4-The Michigan Daily Summer Weekly- Wednesday, June 10, 1992 Clie lifidligniil _1i fu OPINNPN, EDITOR IN CHIEF ANDREW M. LEVY OPINION EDITORS GIL RENBERG DAVID SHEPARDSON Unsigned editorials represent the opinion of a majority of the Daily's editorial board. All other cartoons, signed articles, and letters do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the Daily. 420bMaynard Street Ann Arbor, Muchigan 48109 764-0552 Edited and Managed by Students at the University of Michigan *I I Giving women a sporting chance T he 1990s did not begin well for women athletes at the University. When the Schembechler Hall athletic facility was opened lastyear, women's teamsfoundthattheyhadto fight for equal access to the training facilities. This travesty occurred despite the heralding of Schembechler Hall as a wonderful place for "all" Michigan athletes to practice their sport. The term athlete seemed to apply only to male athletes. Despite this incident, organizers of Michigan sports have not leamed their lesson. Once again, women associated with the athletic department are finding that they have to fight to get equal status and consideration. Last Wednesday a banquet was held on campus to honor three senior "athletes of the year." The event was attended by athletes, coaches, athletic department staff, Athletic DirectorJackWeidenbachandUniversity Presi- dent James Duderstadt. The banquet is spon- sored annually by a booster club, the Bob Ufer Quarterback Club. The Ufer Club also sponsors agolf game on the same day.Entry fees are used to support the Bob Ufer Scholarship for out- standing high school athletes. Nice ideas, right? Local businessmen are getting involvedin theUniversity community to promote education and good sportsmanship. A nice idea-except for the fact that women have Ufer Club fiasco shows that Michigan s Athletic Department has yet to give sexism the boot been barred from participating in both the dinner and the golf game. Not only are female coaches and athletes not permitted to attend the events, but mothers of honored athletes are also unwel- come. In a year in which Michigan women contin- ued to excel in sports, it is sad to see that the University condones their exclusion from cer- tainnon-University events; for, while thebooster clubisnotdirectlyaffiliated withtheUniversity, it receives considerable support from the University's Athletic Department. The banquet was held in the University's Bennie Oosterbaan Field House. The golf game was played on the University's golf course. The University presi- dent, athletic director and football coach spoke at this year's dinner.Despite the participation of University employees, the Athletic Department Public Relations Office claims that the athletic department "has absolutely nothing to do with the banquet." The University has many avenues available to encourage change in matters of discrimina- tion and exclusion. The factthatit took the threat of a large public outcry to make the University administration take a stand on the issue is dis- turbing. One wonders what other restricted ath- letic activities have yet to be uncovered before action is taken. Although the Ufer Club provides scholar- ships to both high school boys and girls, it only honors men as "athletes of the year." Don Robinson, the committee chairman, said, "It is a Michigan sports banquet which honors out- standing athletesfromtheUniversity.Allcoaches and staff from the athletic department are in- vited." When asked if women coaches were included, he replied, "Oh no, we haven't got to that point yet. It's just tradition and practice.We haven't gotten around to inviting women yet, but we're going to do that next year." While the Ufer Club will allow women to be present atnextyear's festivities, there isno word yet on whether it will continue to consider only maleathletesas"athleteof the year."Butatleast it has taken.a step toward full inclusion of women. The University needs to review thor- oughly any similar forms of discrimination and then discourageitspersonnelfromparticipating in such activities as well as to stop permitting groups that discriminate to use University facili- ties. Thisis the firstyear thatPresidentDuderstadt was asked to attend. He chose to use the event as aforum for discussing the sexismof the club and his disappointment that such practices continue at the University. While Duderstadt deserves praise for his actions, he must realize that just speaking out at an event like this does not go nearly far enough. Duderstadt should have is- sued a letter to all Athletic Department staff discouraging participation until the club permit- ted femalecoachesandathleticdepartmentstaff and the mothers of the honored athletes to at- tend. Without the presence of the Athletic Department's top personnel, the banquet would have been a failure and members of the Ufer Club would have leamed a valuable lesson. Blatant sexism in athletics persists because men who can effectchange are unwilling to take astand or fail to see that there is aproblem. There are too few colleges in America where women arein a position to correct problems of sexism in athletics.Butwhatcan womenathletesatMichi- gan expect from an athletic department which does not even consider them worthy of consid- eration for "Athlete of the Year?" 01 All the President's Men: Part II 01 At a House Judiciary Committee meeting last Tuesday, senior House Democrats in- dicated that they would call for the appointment of an independent prosecutor to investigate the Bush administration's dealings withIraqbefore that country attempted to annex Kuwait. This call wasechoed by federaljudge Marvin Shoob, whose court had investigated crimes within the BancoNazinale deLavoro(BNL)inconnection with thedefaultof $2billion inloansto Iraq.The Department of Justice (DOJ)mustimmediately appoint a special prosecutor to determine the possibility of illegal activities by the Bush ad- ministration. Several committee investigations in the House have unearthed substantial amounts of information about misuse of the federal farm credit program to fmance Iraqi arms purchases, alteration of key documents, and the willful effort of the Bush administration to mislead Congress - all of this is more than enough to warrantthe appointmentof aspecialprosecutor. Republicanshavetwoargumentsagainstthe appointment: first, that the motive of the Demo- crats is simply for political gain in this election season, and second, that special prosecutors, such as the ones who are investigating the Iran- Contra and October Surprise, simply waste tax- payermoney.Rather thanmaking realprogress. Both of these arguments are flawed. If the Democrats, under the leadership of Henry Gonzales (D-Tex.) and Charlie Rose (D-N.C.), who have been investigating this for almost two years, wanted to make this a political issue they wouldcontinuetoholdpublichearingsandkeep it in the public eye, rather than place it in the handsofanon-partisanindependentprosecutor. Furthermore, at least $2 billion in taxpayer Appoint a special prosecutor to investigate the role of the administration in funding Iraq 's war machine money was lost when the Iraqi govemment defaulted on its loan, which had been guaran- teed by the federal government. In addition, Republicans fear that an investigation could be anelectionyearembarrassment because it would probably focus on the roles of Clayton Yeutter, the former GOP chair who is currently serving as White House Domestic Policy Chief, and Robert Mosbacher, the Bush reelection campaign's general chair. The BNL scandal displayed how the federal govemment had an ineffectual regulatory sys- tem that begged for abuse, with the direct effect that BNL-Atlanta was able to use U.S. govern- ment loan guarantees to send billions of dollars worthofagricultural goods, ignoring Iraq'slack of creditworthiness, with the consent of the administration - despite the illegality of those actions. TheState department believedithat, as Presi- dent Bush said during his prime time news conference last week, Iraq could "be brought into the family of nations... we tried to work with him on grain credits and things of this nature to avoid aggressive action." Yet, pre- cisely the opposite occurred as the Iraqi govern- ment used the grain credits to further its war- makingcapabilities. The Bush policy ofexpedi- ency in foreign policy decisions, despite the legality or rationale for them, must be consid- ered and thoroughly investigated. TheBushadministration-whichsoldweap- ons to both Irp and Iraq during the ten-year Iran-Iraq War - continued to support the Iraqi government even though it had evidence that Iraq was using U.S. farm credits andillegalbank loans to produce weapons and increase its mili- tary capacity. The policy of supporting this dictator and feeding his war machine directly led to Hussein'sability todeclare waronKuwait and later enabled him to kill American troops. Rep. Rose said at Tuesday's hearings, "I fumly believe that violations of federal criminal lawshave occurredand that these violations will never be completely investigated or prosecuted unless an independent counselis appointed."He argues that by placing the responsibility of in- vestigation in the hands of the Justice Dept. is ridiculous because it is likely that DOJ officials were involved in the pre-Iraqi invasion policy blunders. The DOJ is not an independent or non- partisan body - its officials had an interest in the investigation. Justice changed documents subpoenaed by the House, concealing the fact that the administration interfered in the BNL investigation and that BNL-funded Iraqi front companies were involved in Iraq's ballistic mis- sile program and nuclear weapons program and nuclear weapons program. Other administra- tion officials including National Security Advi- sor Brent Scowcroft had close ties to BNL as the bank's attorney and NSC documents note that the NSC staff was directly involved in the administration's handling of the BNL scandal. In a 347-count indictment of BNL, DOJ did not investigate its connections with the main branch of BNL in Rome, nor any of its other worldwideoperations.AsShoobnotes,"Itseems far-fetchedthatrenegadeemployeescouldmove $4.5 billion in the fashion it was done without some type of participation by the people in this country and outside the country." Under the special prosecutor law which was enacted as a result of Watergate, the special prosecutors are supposed to be free of interfer- ence from the executive or the legislative branches. These investigations can be expen- sive and are reserved for the most serious issues - this potentially enormous scandal, which appears to involve significant violations of U.S. law and reckless disregard for the authority of Congress on the part of the administration, cer- tainly deserves to be investigated by a special prosecutor. The integrity of government must be placed before the short-sightedconcernof the expenditure of a relatively small amount of money to investigate alleged illegal activities. In the 1988 presidential campaign, President Bush won despite serious doubts raised by the Iran-Contraaffair. This scandalhas directparal- lels with Iran-Contra - misleading the Con- gress, alteration of documents, lack of over- sight, conflicting administration policies, and a cover-up. Steps must be taken immediately to learn the truth about the administration'srole in building Iraq's military. For this issue to be clouded in mystery on the first Tuesday of November may lead to an even more serious mistake. Unless steps are taken, including the appointment of a special prosecutor, the truth about the role of the administration in the Iraqi decision and ability to attack Kuwait will never be known.