4 - Tuesday, March 10, 2009
The Michigan Daily - michigandaily.com
C I I4e fitic4tpan 4,3a' ily
I
Edited and managed by students at
the University of Michigan since 1890.
420 Maynard St.
Ann Arbor, MI 48109
tothedaily@umich.edu
AVE COURTNEY RATKOWIAK
EDITOR MANAGING EDITOR
GARY GRACA ROBERT SO
EDITOR IN CHIEF EDITORIAL PAGE
Unsigned editorials reflect the official position oftthe Daily's editorial board. All other signed articles
and illustrations represent solely the views oftheir authors.
Burning smokers
State should find other methods of paying for S-CHIP
T he cost of lighting up is soon going to be anything but
light. On Feb. 4, President Obama signed a law that will
increase the tax on tobacco products in order to fund the
State Children's Health Insurance Program, which makes health-
care more affordable for children from low-income families. In
addition to the federal tax increases, a bill that would raise Mich-
igan's tobacco tax is currently being debated by state represen-
tatives. While the proceeds from these taxes would support an
important program, placing the burden of paying for it solely on
smokers is both unfair and inequitable. Legislators should find a
new way to pay for S-CHIP that distributes the fiscal responsibil-
ity of paying for it across a more reasonable tax base.
While your risk is very high,
my risks are irrelevant.
- Helg Sgrabi, a Swiss man convicted for fraud, in a blackmail letter to BMW heiress Susanne Klatten
claiming he possessed a sex tape with her in it, as reported yesterday by CNN.
ELAINE MORTON I ATHE C, E-MAIL ELAINE AT EMORT@UMICH.EDU
To6acco +40s- Win forub isVhe 41 CAI' y' 4LOSE
WlN~W-WIN . 91 ~rxe o
w n for politis.. .fri
a
a
Misdirected morals
The federaltax increase affects all tobac-
co products, but loose tobacco is facing the
most significant change - from a $1.10 per
pound tax to a whopping $24.78 per pound
tax. On top of the national tax hike, the bill
under consideration by Michigan's House
of Representatives proposes to increase
the state tobacco tax from 34 to 64 percent.
The state and federal tax increases would
both go toward S-CHIP.
Certainly, S-CHIP ought to receive full
support in government budgets. Ensuring
that every child has access to health care is
an obligation that both the state and feder-
al governments need to honor because no
child should be denied access to a healthy
life on the basis of family income. When
taxes are needed to support programs like
S-CHIP, reasonable tax increases are more
than justifiable. And during tough eco-
nomic times, we might expect to see higher
taxes on tobacco going to pay for programs
like this as other revenue sources decline.
But it's simply unfair to place the entirety
of this burden on the shoulders of tobacco
users through such a massive tax increase.
According to the Center for Disease Con-
trol, 20.8 percent of all U.S. adults smoke
but 30.6 percent of adults below the pov-
erty line are smokers. This means that this
massive tax increase disproportionately
impacts the individuals who are least able
to afford it. Lower-income individuals also
have the greatest difficulty in reducing
their use of tobacco because they cannot
easily afford products like nicotine patches
that might help them overcome their addic-
tions. And according to the American Lung
Association, about 20 percent of college
students smoke. These taxes, then, also fall
to cash-strapped college students for whom
smoking is an addiction, not somethingthey
can just give up due to rising costs.
Since the federal tax increase on tobacco
was already approved, the federal govern-
ment should now concentrate on providing
better assistance to low-income smokers
whose options for quitting are few. At the
state level, Michigan legislators should con-
sider alternate methods of funding S-CHIP
that distribute the financial responsibility
more equitably.
Funding S-CHIP to ensure the health of
underprivileged children is a good use of
resources, but sticking smokers with the
bill isn't the best method of paying for it.
Low-income smokers need to be provided
with better access to treatments that can
help them quit smoking before their addic-
tion can be taxed so heavily.
love to listen to liberals talk
about the drug war, social issues
and civil liberties. They often
invoke the idea,
for example, that
a woman owns
her uterus and
her body, and she
thereforeownsthe
right to do what
she wants with
her body. The rea-
soning behind the VINCENT
above argument
is very important, PATSY
because by using
the principle of
self-ownership, liberals strike at
what is essentially the core of classi-
cal liberalism or libertarianism. This
core is the idea that individuals have
natural rights and any violation of
these rights is immoral.
All rights are essentially the appli-
cation of self-ownership to different
parts of one's body. I own my mind,
lungs and mouth, and therefore have
the right to free speech. The fact that
the First Amendment to the Consti-
tution protects this right is irrelevant
- the natural right of self-ownership
supersedes the Constitution.
But liberals' inability to extend
natural rights to economics is where
my love affair with them ends.
I own my body, my mind and my
property. Ican dispose of my property
in any manner I conclude will bring
me more happiness as long as I do not
violate the rights of others. When I
decide to exchange my property in
a voluntary manner, I have a right to
do so. By introducing coercion into
the exchange of property, the govern-
ment violates my rights just the same
as ifit was suppressing my right to free
speech. And the system of econom-
ics which is compatible with natural
rights is free market capitalism.
The resistance to free market eco-
nomics often comes from a misunder-
standing of what capitalists actually
believe. As a capitalist, I do not want
subsidies for big oil, I do not want us
to use our military to conquer for-
eign lands, and I certainly do not
want businesses to be regulated. All
three of these actions represent coer-
cion and an aberration of someone's
natural rights. They are also tools by
which larger businesses use govern-
ment to oppress smaller businesses.
Our current situation is in no way
free market capitalism, but rather
revolves around business leaders and
government coercing the citizens for
the benefit of business over that of the
people. Established businesses want
to be regulated because they will
be better able to pay for, and have a
better understanding of, the licenses
needed to run a business - like tax
code, for instance. They essentially
use government to eliminate their
weaker competitors.
Another misrepresentation of the
free market was brought up recently in
Adam Gaglio's viewpoint (The perils of
environmentalism, 03/01/2009). Gaglio
mentioned environmentalists' notion
thatresources are scarce so we need to
preserve them for future generations.
But all resources are scarce - that is
why you have to pay for food and cloth-
ing. There is a limited amount of all
resources other than air. If resources
were not scarce, we would be living
in the Garden of Eden with all of our
desires met instantly. Unfortunately,
we were kicked out for various indis-
cretions and now we have scarcity of
all goods. This means that we need to
utilize them.
Only the free market can deal with
the proper utilization of resources.
Suppose I owned a tungsten mine
with avalue of $10 million. IfIdigout
$1 millionworthoftungstenthisyear,
I will have $9 million left in capital
value. Now suppose that the world is
running out of tungsten. This change
Why liberals
should love the
free market.
would be reflected in a higher capi-
tal value for my mine, maybe up to
$100 million. This prompts me to dig
out less tungsten, and since the price
rises, the marginal users of tungsten
may switch to other metals. If the
government owns the mine, then
there is no capital value. There is no
possible way for them to know how
much tungsten to produce now and
how much to leave in the ground.
Author Isabel Paterson, one of the
founders of the libertarian move-
ment, once wrote: "Most of the harm
in the world is done by good people,
and not by accident, lapse, or omis-
sion. It is the result of their deliber-
ate actions, long preserved in, which
they hold to be motivated by high ide-
als toward virtuous ends." Liberals, I
do not doubt your devotion to higher
goals, I merely object to the meansby
which you attempt to achieve them.
To my liberal friends, please, make
yourself logically consistent and join
me on the other side.
- Vincent Patsy can be reached
at souljaboy@umich.edu.
a
EDITORIAL BOARD MEMBERS:
Nina Amilineni, Emad Ansari, Emily Barton, Elise Baun, Harun Buljina, Ben Caleca,
Satyajeet Deshmukh, Brian Flaherty, Emmarie Huetteman, Emma Jeszke,
Sutha K Kanagasingam, Shannon Keliman, Jeremy Levy, Edward McPhee,
Matthew Shutler, Neil Tambe, Radhika Upadhyaya, Rachel Van Gilder
SEND LETTERS TO: TOTHEDAILY@UMICH.EDU
6
I
Rackham students need to
voice concerns, questions
Meetings are open to all. We can be contacted
regarding continuous enrollment and any other
graduate student issue at rsg@umich.edu.
Tiffany Tsang
As the Michigan Student Assembly examines its own future on campus, the Daily would
- like students to voice their opinions on what should be a part of its agenda.
E-MAIL YOUR IDEAS TO ROBERT SOAVE AT RSOAVE@UMICH.EDU
STOP T uHiE HIKE | iP ins
Tuiton increases mustend
TO THE DAILY: Rackham
As the elected representatives of the Rack-
ham graduate student body - not specific Birth con
interest groups within that population - the
Rackham Student Government has served as more acce
a sounding board since the continuous enroll-
ment policy was first brought to our attention
in the fall of 2007 by Dean Janet Weiss. Our TO THE DAILY:
discussions concerning continuous enrollment Mar. 25 is Bacl
have been both substantive and theoretical. - a national rem
Our members hail from each of Rackham's four mation and prepa
divisions and each division has raised a litany steps toward redu
of questions and concerns. Over the course of ed pregnancies in
the last 18 months, many of these concerns have There are wom
been resolved while others have lingered. country with no
In light of these outstanding issues, we even if they do h
polled the Rackham student body to gauge engage in unprot
their understanding of the policy and their pri- because primaryI
mary concerns. One in six graduate students And sadly, about.
responded and the results are mixed. Some nant every year
students provided positive feedback on aspects result of sexual a:
of the policy, including increased access to There is, how
University services year-round (like University method of birth c
Health Service and the Central Campus Recre- women from hav
ational Building), greater resources available - emergency con
for research efforts and lower tuition. Other been available to1
respondents either didn't know anything about viders as an optio
the proposal or felt they would be adversely vors frombecomi
affected by the policy. These objections center trauma of unwan
around perceived negative effects on academic vors deserve info
quality and financial consequences for typical emergency contra
program requirements. But denial clat
These concerns highlight the need for fur- hospitals to refus
ther discussion on the proposed policy. Accord- ception under an
ingly, RSG, in cooperation with Rackham, proportion of hosi
is forming a student advisory committee to hospitals, are usin
review and address the concerns students have assault survivor:
raised. RSG's primary role in this group will Emergency contra
be to ensure that student concerns are indeed nificantly reduces
addressed before the policy's implementation, ed within 72 hour
no earlier than Fall 2010. This group welcomes By refusing emerg
participation from any and all interested grad- pitals are not only
uate students, and we're seeking approximately but are also disre,
10 PhD students to serve on this committee. deciding what is it
Information about how to join us will be All women shoL
coming soon to Rackham students' inboxes sive and equitabl
and is also on our website: http://www.umich. which hospital th
edu/-rstugov. RSG is here to serve the Rackham we must implore C
student body on continuous enrollment and contraception and
other graduate student issues. We meet every
Monday at 7:15 p.m. in the south alcove of Rack- Andrew Kravis
ham's West Reading Room on the second floor. LSA senior
trol needs to be
?ssible, for women
k Up Your Birth Control Day
inder that, with proper infor-
ration, we can take significant
ucing the number of unintend-
the United States.
en in Michigan and across the
access to birth control. And
ave access, they nonetheless
ected sex or are impregnated
methods of birth control fail.
25,000 women become preg-
in the United States as the
ssault.
ever, a safe, FDA-approved
ontrol that can prevent'these
ving unintended pregnancies
ntraception. For years, it has
hospitals and healthcare pro-
on to help prevent rape survi-
ng pregnant and suffering the
ted pregnancies. Rape survi-
ormation about and access to
aception.
:ses in many state laws allow
se women emergency contra-
y circumstances. A staggering
pitals, particularly faith-based
g these clauses to deny sexual
s emergency contraception.
aception is an option that sig-
the risk of pregnancy if start-
rs of unprotected intercourse.
ency contraception,these hos-
'jeopardizing women's health
garding women's rights while
n their best medical interests.
Auld have access to comprehen-
e medical care, regardless of
ey go to. To ensure that right,
ongress to support emergency
I "back up" our birth control.
Times are tough in Michigan. As students, many of us
have not considered the implications of the economy and
public policy on our education. But critical decisions are
now being made that will affect all of us.
Some policymakers and University administrators are
working tirelessly to invest in higher education and pro-
vide immediate relief for those of us affected by the eco-
nomic crisis. Others argue it's necessary to raise tuition
now so research can stimulate the economy in the future.
We need to be a part of the decision-making process
right now, as it happens.
Critics of immediate student financial aid who argue that
the University cannot possibly maintain research levels and
freeze tuition, fail to recognize the current, dire need for
investment in human capital. Keeping a Michigan educa-
tion affordable is critical to the state's transition to a knowl-
edge-based economy. By pricing out intelligent, qualified
and interested individuals, University policy-makers and
administrators will lose talented minds - those the Univer-
sity intends to benefit through its research programs. Our
graduates already pour outofthe state after graduation. Will
we now hinder them from even attending our university?
Greater access to higher education should be a paramount
concern for the University and the state. After all, what is
top-notch research without the best young researchers?
That is why we are calling for a tuition freeze at the
University if state appropriations for higher education
remain constant. We do so in full recognition of the chal-
lenge this creates for all parties: state government, Uni-
versity administrators, the University Board of Regents
and students. But we also do this in solidarity with other
schools and students across the state, many of whom have
already pledged support.
While we understand a tuition freeze for the 2009 fis-
cal year doesn't fix the system and appears shortsighted, it
will have an immediate short-term impact. A tuition freeze
will allow continued access to higher education for cur-
rent and potential University students, many of whom are
pinned under the economic climate. According to a Univer-
sity News Service publication, the state's higher-education
allocations as a percentage of the University's general fund
have plummeted from 78 to 23 percent since 1960, with a
concurrent tuition increase from 20 to 64 percent.
Our coalition, informally called "Stop the Hike," includes
an uncommon assortment of individuals from a variety
of organizations. The student leaders referenced in Pat-
rick O'Mahen's column (Schooling Jennifer Granholm,
02/15/2009) responded with enthusiasm and dedication to
Stop the Hike'sefforts. Othershavejoined intheweekssince.
But we have not gained enough members to accomplish our
goals. We need more student leaders, organizations, faculty
and staff to lend their support for this united cause.
We have begun by making sure this matters to you.
First, we formulated a survey (http://www.tinyurl.com/
stopthehike) to gauge where students stand on financial
aid issues - it's generated over 600 responses to date. At
the same time, we have proposed and are currently pro-
posing resolutions in the Michigan Student Assembly,
LSA Student Government, Residence Halls Association,
Interfraternity Council, Panhellenic Association, Multi-
cultural Greek Council, Rackham, University of Michi-
gan Endometriosis Center and Ross Student Government
Association. For these initiatives, you can participate by
taking and forwarding the survey, joining our Stop the
Hike Facebook group or attending a meeting forthe above
student organizations. Let your peers know that tuition
affordability is something you value.
We can no longer afford to wait.
We will meet this Thursday at 8:00 p.m. in the Crofoot
Room of the Union to discuss our next steps. We encour-
age you to join us in thinking strategically about what
solutions we can bring to the complex dialogue ahead,
especially as we consider how to address our administra-
tors and policymakers.
Many have already spoken out: You want to continue
your education at the University but are facing the dif-
ficult decision about whether graduate school - or
even next semester - is financially feasible. Even if you
struggle to relate to this, chances are you know someone
who does relate. And at a time when many describe the
economic situation nationwide as the worst in 80 years
and when Michigan's economy is among the worst in the
country - with a January unemployment rate of 11.6 per-
cent, compared to a national average 7.6 percent - this
state cannot afford to price out prospective students.
So take the survey, contact us (stopthehike@umich.edu)
and make your voice heard. We need to let our community
know it is not okay to burden students with unreasonable
tuition costs, and we need to help ensure that access to the
University and all it has to offer will be sustained during
the worst economic time of our lives.
Timothy Bekkers, Aria Everts, Ashwin Lalendran,
Bhavik Lathia, Adam London, Ari Parritz, Fiona
Ruddy, Alex Serwer, Ken Srdjak, Robert Stapleton
and Neil Tambe are members of Stop the Hike.