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.