4 - The Michigan Daily =July 10, 1996 Edited and managed by students at the University of Michigan 420 Maynard Street Ann Arbor, MI 48109 LAURIE MAYK ERIN MARSH " AUEditor in Chief PAUL SERILLA E Editorial Page Editors Un/ess othetrwise noted, unsigned editorials reflect the opinion of the majority oft'he Dailys editorial board. All other articles, letters and cartoons do not necessarily reflect the opinion of The Michigan Dailt Winning the ..e Women admitted to VMI and The Citadel n a landmark ruling this month, the Supreme Court ordered the state-supported Virginia Military Institute to admit women or become a private institution. The near- unanimous decision ended years of media scrutiny and political commentary on what is primarily a question of gender discrimination. The VMI and The Citadel, the only other state-supported all-male college, have waged court battle after court battle to preserve their right to exclude women from their programs. Despite the fact that both schools are public institutions, they argued they did not violate the 14th Amendment's equal protection guarantee and their unique all-male programs were operated in the public's interest. Plainly, they were not. The mission of the Virginia Military Institute was much more than subsidizing a sin- gle-sex educational alternative. It was about promoting a cultural anachronism that has long fallen by the wayside. VMI's - and The Citadel's - particular brand of single-sex education was not about preserving a public interest, but preserving an institution that is unquestionably sexist. The fact that there was a separate program for women, The Virginia Women's Institute for Leadership, alters the argument little. The separate institute at a nearby private women's college raised uncomfortable parallels to the infamous and discredited "separate but equal" clause. It has been proven that if access is not open to all, except on basis of merit, then equality is an impossibility. The women's institute was not an acceptable alternative. Despite the protests of staunch VMI supporters, all parties involved will benefit from the court's ruling. VMI and The Citadel are essentially preparing men for careers in the U.S. armed forces. But women are becoming exceedingly integrated in today's military service - the likelihood that a VMI or Citadel grad will serve under female leadership at some point is almost certain. The best way to prepare male cadets for this reality is to. train them coeducationally. Furthermore, over twenty years of coeducation experience at the three US service academies has proven that integration makes better institutions. In her majority opinion, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg did leave open a small loop- hole for public single-sex education. She made the distinction that in very specific cir- cumstances, public single-sex education could be pursued to address "particular eco- nomic disabilities" or to further "equal employment opportunity." But, she warned, such programs require "exceedingly persuasive justification" to exclude members of one gender. While this loophole may prove extremely troublesome to the judicial system in the future, the court did not close the door entirely on further experimenting with pub- lic single-sex education. The VMI and The Citadel were not experiments in single-sex education, nor were they serving at-risk segments of the population. The Supreme Court made the right deci- sion - VMI was guilty of gender discrimination. ruling? Affirmative Supreme Court blasts affirmative action The U.S. government's conservative stance on affirmative action culminated in a sig- nificant Supreme Court decision last week. The court supported the appellate cir- cuit court decision earlier this spring to declare race an invalid factor for admissions at the University of Texas. Cheryl Hopwood and three white males filed the complaint that spurred the Supreme Court ruling. Hopwood and the others sued the University of Texas Law School, claim- ing they were denied admission based on race - they complained they were passed up because of a UT affirmative action program that gave preference to black and Latino/a students. UT was supposedly prevented from practicing affirmative action admissions policies because of an earlier appellate court ruling. The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the public universities in the fifth district - schools in Texas Louisiana and Mississippi - could no longer consider race a factor for admissions. UT's student population - over 25 percent minorities - angrily protested the court's decision. UT issued a statement that they would remain "firmly dedicated to the princi- ple of equal educational opportunity for all citizens of Texas." The university appealed the ruling, only to be denied review last week. The issue hits home - the University has seen much debate over affirmative action in recent months. Many are rightfully concerned that the tone of the government is unfa- vorable for affirmative action preservation. Affirmative action is necessary for the University's progress as an academic community. Despite governmental and judicial attacks, University administrators stand firmly behind its hiring and admissions prac-@ tices - University Provost J. Bernard Machen said, "We believe our current policies are consistent and legal with the law of the land until something else happens." The "something else" may soon be forthcoming if the Supreme Court continues to undermine public institutions' affirmative action efforts. The country must stop criti- cizing these policies and allow the education system to progress. It is vital that the University continue to support its hiring and admissions policies - the administration must not allow the anti-affirmative action mentality to affect the University. The Supreme Court set a dangerous precedent. Affirmative action programs are being attacked at universities and colleges all over the country. The Republican Congress is wreaking havoc on public institutions' attempts to equalize hiring and and admissions practices. Affirmative action - on behalf of gender and racial minorities -@ helps the academic community promote inclusivity and fights the traditional bias in favor of white, middle-class males. The Supreme Court's ruling flies in the face of progress. It sets the tone for future attacks - and hints at the demise of affirmative action. Such a result will exclude many deserving students and professors and will ulti- mately degrade the public educational experience for all. LETTERS, -, Clinton's higher ed tax credit a positive step for America TO THE DAILY: I would like to comment on your editorial regarding Clinton's higher ed proposal (Educational Access, 612/96). Because I work at the U.S. Department of Education in Washington, D.C., I probably have the best grasp of this program. First, I would like to point out that the $1,500 tax credit is only for the first two years (not for the third) and in the second year it is only offered if the student has maintained at least a B average and stays off drugs. The $10,000 tax deduction, on the other hand, is offered no matter what year you are in school (undergrad or grad). I agree with Clinton in that all students should be able to go to the 13th and 14th grades. It is necessary in today's world. As for this being a campaign- year gimmick, that is just false. Clinton pro- posed the tax deduction in 1994, but it was killed in the Republican Congress. The President announced this now because issues get more publicity during a campaign. Let's remember that this proposal needs to get through Congress first. If the President had introduced the $1,500 tax credit into Congress, it would have been killed like the $10,000 deduction All students should support this because it gives the opportunity for everyone to get a college degree (in a community college at least) and fulfill the American dream of getting a job and prospering. ANDY SCHOR MSA REPRESENTATIVE SCOR will support Matlock in upcoming trial TO THE DAILY: The Students of Color of Rackham (SCOR) Graduate Organization believe John Matlock, Assistant Vice Provost and Director of the Office of Academic and Multicultural Initiatives, to be innocent of all charges of alleged assault and he has our full support and faith. We also believe the Department of Public Safety, as those charged with the professional duty of managing incidences of public safety at the University of Michigan, has not acted in the best interests of students, staff and faculty. It is deplorable when any member of the University community is treated as John Matlock was. After entering an event on good faith to help students, he was inappropriately detained by DPS officers. Our concerns are specific to the entire department since we assume that training is uniform among DPS employees. We are concerned that officers stat- ed that because John Matlock wore a baseball cap and jogging suit, they thought he was a stu- dent, a statement which implies that if he had been a student, the actions taken by DPS would have been condoned. DPS has jeopardized its trustworthiness further in the eyes of students of color and other students who feel they have been inappropriately treated on this campus, and should examine its actions in regarding people on this campus, considering we are in an era when the memories of incidents surrounding Rodney King, Mae Jemison and the Mexican Nationals are still resonant. As a manager of crisis and conflict, DPS should have conducted itself in a more profes- sional manner. We are appalled and disappoint- ed at the legal predicament in which John Matlock has been placed by its behavior. TARA L YOUNG PRESIDENT, SCOR Anti-Klan protesters gave Ann Arbor negative publicity TO THE DAILY: What an image Ann Arbor has made for itself. We now see that the Klan is a more benign and legitimate group than the popular thoughts of Ann Arbor. As the Klan has now moved itself from the point of aggressor to the point of defender, perhaps we should give more concern to their statements. ANTHONY C. SPEARMAN CLEMSON UNIVERSITY