Page 4-Tuesday, June 10, 1980-The Michigan Daily The-,- a Daily Ninety Years of Editorial Freedom Edited and managed by students at the University of Michigan Get public money out of S. Africa ITHIN THE next several months the state legislature will vote on a package of three bills that would outlaw investing public money in firms that do business in South Africa. These votes will be an important opportunity for Michigan to show the rest of the world exactly how it feels about American involvement in South Africa's racist system of apartheid. An important consequence of this legislation is that the University would be required to divest from all companies doing business in South Africa. The Regents would no longer be troubled by the decision on whether an academic institution should concern itself with moral values when choosing its investment portfolio; they would be required by law to rid the University of its stocks from cor- porations in South Africa by July, 1982. The first bill of the divestment package, prohibiting deposit of state funds in banks that do business in South Africa, has already passed the state house and goes before the senate early this week. With any luck, it will pass as smoothly through the second chamber as it did the first. But the other two bills may pose some problems for legislators. An advisory panel has already come out against the second bill saying it would hurt the financial future of state employee pension funds. When the University bill comes into the limelight there will no doubt be opponents who say universities-already faced with reduction in state aid and rising costs-cannot afford to lose their South African investments, which often are at the top of the investment portfolios. State legislators will have to decide if the possibilities of some financial loss should outweigh the opportunity to remove public money from in- stitutions that indirectly, yet definitely support the racist system of apartheid in South Africa. Those state legislators who are economically- minded are in the best position to understand the situation in South Africa. Apartheid is an economic issue. The white Afrikaners will never voluntarily relinquish control of the country to the 80 per cent of its population which is black. Life for the Afrikaners is simply too good under the present system to seriously consider changing. The only way, then, blacks will be able to have their share of the country's wealth is by revolution. Recent uprisings indicate that blacks will not sit still forever. Divestment is the best way for this state to show that when the system falls apart, Michigan did not support the fallen regime respon- sible for some of the worst human rights violations ever. Divestment is a small symbolic step that shows the American public is totally opposed to the South African regime and wants no part of the profits made by American corporations that continue to do business there. This summer our state legislators, and their consciences, must decide that Michigan should risk some financial loss and make that statement. Feiff er GbOT 9FI" T St SlJT tn) 4T T MO!O WMT A OR F o ft 'f (R~ 6 HA4169IF t JE ANH N M f Z lfM)T $E NE 2A. 'P ;~ p 4 A His) M .rp 2 upJT84OAHP lsP. ~fi ~j 4I~lH o 00 a0 mr ewLpt~o velM 09 9D o . c gm 9 LETTERS TO THE DAILY: Clark editorial questionable To the Daily: Your editorial (Daily, June 4) concerning Ramsey Clark'savisit to Iran-"Clark Should Have Stayed At Home"-did have one virtue: it stirred me out of my apathetic slumber and prompted me to write this letter. On several points, however, I found your editorial questionable. First, you criticize Clark for going to Iran because you think it will' delay the release of the hostages. Aside from the fact that you say this prevents a "quick" end to the crisis-I think the ad- jective "quick" is neither apt nor even possible in the seventh mon- th of the crisis-you state that, "The Iranians themselves have insisted that the conference has no relation to the hostages." In light of this acknowledgement, I fail to see the reason for your concern. Perhaps your reason for protesting Clark's visit was your opinion of the convention it- self-you term it "ridiculous." It is very possible that some sort of forum such as this is a necessary precondition for the release of the hostages. Your statement that, "Carter has enough trouble presenting a firm, steady policy toward Iran without fellow Americans openly ignoring his words," seems to indicate Car- ter's lack of foreign policy exper- tise-a flaw I doubt Mr. Clark is responsible for. You also neglect the question: "Does Jimmy Carter have the authority to ban travel to Iran?" While Iran may be considered a special case, the U.S. Supreme Court held in Kent v. Dulles (1958) that "the right to travel is part of the 'liberty' of which the citizen cannot be deprived without due process of law." In this light, it is Americans who are the victims of sanctions, a situation not a little ironic. Finally, and most distressingly, you fault the American media for aggravating the situation. In your words, "The American media have done enough for Iranian propaganda without Clark's help." What do you propose-a news blackout? An open society such as ours has a free flow of information as its lifeblood. It is disconcerting for you to advocate censorship, as member of the press. It is not t function of the media to decide what is progaganda. I hope reasonable members of our society can make that decision on their own. In no sense am I condoning the holding of the hostages. It is clearly an unsupportable and criminal act. Nevertheless, your editorial only serves to further the misconceptions that reign in the public dialogue on this iss4 -John J. wallbillich June 5 Power Center 0 Misstatemnents in advertising article To the Daily: Pranks by Nissen are one thing, misstatements of fact another. The Power family and others-not the General Fund-paid the cost of the Power Center for the Performing Arts (Daily, May 30). -J. F. Brinkerhoff, University Vice Presidents and Chief Financial Officer June 2, 1980 To the Daily: I am writing to correct some misstatements that occurred in Bonnie Juran's article (Daily, May 23) on deceptive adver- tising. First, our office is the Washtenaw County Consumer Action Center, the Consumer Protection Division of the County Prosecutor's Office. we function mainly as a complaint mediation agenacy. we also investigate cases of alleged fraud or decep- tive advertising. If the in- vestigations reveal fraud, the results are turned over to the Prosecuting Attorney's office for further action. Therefore, I might amend her statement to say that the Prosecutor "has the authority to prosecute," but only after an in- vestigation provides factual evidence of the possibility of criminal fraud. At that point, an assistant prosecutor would take the case if further legal action was warranted. Also, her remark concerning companies which advertise specific salaries which are later qualified or restricted might bet- ter be explained as "not only deceptive, but may be illegal." Otherwise, I appreciate Ms. Juran's efforts to alert students to potential deception in adver- tising. If you have inquiries about a specific ad or business, you may also contact the Con- sumer Action Center at 994-2420. -Ann Snyder Consumer Action Center June 6 ' Editorial policies 6 Cartoons frequently appear on both the left and right side of the page; they do not necessarily represent Daily opinions. v. ::'x4i ",w.+'ii.Yv Pi%{ +:r 6~H"