4A - Friday, October 24, 2008 The Michigan Daily - michigandaily.com l e Iicl30ig n wily Edited and managed by students at the University of Michigan since 1890. 420 Maynard St. Ann Arbor, MI 48109 tothedaily@umich.edu I really wanted to give you some good head this morning and I didn't know how to ask you to let me do it." - Christine Beatty, in a text message to former Detroit mayor Kwame Kilpatrick. The text messages were released yesterday after an appeals court rejected a motion Wednesday to keep them sealed. ANDREW GROSSMAN EDITOR IN CHIEF GARY GRACA EDITORIAL PAGE EDITOR GABE NELSON 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. Risky business As private donations grow, so do conflicts of interest ndependent research is the centerpiece of academia. Because of protections like the tenure system and, in some cases, autonomy from state governments, universities allow their professors to conduct research free from outside influences and fear of the repercussions of their work. But as many univer- sities shift from dependence on state funding to reliance on pri- vate donations, a new layer of complexity is added to universities' relationship to private industry and donors - one that calls for more transparency and accountability, including here at the Uni- versity of Michigan. MAX FABICK E-MAIL MAX AT FABICKM@a)UMICH.EDU T HE DC SUITS W q'T a.. o w T NE To V TE - ViMMM.. ODD Cv oWI I1JLIIETOV-T___ ouT TO VT. i Seeds of change The latest example of this delicate situ- ation came earlier this month in a report by the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel about University of Michigan Prof. Martin Phil- bert and his connections with private donor Charles Gelman. Philbert is the director and co-founder of the University's Risk Science Center. He is also chairman of a Food and Drug Administration advi- sory panel expected to release a much-an- ticipated study soon about the risks of the controversial chemical bisphenol A, which is used to make numerous plastic prod- ucts, including baby bottles. This summer, Charles Gelman, who has publicly stated he believes BPA is perfectly safe and whose firm, Gelman Instrument Company, was embroiled in an expensive chemical cleanup during the 1980's, donat- ed $5 million to the Risk Science Center. Philbert didn't disclose the donation to the FDA, though he argues he didn't have to because it was a gift to the University, not to him. Further complicating the mat- ter, Gelman told the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel he talked with Philbert several times about BPA- conversations that, to his credit, Philbert says he scrupulously avoided once they came up. As it stands, the situation boils down to a he-said-she-said, and the FDA is now getting involved to investigate the extent of the relationship. That explicitly doesn't mean Philbert did anything wrong. But the concerns raised in this complicated case point to the consequences of univer- sities' new funding model. In essence, the University is now a pri- vately financed public university. While state appropriations supported about75per- cent of the general fund 40 years ago, today they account for less than 20 percent. And when the state was footing most of the bill, the University was protected by its consti- tutional autonomy (as itstill is) from serving the narrow interests of state government. But now that private donors have replaced taxpayers, the rules are changing. Private donors have always placed a role in funding the University. But the unique situation now is the volume of those dona- tions, and the increased complexity of the relationships that may underlie them. Philbert's potential conflict of interest with Gelman exemplifies this complex- ity perfectly: Where exactly is the ethi- cal line drawn when the University is a potential intermediary between donor and researcher if the researcher's interests or organizations stand to benefit? The first layer of the solution is for state government to renew their commitment to their universities, especially here in Michigan. But absent that, the University, like other universities across the coun- try, should nip these problems in the bud. They should be aggressive in preserving the integrity of their research and the perception of it. That means setting clear boundaries, policing them and even turn- ing away some donors if needed. If universities don't, they risk compro- mising their greatest strength: their inde- pendent research. . The Middle East is the apex of global crude oil extraction, yet a country with no petroleum deposits - Israel - is emerging as the region's leader in alternative fuel research and pro- duction.: How, you ask? Jatropha. Neither a mind- altering substanceA nor a household cleaning prod- PARRITZ uct, Jatropha is an African perennial plant with seeds that contain up to 35 percent vegetable oil. Why have we never heard of it? The oil extraction method is secret. And the firm with the coveted extraction patent, Galten Global Alternative Energy Co., is based in Israel. To compare the Jatropha plant to other sources of biofuel, Galten's web- site asserts that only one ton of biofuel can be extracted from 2.5 acres of edi- ble crops like corn or soybeans - as opposed to three tons of biofuel from the same amount of Jatropha.. Since 2006, Galten has become an integral member of Israel's diverse and brilliant arena of green technol- ogy companies. Galten joins industry leaders OrganiTECH, now manufac- turing self-operating greenhouses that produce pesticide-free green leaf vegetables; Project Better Place, currently designing and building a charging grid for electric cars; and Mekorot, Israel's leading water tech- nology company. To be successful, however, these companies rely heavily on exporting their products and producing abroad. Because Israel inhabits only a tiny fraction of land in the Middle East - and its agricultural regions are already densely populated - Galten chose to develop its technologies in a foreign country with two important advantages: 1) more expendable land area and 2) a native supply of Jatro- pha. Galten selected Ghana as its nursery for Jatropha production, and has already leased more than a half- million acres of land in the country. Though the political climate in Ghana is relatively stable, Galten's project is not without its obstacles. According to Doron Levi, the chief operating officer of Galten, "We are working according to plan growing the Jatropha plants. We've built a nursery, but it's not easy in Africa." Levi explained that the poisonous bush snake also enjoys the benefits of the Jatropha plant, through shade and cover from the harsh African sun. Snakes scare the bejeezus out of me, so I sympathize with Galten's engineers on the ground, but I'm con- fident that Galten can solve its snake problems to focus on its ultimate goal: eliminating Israel's dependence on Arab oil. On Oct. 22, crude oilprices dropped below $65 per barrel. Though OPEC is now scrambling for a solution, Israel is silently smiling - for good reason. Many years of cultivating alternative fuel technology, it seems, are begin- ning to pay extraordinary dividends. In an Israeli news op-ed earlier this year titled "Beyond the Oil Age," Sarah Kass, the director of strategy and evaluation at the Avi Chai Foun- dation, noted that the most impor- tant geopolitical event in the region 60 years ago was not the creation of the State of Israel. Rather, "It was the discovery and cultivation, then, and the commercialization, since then, of the hot ocean of oil beneath the sands of Arabia." Post WWII, according to Kass, "Mideast oil began to dominate the world strategic landscape." Today, the vast majority of Arab- world GDP stems from oil exports. Though each Arab country spends its oil revenues differently, only one spending strategy truly benefits Arab citizens: domestic reinvestment of oil revenuesintohuman capitalandinfra- structure. The United Arab Emirates employs this strategy widely, especial- ly in Dubai, yet most other Arab states are content to hoard oil revenues for the wealthiest ruling class - or to invest them in terrorist organizations, nuclear projects or weapons imports. Enter Iran. Though Iran is not an Arab state, it plays an important role as a major power in the Mideast oil hegemony. Its influence reaches everystate inthe region, and -its oil revenues sponsor internationally recognized terrorists groups Hezbollah and Islamic Jihad. Fortunately, plunging oil prices have shocked and disrupted Iran's foreign "aid" network, because Iran's budget is balanced around a crude oil price of $95 per barrel. According to the International Monetary Fund, Iran's budget is now "unsustainable." And this could seri- ously alter the balance of power, in both energy production and terrorism finance in the Mideast. In a region of oil, Israel leads the way in green energy. Galten, then, is quite literally plant- ingseeds to change the regionalhege- mony in the Middle East. Oil prices, left in the dust of the United States' financial collapse and the slow- ing growth in the developing world, will inevitably skyrocket once more. Once they do, Israel can-and will be the pinnacle of non-crude oil driven economies in the Middle East. With venture~ capital funds pouring into Israel's green technology industry, the days of OPEC's central command over the Middle East's energy pro- duction - and its regional economy - may soon end. At the end of the oil horizon, the Middle East will rely on Israel for alternative fuel. At least we should hope so. Ari Parritz can be reached at aparritz@umich.edu. I I EDITORIAL BOARD MEMBERS: Nina Amilineni, Emad Ansari, Elise Baun, Harun Buljina, Ben Caleca, Satyajeet Deshmukh, Brian Flaherty, Matthew Green, Emmarie Huetteman, Emma Jeszke, Shannon Kellman, Edward McPhee, Emily Michels, Kate Peabody, Matthew Shutler, Robert Soave, Eileen Stahl, Jennifer Sussex, Radhika Upadhyaya, Rachel Van Gilder, Margaret Young SETH BUCHSBAUMI(VEW Find your voice LETTERS TO THE EDITOR: Readers are encouraged to submit letters to the editor. Letters should be less than 300 words and must include the writer's full name and University affiliation. All submissions become property of the Daily. We do not print anonymous letters. Send letters to tothedaily@umich.edu. I was talking to one of my good friends in my room the other day when politics came up. I immediately went off on a rant about voter turnout and the dismal state of our democracy. As I wound down, my friend informed me qui- etly but matter-of-factly that he wasn't going to vote. My jaw dropped. I had no idea that he was part of the roughly 50 percent of eligible Amer- icans who won't bother to drag themselves away from work, school or bed to participate in our democracy on Election Day. As we talked about it for a while, I noticed a kind of attitude that I've seen in others before. It wasn't apathy or laziness. It was more dangerous. He truly believed that he would make absolutely no dif- ference if he voted. Through this conversation I also realized that many people who don't vote believe that no matter what they do, they have no say in the government or in the way our country is run. First of all, this belief is patently false. I worked in a local campaign office this summer, and in one of the primary elections the candi- date I worked for lost by eight votes. I repeat: Eight votes. You and eight of your friends could have reversed this election's results. If the can- didate had spent two more hours knocking on doors and convincing voters to get to the polls, she might have won. . That was just a local election. The same phenomenon can occur on a larger scale. We all remember the 2000 presidential election, where the final outcome was decided by about 500 votes in Florida. If that doesn't make you believe that every single vote counts, I don't know what will. But there is a reason for voting that goes above and beyond the statistics. The reason is not the candidates, the issues or the fact that a single vote may make a difference. The reason is that voting is what defines us asa democracy. The vast majority of people in the United States, myself included, believe in democracy as a theory and an ideal. We cry out against dictatorships, we cry out for freedom all across the world. And yet half of the entire popula- tion doesn't even realize what their belief in democracy means. The precise reason we have a democracy is because it gives every citizen a way to be heard in our society. In refusing to vote, half of us forfeit our only direct way of having a voice in government. Ifwe hold these beliefs and make these claims about the power of democracy, and yet do not participate in our own democratic government, then we are a nation of hypocrites, fighting for free elections all over the world and then not participating in our own back home. We are a nation of whiners, perpetually complaining about current conditions and the state of our lives, but making no move to change them. We are a nation of the uninterested, more worried about what happens today than decisions that could affect us years in the future. However, I also believe that we are also a nation of the consistent, firm enough in our beliefs that we can hold them strong. That we are a nation of doers, knowing when to take action to change something wrong in the world. That we are a nation of the concerned, speak- ing out loud about things that will affect both our children and us. I believe in that nation, the nation where every citizen uses his or her own voice to bring up what they believe in. I believe in the nation where people participate because they know it is their way to apply their beliefs to the issues that affect them directly. I believe in the nation where we all vote. Vote on Nov. 4. Make sure you bring your MCard and some kind of proof of residency (leasing statement, anything received from the university, etc.) tothe polls, and that you refrain from wearing any paraphernalia that endorses a certain candidate (you will be turned away at the door or asked to remove the gear). Idon'tcareifyoubelieve thatyourvote makes a difference or not. Vote because even when you feel like you don't have a voice in this coun- try, you still do. You just need to learn to use it. Seth Buchsbaum is anS LSA sophomore. He is a representative on the Michigan Student Assembly's Voice Your Vote commission. 0 RADHIKA UPADHYAYA I I Outlawing a primitive practice Whether you like it or not, it is impossible to ignore the fact that Michigan is a hunter's state. Each fall, the deer hunting industry alone generates more than $500 million dollars for our feeble state economy. In addition, hunting advocates argue they are providing a civil-service to the state by helping keep the deer population under control and deer-related auto accidents down to a manageable figure each year. Yet, in spite of these economic and, perhaps, ecological, advantages, it appears that this season the deer hunting craze is finally slowing down to what will one day hope- fully be a complete halt to this primitive practice. This fall, the so-called sport of deer hunting is finding itself with fewer players than usual - in terms of people that is. This is primarily because the Department of Natu- ral Resources has banned deer baiting in the Michigan's Lower Peninsula, thereby discouraging many hunters. Deer baiting is the practice of putting out food like apples, carrots and sugary beets to bait deer into stopping and eating at food piles. Once the deer congregate, nearby hunters - primarily bowhunters who need to be in close range - can kill the deer with great ease and efficiency. The DNR has banned deer baiting this particular sea- son because recently one small doe was found infected with chronic wasting disease, a highly contagious and fatal disease that can spread quickly when deer are in close contact with one another - like when they are feed- ing together. The theory behind this ban is that the state wants to preserve the deer population now, so that hunters can kill them in future hunting seasons later. This is, of course, an argument made in economic terms. Naturally, this ban has infuriated the huge population of Michiganders who hunt recreationally and the farm- ers who depend on the bait crop sales. While the farmers' concerns are legitimate, the minor irritation to hunt- ers who simply can't bait is a minor consequence hardly worth considering right now. After all, hunting for meat is no longer imperative to survival. This practice exists primarily for the sake of recreation and tradition - reasons that just don't validate a practice that promotes the massacre of creatures with which we share this earth. Moreover, population control is a poor rationalization for deer hunting. While the deer population may get out of control and aggravate us in the short run, nature will likely force its populationilevel back into balance in the long run without us having to step in violently. It isn't logical to continue killing for the sake of killing anymore. Now, it is certainly naive to believe the state can imme- diately drop this practice given our current economic despair and our history with this industry. Still, it is optimistic to see that the state has been taking steps to facilitate a transition for bait-crop farmers this season. Primarily, the DNR and the state have been helping farm- ers seek out alternative markets for their unsold crops. If it is too late into this season to find different markets and the crops are certain to go to waste, I hope these farmers will at least look into donation venues for their surplus food. Once the farmers are fully rehabilitated we will be another step closer to banning hunting. The only thing we really need now is for the state to revitalize its economy enough that it can completely let go of the revenue asso- ciated with hunting. For the hunters, this is good news because it doesn't look like Michigan will be achieving that goal in the immediate future. For the rest of us, we can at least be happy that the deer-baiting ban is pre- venting a potential deer pandemic and deterring a small population of people from hunting, and that, for now, is progress. Radhika Upadhyaya is a Business junior. I I I