4 - Tuesday, November U7, 2009 The Michigan Daily - michigandaily.com 74L cfirIC4,6,gan 3at*lm Edited and managed by students at the University of Michigan since 1890. 420 Maynard St. I in Ann Arbor, MI 48109 tothedaily@umich.edu GARY GRACA ROBERT SOAVE COURTNEY RATKOWIAK 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 ofttheir authors. Relaxing late-night laws State should let bars stay open to raise budget money ight life in Ann Arbor may get a little more interesting in the near future. That's because the Michigan House of Representatives is considering legislation to allow bars in the state to extend their closing times from 2 a.m. to 4 a.m. Such legislation will stimulate business in local bars while allowing the government to collect more revenue in taxes due to the increased hours. Helping businesses while closing budget gaps is a smart move for the state, and legislators should propose, pass and implement a policy to keep bars open later. Having those terrorists tried so close to the attack is going to be an encumbrance on all New Yorkers." - New York Gov. David Paterson, commenting on the Obama administration's decision to try five men linked to the 9/11 terrorist attacks in New York civilian court, as reported yesterday by the The New York Times. ELAINE MORTON E-MAIL ELAINE AT EMORT@UMICH.EDU Last week, Rep. Richard Hammel (D-Mt. Morris Twp) introduced a bill that would allow bars in the state to stay open until 4 a.m., extending closing time by two hours. The law would also permit liquor stores to begin selling alcohol as early as 7:30 a.m. on Sundays instead of the current time of noon. According to the current legislation, bars that want to take advantage of the extended hours would have to pay a $1,500 fee, and local governments would have the power to forbid businesses within their jurisdiction from participating. The bill is great news for many struggling Michigan businesses. Because they would be allowed to stay open later, the bars would generate more sales and help offset their economic problems with more revenue. While the owners will have to pay a $1,500 fee, this isn't overly burdensome, and many businesses will quickly be able to make up the cost. And businesses that don't want to add the hours don't have to. But those who do will be able to employ people for later shifts, creating more work and jobs. With Michigan's debilitating 15.3-percent unem- ployment rate, even small increases to the job market can help. And keeping bars open later will also help the state government make some money. This is coming just a few weeks after the state's bruising budget debate, where fund- ing for education was slashed across the board because of deficient revenue sourc- es. The government needs to find a way to reverse as many of these cuts as yossible, and making more money off taxes from bars that stay open later is one way of doing that. The state will also profit from the $1,500 fee. one of the concerns raised about this bill is that it will encourage late-night drinking and decrease safety. But college students who want to stay out late drinking will do so in any case. The current 2 a.m. restric- tion does not mean that people aren't drink- ing after 2 a.m., only that they're doing it outside of a bar. The state might as well see if businesses and state revenue sources can profit from these drinkers. Keeping the bars open offers these students a place to drink that is supervised, regulated and relatively safe. For this reason, local gov- ernments should not be able to opt out of the policy. The state legislature should pass this bill and give businesses a break while raising funds for the state budget. But local govern- ments shouldn't be given the power to end the party early. DA t - A- I/Ziosi --losfii el" - -o room sithetmIdd Ce? erehas'beI tofd ss s For.exmple, tyn - - bJ the p tican eaders Ne p 1an (mo1inh theai d g dw T here has been plenty of discus- who would benefit liberals if they able to overcome all of that by poer- sionon this page in recenwdays keep him on their side. For example.traying Chafee as a poppet of the evil about the Stupak Amendment, Stupak voted to prohibit employment Republican leadership - in 2006, that a last minute addition to the House of discrinmination based on sexual orien- meant Chafee had to go. Representative's health care reform tation and opposed a constitutional 2006 was also the definitive year bill that bars coverage for abortions amendment defining marriage. He in the tragic tale of Joe Lieberman. under federally has supported 'rehabilitative pro- Lieberman was pushed the same way subsidized insur- grae for criminals, opposed drilling Chafee was, but he had the added ance plans (From for oil at the Arctic National Wild- burden of having supported the war the Daily: Stop StY- life Refuge and opposed a bill that in Iraq. Despite being a three-term pak, 11/10/2009; -- - would allow deportation of illegal incumbent, he was edged out by Ned Defending repro- immigrants who come into hospitals Lamont in the Democratic primary, ducive rightstseeking. care. In the last Democratic but managed to rally as an indepen 11/11/2009; Stu- presidential pris ary, Stupak support- dent in the general electionto main- pak isn't so stupid, ed John Edwards, who - despite his tants his.eat. And then - either out of 11/12/2009). IMRAN later-exposed ickiness - ran easily a true change in his political beliefs, Missing from the most liberal primary campaign of spite for the Democrats who had the conversation sYED any 2008 candidate. abandoned him or sheer madness - thus far, however, Certainly, Stupak's positions on Lieberman became what even four has been any men- all issues are staggered within the years ago would have been hard to sion of the man himself - a glaring grey area liberals associate with sell- omission, considering that anomalies outs. But consider that Stupak took like Bart Stupak ( f-Mich) will ulti- all of these aforementioned stances L eas L m s d mately get to shape just about every- knowing full well that they would d appeara noudnt thing President Barack Obama hopes be unpopular with his constituents. to accomplish. Then consider that,he still managed atta k centrist Stupak is a Democrat who has to thump his Republican rival by represented' Michigan's first Con- mnore than 32 percentage points in the Democrats. gressional District since 1993. That's 2Qo8 election. This is a man you want significant because he was the first bn a your corner. representative of the new first Dis- At a time when the blue-red debate trict, which emerged from congres- has become more pronounced than imagine: a neoconservative. sional reapportionment following the ever, people like Stupak are rare. These two are the opposite ends of 1990 census. This new first District There was atime when senators like the spectrum of possible outcomes for comprises the entire Upper Peninsu- Lincoln Chafee and Joe Lieberman the story of powerful moderates being Is and a large chunk of the northern could be seen as true leaders ground- pushed aside. Lieberman survived, Lower Peninsula - about 45 percent ed in the center. But with the recent but did so by appealing to the right of the state's land mass. inflammatory tactics and hegemonic wing in Connecticut, and emerged Of the 19 men to represent that delusions of both the Left and the as part of the problem. Chafee was region in Congress before Stupak. Right, moderates have flittered away. defeated and replaced by a Democrat only three were Democrats. If you it's impossible to pin down one who has an almost identical ideology know anything about northern Mich- linchpin, but the 2006 election comes but lacks the influence and friend- igan, you know that makes sense close. That year, Chafee - then a ships Chafee had with Republicans. - there aren't too msany "Yes We Republican senator from Rhode Liberals should hope that there is Can-ers running around up there. Island' - was defeated soundly by a middle path that current moderates. To represent that region in Congress Democratic upstart Sheldon White- like Stupak and Sen. Olympia Snowe as a Democrat, Stupak obviously house. Along with his support for (R-Maine) can follow. But for that must be an anomaly among his cau- affirmative action, gun control, stem path to exist, we have to pave it. To cus colleagues. And so he is, taking cell research and environmental pro- do so, we might have to let Bart Stu- the non-liberal position on issues like tection, Chafee denounced President pak take a little souvenir for the good stem cell research, free trade and, of Bush's war in Iraq and was among the people back home. - course, abortions. - most outspoken supporters of abor- But a closer look at tupak suggests tion rights and gay marriage on either - wrat Syed cat be reached a complex political entity, someone side of the aisle. Yet Whitehouse was at ealad@amich.ed., 0 0 .0 EDITORIAL BOARD MEMBERS: Nina Amilineni, Emad Ansari, Emily Barton, William Butler, 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 Government, not businesses, will lead green revolution TO T H E IAILY: In response to Brian Flaherty's column, I think that he places too much faith in the business com- munity to address global climate change (Chang- ing the business climate, 11/16/2009). While it is true that the private sector should - and hopefully will - produce the innovations nec- essary to combat greenhouse gas emissions, the role of government is too great to dismiss so casu- ally. It is true that the U.S. government has failed to lead the way in combating climate change, but the proper response is to lobby our elected repre- sentatives and elect more environmentally friend- ly politicians. We should not abandon what could be out most powerful tool in enacting real change. Flaherty was correct in pointing out the increase in solar panel sales, but failed to mention the hefty subsidies offeredby, that's right, the gov- ernment. Nascent and critical industries have his- torically been subsidized, protected or otherwise incentivized, green technology should be no dif- ferent. Flaherty ignored the role that public fund- ing plays in researchingnew technologies and the demand created by government-backed incentive programs. We need a bold move toward a greener econ- omy, but it won't come from the conservative energy and manufacturing industries. Given the end-of-life-as-we-know-it consequences of global warming, creating a cap-and-trade system for the U.S. is a dramatic step toward reining in our car- bon dioxide emissions. Climate change is a global issue and the rest of the world is waiting for the U.S. to take action. Our government must take steps to create an atmosphere more conducive to a green econo- my, but we citizens must hold our government responsible. Samuel Marvin Chair of the University's chapter of the College Democrats The Daily's top 10 rankings ignored Texas Christian TO THE DAILY: I am just curious as to why the entire sports staff failed to put Texas Christian University in their iop 10 rankings. What else does it have to do to prove it is an elite team? it crushed a good Utah team last week, destroyed Brigham Young in an away game, knocked off a pretty good Clemson team and have cruised fairly easily through the rest of the Mountain West. It is hav- ing a much more dominating year than Utah did last year, and we all know what Utah did in their bowl game. There is no question TCU deserves a high ranking. And if Texas slips, I believe TCU deserves a chance in the National Champion- ship game. What's up with the Mountain West hating? Eric Hutchinson Engineeringsophomore FDA has reason to exclude gay men from donating TO THE DAILY: In his column, Matthew Green dangerously imposes politics on medical science (There should be blood, 11/12/2009). The U.S. Food and Drug Administration explains why gay men are excluded from donat- ing blood on its website: "Men who have sex with men and would be likely to donate have a HIV prevalence that is at present over 15 fold higher than the general population." I wish this was an archaic issue, but it isn't. It's actually getting worse. As of 2006, gay men accounted for 48.1 percent of all HIV cases in the U.S. According to the Centers for Disease Con- trol, "Approximately 56,300 people were newly infected with HIV in 2006 (the most recent year that data are available). Over half (53 percent) of these new infections occurred in gay and bisex- ual men." The FDA's policy to exclude gay men from donating blood is the result of a calculated deci- sion that keeps nearly 50 percent of all HIV cases out of the blood supply. it has been maintained through liberal and conservative administrations alike. Furthermore, Green was misleading when he stated that more advanced tests practically guar- antee that HIV infected blood would be screened out. Most of it is. But all tests are guaranteed to provide a false-negative result some of the time. Going against the science means that a very few unfortunate people will contract this fatal dis- ease who otherwise might not have. That is not medically ethical treatment. Blood shortages are not so critical to warrant a change in the policy. Politically, I actually agree with Green. Iwould gladly vote to legalize gay marriage. But I will not rieedlessly reduce the safety of a routine medical procedure for the sake of politics. The point of donating is that you make a sacrifice for the ben- efit of the patient. You do not ask patients to sacri- fice their safety so that the donor feelsvindicated. Gavin Stern Alum ALEX SCHIFF I Socialism -the new s' word 0 Over the past year, "socialism" has become the new political buzzword. It inspires even more red-faced, drooling fits of rage on the right wing than abortion does,' and our national discourse has been completely hijacked by demagogues screaming the new "s" word. On Wednesday, I read Vincent Patsy's column which warned of all the "socialism" brewing in America (The Price of Socialism, 11/11/2009). Patsy rightly points out that true socialism occurs when the state owns and con- trols the means of production, but I have yet to hear a real,' unexaggerated example of this occurring within Ameri- can borders. The column lumps together all government action as an evil, distortive and brutal force. Free markets do a lot of good. They allocate resources and set prices in a far more effective and rational manner than command economies. But it astounds me that people believe that any and all forms of government action are "socialist" and evil. The Food and Drug Administration is a form of "government intervention" in the economy that keeps consumers safe from dangerous products. Free market purists try to make the case that the market would be better than regulators at protecting consumers - but how can that be when the goal of a firm is only to maxi- mize its profit? We wouldn't even know about the major- ity of the deplorable practices government inspections uncover if it weren't for the FDA. But the magic of the market will protect us from cyanide found in our fruit, right? In 1999, Congress decided to follow the "unfettered market" dogma of the time and repealed the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933. This law separated banks that take deposits from consumers from those that traded financial instru- ments like credit-default swaps and collateralized debt obligations. For 66 years, the U.S. benefited from a rela- tively stable commercial banking industry. The money you put in your checking account was not leveraged for invest- ments in risky assets in order to please shareholders. Since t99, that evil "government intervention" safeguard has been removed, and the economy nearly collapsed in the fall of 2007. There were many factors involved, but had we recognized the limitations of free markets, Citigroup and Bank of America would never have been allowe to touch the toxic assets referred to so often in the media. The new "s" word recently sprung up most violently in response to Obama's "socialist" health care reform plan. Town hall meetings that were supposed to give citizens a chance to be*heard became forums for rhetorical lunacy. "Keep your government hands off my Medicare!" was my personal favorite. According to a Public Policy Polling survey conducted in August, 39 percent of those polled said "the government should stay out of Medicare." Thir- ty-nine percent of Americans think the single largest gov- ernment program in the country shouldn't be ruined by government.involvement. What? If -you're going to debate public policy, at least know what you're talking about. Socialism is not what happens every time the government intervenes in order to protect consumers or stabilize the economy. You can disagree with the bailouts or health care reform for very sound economic reasons, but the argument that the govern- ment is engaged in a deliberate campaign to take over the economy one industry at a time is ridiculous. This country has had an irrational history of fear of socialism stretching back to the beginning of the 20th century, and it is time for us to eradicate idiocy from the political dia- logue. Obama has been branded a socialist, a communist and even a fascist in the same breath. And yet all these ideologies conflict. America is changing. It is finally starting to fulfill its promise of opportunity for everyone, not just rich white men. The political right is afraid of losing its terror grip on Middle America and will say whatever sticks to make people afraid of a progressive agenda. This is about fear of change, and conservatism, by its very definition, is aver- sion to change. The only thing self-proclaimed conserva- tives seem to stand for is the reluctance to embrace the change that occurs with the march of time. Dear readers, if someone tries to tell you that we're on the way to becoming the Soviet Union, kindly smack them upside the head and explain to them that sometimes it is necessary for the government to reinforce, not eliminate, markets in order to save capitalism from itself. Alex Schiff is an LSA freshman.