4A - Wednesday, November7, 2007 The Michigan Daily - michigandaily.com Edited and managed by students at the University of Michigan since 1890. 420 Maynard St. Ann Arbor, MI 48109 tothedaily@umich.edu KARL STAMPFL IMRAN SYED JEFFREY BLOOMER EDITOR IN CHIEF EDITORIAL PAGE EDITOR MANAGING EDITOR Unsigned editorials reflect the official position of the Daily's editorial board. All other signed articles and illustrations represent solely the views of their authors. The Daily's public editor, Paul H. Johnson, acts as the readers' representative and takes a critical look at coverage and content in every section oftthe paper. Readers are encouraged to contact the public editor with questions and comments. He canbe reached at publiceditor@umich.edu. Crmealr Blatant discrimination at 'U' must not continue f the pending lawsuit filed by the Michigan Paralyzed Veter- ans of America left any doubt about how accommodating the University has been to its disabled fans at Michigan Stadium, the Department of Education's Office of Civil Rights cleared it up last week. Chronicling more than a decade of disregarding the dis- abled, ignoring the law and circumventing an investigation, a let- ter from the OCR to the University made it clear that the lack of action has been blatantly discriminatory. Richard B. Cheney ... warrants impeachment and trial and removal from office." - Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio), introducing legislation to impeach Vice President Dick Cheney on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives yesterday. Kucinich's fellow Democrats tried to defeat the resolution, but it passed, thanks to Republican support. The Republicans hope to embarrass the Democrats by forcing them to discuss the resolution on the floor. I The liberal revenge Concluding an investigation that began in March 2005 and evaluated construction projects dating back to 1991, the 42-page letter was in some respects an extension of the grievances cited in the MPVA's pend- ing lawsuit. Echoing the claim made in the lawsuit, the OCR found the stadium's lack ofwheelchair-accessible seating dispersed throughout the stadium to be deplorable and discriminatory. However, unlike the lawsuit, the OCR found more broad acces- sibility problems with the routes into the stadium, the bathrooms, the concession stands, the routes into the seating area and the M-Dens. It also came with a threat to cut federal funding if the University doesn't make changes. The OCR put ahuman face to the problem, recounting the anecdotes of several fans who suffered from the Big House's unwel- coming conditions. One wheelchair-bound fan described getting friction burns on his hands when he tried to slow his wheelchair on a steep slope exiting the stadium. Anoth- er man complained that when he took his disabled father to a game, he couldn't find an accessible bathroom before his father soiled himself, and even then none of the bath- rooms had resources to properly deal with the situation. Lastly, a fan described having to empty his catheter bag outside because the passageway into the bathroom stall was too narrow for his wheelchair. In its response Monday to this investiga- tion, the University did what has become all too common in the way it has handled this problem: It wrote off these serious concerns as anomalies that don't require any more than a minimal, behind-the- scenes response. ' Again, the University used its counterpro- ductive argument about the technical, legal question of whether its projects are reno- vations, which would require ADA compli- ance; or repairs, which would not. It added that it doesn't have to follow the law anyway because disabled people won't fill the seats even if it did provide them. For good mea- sure, it took a few pot shots at the OCR too, claiming that the OCR's judgment was "fun- damentally unfair and wrong." These arguments are both disingenuous and distracting. As the OCR noted, the lack of demand for wheelchair accessible seats is an illustration of the problem rather than a reason not to act, because fans don't want tickets if the stadium is inaccessible and unwelcoming. While it's true that the ADA was not intended to force old stadiums to retrofit the entire structure forsmall repairs, its intent certainly wasn't to allow stadiums to indefinitely make small repairs that add up to big changes while skirting the law. Its intent probably wasn't to force disabled peo- ple to soil themselves because of the lack of accessible bathrooms, either. At a meeting of the Senate Advisory Committee on University Affairs - the executive branch of the Faculty Senate - University President Mary Sue Coleman called the skybox plan "the most openly transparent project" she has ever worked on at the University. However, she failed to mention the OCR letter, which she received earlier that day. How ironic. While making' that statement, Coleman must also have forgotten about the stacking of the speak- ers' list with skybox supporters at the June meeting of the University Board of Regents and the faculty petition stating that itsvoice wasn't heard in this process. The OCR letter describes numerous other University attempts to thwart the investiga- tion. Although the OCR requested informa- tion about the multiple "Concrete Repair Projects" made during the 1990s,, it didn't receive this information until July 2007. Instead, many of the details in its letter had to be gathered from other sources, including pictures from Sports Illustrated, the Univer- sity's website and minutes of Regents meet- logs. On at least seven occasions between 2004 and 2007, the OCR also notified the University that the changes it was making to the stadium were significant enough to be renovations - a detail Coleman convenient- ly ignored in her fervor over skyboxes. The University's complete lack of trans- parency and the fact that it has to be coerced into accommodating people in wheelchairs are a complete disgrace to its institutional reputation. With so many complaints at the Big House being ignored, it's easy to wonder how many other university facili- ties are unaccommodating to students in wheelchairs. Such discrimination should be unthinkable at the University of Michigan. Sadly, it's now a fair possibility. ith the strike of the Writ- ers Guild of America domi- nating the discussion, The New York Times reported yesterday some excitingnews in television that may be easily over- ; looked: The dark- ness has passed. But for how long? Just as the Bush presidency nears IMRAN its long-awaited SYED end, it seems the mind-poisoning dominance of the Fox News prime- time juggernaut is at an end too. Keith Olbermann, the popular sportscaster- turned-newsman who hosts "Count- down" on MSNBC, has for months openly challenged the prince of dark- ness himself, Bill O'Reilly, in both ratings and relevance. By competing directly with "The O'Reilly Factor," once the unquestioned king of cable news, Olbermann has won over a sig- nificantnumber ofviewers, even occa- sionally surpassing O'Reilly's ratings among the all-important 25-54 age demographic, accordingto the Times. Righteously overzealous as he is, Olbermann has proven quite a point with his successful insurrection. Contrary to what we felt inclined to accept for the past several years, the majority of Americans have not trans- formed suddenly into foot soldiers for the neo-con cause: They simply want a news show that does something more than tell them what happened. They want analysis. They want spin. But it has tobe edgy and unique. Just as Jon Stewart won over so many viewers with his well-aimed irreverence, Olbermann has reached out to viewers in ways other news- casters have been reluctant to do. It involves more than just being openly liberal or opinionated; Olbermann is biased. and not afraid to say exactly Rep. Dingell answers misleading criticism what he means to imply. Whereas people like Chris Matthews feel the need to maintain some semblance of neutrality, Olbermann makes no such pretense. His fiery "Special Com- ment" segments, which nearly always evolve into a first-person tongue-lash- ing of Bush, leave little doubt to where his politics are. Olbermann was a sorely needed opposing force to counter the gains made by the lunacy coming from the Fox News Channel. Perhaps we could even use a couple more like him to really even the conversation. The trend that has now started, however, promises to go just beyond that and maybe devolve into a bjtterly divisive movement that closely emulates the many faults of O'Reilly and Fox News. The Times reported that MSNBC has plans to give Rosie O'Donnell a primetime news show. That's good so far: O'Donnell's special brand of liberal rabblerousingmay have been too much for "The View," but it will fit in perfect- ly alongside Olbermann. It also report- ed that Matthews has taken his show, "Hardball," decidedly left in recent months, hoping to ride Olbermann's coattails back to the forefront of cable news. That's fine too, because no one ever really mistook Matthews for a neutral messenger in the first place. But the trouble begins with the report that MSNBC's lone remain- ing conservative voice in primetime, Tucker Carlson, may be on his way out. I have no sympathy for Carlson, but the apparentcpushtoward bringing in all liberals and eliminating conser- vatives is a dishearteningindicator. My problem with Fox News was never that it was too conservative: It was always that the network was too one-sided. In becoming the liberal equivalent of Fox News, MSNBC's distortion of the conversation will become just as destructive. Sure, it's a slight improvement that viewers will atleasthave the optionofliberalvoices to go with Fox News's warmongering, but why must differing viewpoints be partitioned off onto an entirely differ- ent network? Far from having a lively debate of opposing viewpoints on one show, it seems we aren't even willing to stand for diversity of thought on one network. With political divisiveness ram- pant on the campaign trail and here on campus, exactly what this means for the prevailing notion of American democracy is a troubling thought. I love Olbermann for what he does, but for him to advocate that all shows on a cable news network must be a varia- tion on the same ideologies (as he did A liberal Fox News is the last thing we need. in the Times story) is unjustifiable. Such a thought is born from either an inability or refusal to understand that political disagreements are rarely about right or wrong. They're simply about a different viewpoint that, at its core, almost always has some merit. Fox News accepted long ago that liberals are God-hating, flag-burning terrorist sympathizers. The damage that type of stereotyping has done to national political discourse is alarm- ing - almost as alarming as what will happen if liberals take their turn to be equally as polarizing and prejudiced. Why is it that we cannot have a net- work with differing viewpoints and true disagreement? Isn't that the most logical extension of American democ- racy to the airwaves? Imran Syed is the Daily's editorial page editor. He can be reached at galad@umich.edu. 4 I 4 I SEND LETTERS TO: TOTHEDAILY@UMICH.EDU Coach Lloyd Carr kick him in the butt tion if he was laughi Mike, don't you win with class?T MOHAMMAD DAR EE The cause lives oil I think it's fair to say that the University of Michigan has some of the most compassionate students out there. Outside oftheir class obliga- tions, our students tackle so many issues with incredible vision and passion. That productiv- ity has been something that has continuously humbled me in my time here. This viewpoint During my first Festifall, I was is the third in a stunned by how series about the much is always r going on. I asked present state of myselfaboutwhere student activism. I would fit into all of this. I decided that if I could do anything to improve all of the efforts of other students, it would be worthwhile. That was what first drove me to the Michigan Student Assembly. Over the past few months, I have thought a lot about what we as students are able to do thanks to our unique position. I have also thought about how lucky I have been just to be here over the last three years. As students, we're not weighed down by burdens that come later in life. We're attempt- ing many things for the first tirpe, so we bring an enthusiasm to our work that cannot be matched. We are the hope for the passing gen- eration and the inspiration for the next gener- ation, but that next generation is what I worry about. While we do a lot to make the world a better place, we often don't realize how lucky we are to be in this position as students. Getting to college is a great achievement for anyone, but it is a combination of our luck and effort. I would never say that anyone arrived here based solely on luck; we have all worked hard, but sometimes luck is simply a product of our circumstances. In the end, there is no difference between me and someone who doesn't know where his next meal is coming from, other than the fact that I was lucky to be the one born in the house able to provide three square meals a day. We're lucky because the providence of our lives is that we had the access to get here. This place was within our reach. However, it would be a lie to say it is within everyone else's reach too. That issue of access to education is what made me organize the student rally for affordable highe'r education at the statehouse in Lansing earlier this semester. I am grateful to all of the students who came out and stood with us, but I think more students need to be concerned about the issue. Every time costs rise, we cut out people who could have made great contributions to the University and to student causes. I know I would not be here if tuition rates had been at their current level for my first year. I can think of many great and compassionate peo- ple from high school who grew up knowing that they were priced out of a place like this university, despite their best efforts. Our world today is a place of great oppor- tunity but still not of great access. It is an act of great privilege that we are able to be stu- dents of the University of Michigan. As stu- dents, we work to right many wrongs in our world - issues of equality, bias, world hunger and disease. However, I hope that we will still remember to work on righting one more wrong - that of restricted access to educa- tion. We must make that a high priority. If we keep losingpeople alongthe way, we'll keep losing potential members of our student groups and of the University community, and we'll suffer for it. If we lose sight of how lucky we are, we'll lose sight of making the world better for others. What good is it, after all, to champion a cause in this world if you have no one to keep it up after you're gone? Mohammad Dar is an LSA senior and vice president of the Michigan Student Assembly. TO THE DAILY: sometime soon yot I am writing in response to Mary again. I wonder1 Sweeters's viewpoint last week then. Haven't you I criticizing me fpr not taking appro- _ around, comes aro priate action on environmental grandiosity getting concerns (Hold Dingell accountable, your clear thinking 11/02/2007), parts of which were misleading. Paul Wieckowski One of these misleading state- Alum ments was the assertion that I have "opposed strong increases" to fuel economy standards.I am a Gravel iS rig co-sponsor of H.R. 2927, the Hill- Terry bill, which would increase Legalize ma current fuel-economy standards by 40 percent while also protecting TO THE DAILY: American jobs and creating incen- As a retired I tives for new breakthrough fuel- officer, I heartily; efficient technology. met Alaska senato Unlike my critics, I do not see fuel thoughts on ending economy as the only issue we must of marijuana (Gray deal with to meet my goal of reducing laws, 10/29/2007). carbon emissions by 60 to 80 percent years of service, It by 2050. I support raising Corporate calls caused by ma Average Fuel Economy standards is the case with an as part of a multi-pronged approach intoxicating drug, u that includes my proposal to create a a poor choice. How fee on carbon to deal with the ques- marijuana is also re tion of consumption. And I intend to safety by wasting re finalize work on a comprehensive, We are losing foci economy-wide cap-and-trade pro- ers and child pres gram and other measures to control pursue non-violent: greenhouse gas emissions. For those of you who would like a closer look Howard J.Wooldr at this work, please go to my website The letter writer is an www.house.gov/dingell. at Law EnforcementA Congress is working to limit the Washington, D.C. effects of climate change and will continue to build on the progress we've already made toward that Non-Smoke end. This summer we passed a bill to remove 10.8 billion tons of carbon freedoms aS dioxide from the atmosphere, an amount equal to five times the annu- TO THE DAILY: al emissions of all cars and trucks on I would like to the road in America today. Touran's recent let I take seriously my role in fighting smoking bans (Sm global warming and intend to pro- trample on freedor duce the climate change legislation When people spea] our country needs and deserves, but smoking bans, they I will do it responsibly and not hap- arguments: the lost hazardly in order to avoid creating loss of business. unintended consequences. When consideri impact of a ban, Rep. John Dingell ing at the results i The letter writer is Ann Arbor's represen- Washington, stats tative in the U.S. House of Representatives ness in bars fell ot and chairman of the House Committee on implementation of Energy and Commerce. many restaurants' ally increasing. On the loss of fre Hart needs to grow sider some other , there is the freedo up andplay nice safe, healthy enviro the reasoning beh TO THE DAILY: smoking in office; As a University alum, Iwas embar- buildings, and it sh rassed by the egotistical comments workers. Numerou by Wolverine running back Mike shown substantial I Hart following the game 'against bartenders in the1 Michigan State on Saturday. Did he since its nationwide actually laugh when his team was my own experienc down by 10 points? I doubt it. I think player with asthm would probably to get his atten- ng. know how to The problem is, u will be a loser how you'll feel heard what goes und? Or is your g in the way of ? ht: ryjuana Michigan police agree with for- r Mike Gravel's g the prohibition vel: Loosen drug During my 18 was- sent to zero arijuana use. As ny mind-altering, sing marijuana is ever, prohibiting ducing our public sources. us on drunk driv- dators while we smokers. idge education specialist Against Prohibition, rs have well respond to Nick ter on proposed oking ban would rns, 11/05/2007). k against indoor usually have two s of freedom and ng the economic I suggest look- n California and es where busi- nly slightly after f the ban, with revenues actu- edom, let us con- freedoms. First, m to work in a nment. This was ind the ban of and government ould apply to all us studies have health benefits to United Kingdom smoking ban. In e as a saxophone a, Washington's 2005 indoor smoking ban made an incredible difference in my ability to perform on the job. Second, let us consider the rights of non-smokers. I agree with.Touran that people have the right to smoke; however, people also have the right to not smoke. When someone smokes indoors, everyone in the vicinity is forced to smoke too. Many bars and restaurants are not designed to adequately partition smoking and non-smoking sections, and retrofits to accommodate such segregation could be prohibitively expensive or altogether impossible. Inthe end, this issue is notabout an "Orwellian law" or protecting smok- ers from themselves. It is about the right of those who work and relax in bars to not have a deadly carcinogen literally forced down their throats. Brian Lassiter Engineeringgraduatestudent Copyright laws must protect artists' work TO THE DAILY: Robert Soave argued yesterday in his columnthat file sharing is notille- gal because music is not something that can be owned (Ido not own these words, 11/06/2007). He explained that "The tangible disc that you buy from a store can be owned, but the information on it cannot." To him, copyrighting thoughts or sounds leads us down the terrifying path of copyrighting information. Central to Soave's argument is the belief that music itself is simply information and thus should not be 4 owned. However, he forgets that when you listen to an album you are not just listeningto information, you are listeningto a specific recording. When I buy a Beatles CD, I am not paying just to hear music, I'm paying to hear the Beatles perform it. I am also paying to hear all of the techni- cal work that has been done by the recording engineers. In short, I am not payingto hear sounds and infor- mation, I am paying to hear a prod- uct that the musicians, recording engineers and songwriters worked to produce. And they deserve to be paid for it. The truly pressing issue that Soave's article brings up is recog- nizing the increasingly digitalized world we live in. Listeners can download music right onto their computer without every going to a record shop. But whether you get the recording from a vinyl record, CD or from your computer, it is the same music. We need copyright laws to protect art. Copyright laws insure that artists get paid for their hard work. Taylor Stanton School ofMusic sophomore r . F