4A - Thursday, November 5, 2009 The Michigan Daiiy - michigandaily.com C tpiian atlp Edited and managed by students at the University of Michigan since 1890. 420 Maynard St. Ann Arbor, MI 48109 tothedaily@umich.edu GARY GRACA EDITOR IN CHIEF ROBERT SOAVE EDITORIAL PAGE EDITOR COURTNEY RATKOWIAK MANAGING EDITOR They're not offering the classes I need. I don't know what I'm going to do:' - Susan Li, a senior at the University of California, commenting on her inability to complete her major due to a lack of classes stemming from cuts to school funding, as reported yesterday by the New York Times. Unsigned editorials reflect the official position of the Daily's editorial board.All other signed articles and illustrations represent solely the views ofttheir authors. Gay marriage will wn Despite Maine's ban, gay rights activists gaining ground As the Election Day results began trickling in Wednesday night, it became clear that gay marriage supporters had suffered another stinging defeat at the hands of intoler- ance. The voters of Maine turned their back on a law passed by the legislature to finally extend legal recognition to gay partners. This defeat, both shocking and distressing for gay rights support- ers, makes Maine the 31st state to ban gay marriage in a popular vote. But despite this setback, gay rights supporters are, slowly but surely, gaining ground in their struggle. Advocates must stay strong and keep fighting while the rest of the country grows steadily more cognizant of the discrimination inherent in anti-gay marriage laws. ADRIAN CHOY I E-MAIL ADRIAN AT AWCHOY@UMICH.EDU 1 CAN'~" T"HNK Of ANY FATbRRSVN5DYER cCOMIC IDEAS. MA'YEI DtsCi ' ThERE'S A NEw STORY "TEENS SET CAN PARODY. BoYN FIRE" ''o wrr Ess *Awn d JUT CSECTION OF CNN.COM4 School spending solved In May, Maine's legislature passed a law giving same-sex couples the right to legally wed - a huge step forward for equality in the state. But implementation of the law was put on hold because of a conservative uproar calling for its repeal. Groups hop- ing to get the law repealed in a referen- dum launched a successful petition drive and, ultimately, a same-sex marriage ban made its way onto the ballot. The ban was approved by 53 percent of the voters, mean- ing that every time a gay marriage ban deci- sion has come before a statewide vote, the ban has passed. But no matter how many states approve them, bans on gay marriage are indefen- sibly morally wrong. No degree of intoler- ance can hide the fact that gay relationships deserve the exact same legal recognition that heterosexual marriage receives. Nei- ther state nor federal governments should have the right to hold certain marriages less valid than others. That's because same- sex relationships are just as legitimate and loving as any heterosexual relationship, and failing to recognize them is a travesty of justice. But despite the fact that one more state has been added to the list of those who banned gay marriage, the movement for equality is gaining ground. Maine's ban was passed by a much slimmer margin than California's last year. Protect Maine Equal- ity, the campaign to defeat the ban, raised $1.5 million more than its opponents - an impressive feat, as the opponents are usu- ally extremely well funded. So even though gay couples might feel further away from their end goal, the tide is turning. After all, important gains are being made across the country. A Texas court recently recognized an out-of-state same-sex mar- riage couple and deemed the state's ban unconstitutional. And on Election Day in Michigan, Kalamazoo voters approved a measure banning housing discrimination based on sexual orientation. These victo- ries may seem small, but they reflect the basic fact that the gay rights movement will ultimately prevail in convincing enough Americans that gay relationships are lov- ing, committed and healthy. But this truth does not excuse the actions of the voters of Maine or any of the other states that banned gay marriage - includ- ing Michigan. Same-sex marriage bans are nothing more than codified discrimination, and Americans need to realize that later generations will view these bans the same way we now view bans on interracial mar- riage. States have an obligation to overcome this parallel immediately. have no idea what to make of this year's election results. Repub- licans won governorships in Virginia and New Jersey, but lost a House race in New York. Maine banned gay mar- riage, allowed the dispensing of medi- cal marijuana and said noto a limit on government spend- ROBERT ing. If there's some SOAVE trend in there, I fail to see it. So instead of making some broad generalization about how this election reflects the country's mood, P'm going to zoom in on just one vote - the decisive'defeat of the Regional Enhancement Millage in Washtenaw County. The millage would have raised property taxes in Washtenaw Coun- ty to solve a budget deficit of several million dollars and generate $30 mil- lion for the county each year for five years. Property owners would pay an additional $2 for every $1,000 of tax- able assets, meaning that taxes would have increased by about 11.4 percent. But the millage was defeated, with 60 percent of voters in opposition. Why? Washtenaw County residents clearly didn't think they could afford the tax increase, even for schools. Indeed, annarbor.com quoted an Ypsi- lanti resident as saying, "I took a big pay cut ... I just couldn't afford to pay more, as much as I would have liked to." It's likely thatthis was the prevail- ing sentiment among those voting no. But because school funding can only come from one tax source or another, saying "we can't afford it" is the same as saying "we are spending too much." The only question, then, is this: Are these voters right in thinking that Michigan spends enough on edu- cation? Gov. Jennifer Granholm seemed to agree with them when she vetoed some of the funding for K-12 educa- tion last week in the final version of the state's budget for fiscal year 2010. As if realizing for the first time that the state is broke, Granholm cut per pupil funding for schools by at least $292 per student. But this paints a bleaker portrait than Michigan deserves. According to the U.S. Census Bureau's 2007 data, Michigan spends $9,912 per pupil - so per-pupil funding is really only decreasing by three per- cent. Considering that Michigan was already above the national average, our schools probably aren't as badly off as feared. , But the Census Bureau data also provides an answer to my origi- nal question of whether Michigan spends too much on education. As it turns out, 'onlyvight states had more revenue 'than Michigan to spend on schools. When the revenue sources were broken down into federal, state and local sources, Michigan moved to. fifth place for percentage of revenue being generated at the state level. This means that the percentage of revenue for public education being generated by Michigan taxpayers is greater than in 45 other states. Does Michigan really seem like it's financially secure enough to give more money to educa- tion than 45 of its neighbors? The gut reaction to this might be, "Well, at least they're spending lots of money on top-of-the-line textbooks, teaching materials, and facilities." But the real cost of education is employee compensation. Indeed, according to the Daily, the Ann Arbor school dis- trict spends 85 percent of its funds on compensating employees. And accord- ing to the Census Bureau data, Michi- gan's public school employees receive the seventh highest salary and benefit packages ofallteachersinthe country. All these numbers show that Michi- gan clearly isn't lacking in its funding of primary education - and that its public teachers are well paid com- pared with other states. Add in the fact that public school teachers nation- wide make 61 percent more than pri- vate school teachers nationwide, and what we have are some teachers who certainly don't need increased state funding to survive. Quality education needs concessions from teachers. Simitarly; it does not""take a mill- age," as the pro-millage group's slogan argued, to close budget gaps: We don't need to fire anybody just because we didn'tpass the millage. Werdon'tneed to reduce curricula, downgrade text- books, increase class sizes or cut arts programs. We simply need to pay our public teachers - who are already paid better than those in other states, and vastly better than private school teachers - slightly less. This isn't an unreasonable request, as workers in other sectors across the country have already accepted salary cuts in the face of an inhospitable economy - and in Michigan, especially. This isn't about the kids. Michigan can maintain the quality of its edu- cational system if its employees will accept compromises. - Robert Soave is the Daily's editorial page editor. He can be reached at rsoave@umich.edu. EDITORIAL BOARD MEMBERS: Nina Amilineni, Emad Ansari, Emily Barton, Ben Caleca, Michelle DeWitt, Brian Flaherty, Emma Jeszke, Raghu Kainkaryam, Sutha K Kanagasingam, Erika Mayer, Edward McPhee, Harsha Panduranga, Alex Schiff, Asa Smith, Brittany Smith, Radhika Upadhyaya, Rachel Van Gilder, Laura Veith SEND LETTERS TO: TOTHEDAILY@UMICH.EDU w student turnout hurt from that middle-income family. illG e's chn ces I don't want to belittle the amount, but many families spend that much or more on game day festivities. They could probably "sacrifice" a Lc ml The finalfron tier? TO THE DAILY: single Saturday t Students turned out in droves for the 2008 from their living presidential election. But this year, when their children wi something locally urgent was at stake, less and have a chanc than five percent voted. In some precincts It seems likea like the Michigan Union and Mary Markley behind. Students Residence Hall, less than one percent voted, government sups according to the Michigan Daily (County voters could have made reject school millage, 11/04/2009). The issue of wide proposal th funding for Washtenaw County schools inun- ing yes, students dated the news in recent weeks and campaign education and tb signs speckled front yards, but students were bill. And that w; as cognizant of this vote as they are of traffic voting booth for? when blindly crossing the streets. Proposal 1 would have provided Washtenaw Justin Schott County schools with an additional $30 million. University alum It's not just college kids taking the hit, but chil- dren as young as five years old. Last week, Gov. Students Jennifer Granholm - once a champion for edu- cation - cut an additional $51.7 million from millage on school districts, mainly in Southeast Michi- Jfll ge O gan. Michigan has made massive budget cuts for K-12 and higher education and holds the TO THE DAILY: dubious distinction of being one of five states University Ch to spend more on incarceration than higher who are you to to education. The Michigan Promise scholarship vote for the prop is no longer a promise. will probably be1 Proposal 1 was put on the ballot to maintain four years when critical funding for arts, athletics, Advanced find it fun to spes Placement courses, teacher salaries and other ology is always es extracurricular programs that contribute to ers bear the costs quality education. Critics of the proposal com- I'm not minim plained that Ann Arbor would subsidize other cation. But we h districts by paying $15 million and receiving time and place f only $11 million in return, according to a for- during an econot mula mandated by state law. Opponents also choice. argued that districts should be thriftier and And money is spend within their means. Supporters respond- thing. On a broa ed that Ann Arbor Public Schools cut $19 mil- spends more mc lion in the last four years, and that we shouldn't than almost ever punish our children for Michigan's economic dents perform ot woes and financial mistakes made by adults. age on reading,n And the cost to homeowners? A mill is a 0.1 school districts,: percent tax on taxable property value (50 per- have. Other natio cent of the most recent assessment). If a fam- less and still ma ily paid $200,000 for a house, and the taxable shine us. value is $100,000, a one mill tax amounts to $100 per year. Proposal 1 sought to raise a 2 Andrea Siklosi mill tax, which would have been $200 per year LSA junior o enjoy the game with friends room or a tailgate knowing ill receive a quality education e to succeed. an issue students would rally s, many of whom depend on sport for a college education, the difference for a county- at lost by 8,000 votes. By vot- would have been supporting heir landlords would pay the asn't worth stumbling into a wrong to push 7property owners apter of College Democrats, alk? You advocate students to posed school millage, yet you leaving Ann Arbor in three to you graduate college. Do you nd other people's money? Ide- xpensive, especially when oth- s. izing the importance of edu- ave to realize that there is a for everything. Raising taxes mic slump is not an intelligent not the solution for every- ader level, the United States oney per pupil on education ry other nation. But U.S. stu- nly at the international aver- math and science tests. To the I say, make do with what you ons survive with considerably nage to outperform and out- Addressing Congress on May 25, 1961, President John Ken- nedy famously challenged the United States to land a man on the- moon and bring him home safely. At the time, America8 - locked in an arms race with the Soviet Union, bursting with national pride, and looking starry- - eyed toward theC cosmos - was eas- CHRIS ily convinced of the KOSLOWSKI moon's profound -_ importance. The public forked over $25 billion for the Apollo program, then one of the largest expenditures ever by a nation in peacetime. After funding cuts, a drastic decrease in public interest and two space shuttle disasters, NASA is des- perate to rekindle America's love for space exploration. Many of NASA's most famous names, including Apollo 11 astronaut Buzz Aldrin, are lobby- ing hard to convince Congress and President Barack Obama to earmark more funding for a manned mission to Mars. They claim a Mars program is paramount to the advancement of scientific discovery and the survival of the space agency. Former President George W. Bush signed his Vision for Space Explo- ration into law in late 2005. It set milestones and appropriated fed- eral dollars for a program slated to return astronauts to the moon and then, eventually, the red planet. As research from the project progresses, NASA and the public are quickly real- izing that sending people to Mars is a much harder, longer and more dan- gerous endeavor than the 1960s moon missions. And of course, the biggest obstacle is cost. Quoted in an article in the Tele- graph this summer, Norman Augus- tine, formerCEOof Lockheed Martin, said, "With a few exceptions, we have the technology or the knowledge that we could go to Mars if we wanted with humans." What we don't have, between our tepid economy and the trillions of dollars of new government spending, is money to spare. It seems unlikely that NASA will be able to execute a Mars mission anytime soon - that is, unless we ignore the second criterion of Kennedy's challenge. A way to cut costs that is gaining popularity among space enthusiasts, and even high-ranking directors at NASA, is to send astronauts to Mars but not bring them back. A one-way ticket would eliminate the need to transport fuel for the return trip, for, a system to escape Mars's gravity, and for a vehicle that could withstand re- entry into Earth's atmosphere. The cuts would save the taxpayers bil- lions and trim years, maybe decades, of preparation off the program's esti- mated completion time. John Olson, NASA's director of exploration systems integration, noted in an interview with The Guardian that sending explorers on one-way missions is not new. "It's really no different than the pioneer- ing spirit of many in past history, who took the one-way trip across the ocean, or the trip out west across the United States with no intention of ever returning." Though I can't imagine ever want- ing to spend my final days alone on a dead, red rock millions of miles away from the nearest companion, I sus- pect many older space junkies, per- haps even Aldrin himself, would be thrilled to embark on such a historic journey. After all, we all will even- tually die. Why not end life with the ultimate exclamation point of being the first person to walk on Mars? Humans are much more versatile than unmanned probes at conduct- ing experiments on alien worlds. A human on Mars could help us learn about the birth of our solar system and the origins of life on Earth, and maybe even begin to develop Mars as a colony that could save our species if Earth ever becomes unviable. Still, I just can't support sending an * astronaut to his or her death only to cut costs. Perhaps if a one-way ticket was the only way to send someone to Mars, I would think differently. The potential for boundless scientific dis- covery justifies a considerable amount We need to make sure we can bring astronauts home. of risk. But a no-return mission would ultimately send the message that an astronaut's life is worth the amount of dollars and years saved by not devising a way to bring him home, and that's wrong. Even in war, when civilian lives are at stake, the U.S. government does not send soldiers on missions with zero chance of return. I think it's wise to keep Kennedy's words in mind as we reach out to our red, celestial neighbor. We chose to go to the moon and we choose now to go to Mars, not because it's easy, but because it's hard. Sending an Ameri- can on a one-way mission to save a few billion dollars, even if the rewards would be great, is the easy way out. - Chris Koslowski can be reached at cskoslow@umich.edu.