4 - The Michigan Daily - Monday, June 29, 1998 Edited and managed by CHRIS FARAH DAvID WALLACE students at the a Editor in Chief Editorial Page Editor University of Michigan Unless otherwise noted. tosigncd doItorials recrt the >Jion ofth 420 Maynard Street majority of the Dails editorial board. Allot er article. ltterand A nn A rbor, MI 48109 cartoons do not necessarily reflect the opinion of ihe Michigan 1bail A t the University Board of Regents meeting in Grand Rapids recently, the question of establishing a student seat on the board once again came face to face with the regents. And likeresponses before, the regents were not receptive to the concept. MSA President Trent Thompson and the assembly must not be discouraged in their efforts to establish a student regent and continue to build sup- port on campus and throughout the state. A student regent has long been a goal of many students here at the University. The Board of Regents is the governing body of the University and directs all of the University's funds. Regents are elected to their positions, and they serve without compensation. The regents hold a public meeting each month. Many students feel that they would play a greater role in University affairs if a cur- rent stjdent's voice had a vote on the board. While the majority of the current regents are former University students, they do not have the same perspective of Deniedein University should have a student regent someone who attends classes, writes term papers and spends virtually all his or her time on campus. A great deal has changed at the University since the regents were attending classes, and someone at the fore- front of student life can best represent stu- dent interests. Certainly the board recognizes that the University's pulse is its students. The regents' bylaws state in Sec 7.05 that "Student participation in University deci- sion-making is important to the quality of student life at the University, and shall be encouraged." Student input helps the regents make decisions that can most ben- efit the University as a whole. A student regent would give other students at the University a peer on the board, which like- ly would increase communication between the student body and the regents. Some students who might otherwise be uncom- fortable seeking out the regents may be put at ease by someone of their age and expe- rience on the board. Thompson's latest setback with the board should not discourage him from leading the student body in the quest for a student regent. His proposal requested a student fee increase of $4 in the hopes of putting the question on a statewide ballot. This proposal was unlikely to be accepted anyway, as there is just not enough time before the state election to properly take up such an important issue. MSA should stay away from collecting fees from students in the quest for a stu- dent regent. There is no guarantee - should the board ever allow such a fee - that the money spent would result in suc cess. There is too great a risk that studer dollars would be wasted. The most promising avenue would se~ to be lobbying the Legislature directly . raising student awareness of the issue. Th Office of the Governor released poll result showing that 73 percent of Michigan voter would support a student regent ballot pro posal. MSA not too long ago achieve some success when Rep. Lingg Brewer (0 Holt) agreed to sponsor a bill to place th issue on the ballot. While opposition i strong in the state Senate, Brewer's suppoi is evidence that both Houses can eventuall be won over to the cause. * The founding of a student regent is difficult task; it requires a change to b made to the state constitution. And as wit] any difficult task, the establishment of student regent cannot be achieved immedi ately. MSA and the student body as whole must be diligent in their work. Wit a strong, concentrated effort the goal of student regent can become a reality. Burn out Senate should not have let McCain bill die The driving experience Drivers must be aware of their SUVs' risks T he U.S. Senate killed legislation to curb teen smoking and allow the govern- ment to regulate nicotine last Wednesday when movements to cut off debate and keep the bill under floor consideration failed. Voting to send the bill back to committee, the Senate destroyed the hopes of anti- smoking forces which had expected the leg- islation to discourage tobacco companies' practice of marketing to Americans under 18 years of age. The failure of Sen. John McCain's anti-tobacco bill reflects the gov- ernment's hesitance to combat smoking. Wednesday's vote was a missed opportuni- ty for the legislators to limit teen smoking in the U.S. Legislators - and the public they represent - should align themselves behind a push for the passage of legislation that will directly take steps to end underage smoking. The McCain bill would have imposed penalties on tobacco companies if the fre- quency of teen smoking did not decline within the next 25 years. The bill would have also added $1.10 to the price of a package of cigarettes over the next five years. The financial impact of the bill would have fallen between $755 billion and $868 billion over the next 25 years - about $30 billion per year. The McCain bill would have given the tobacco industry one of its first true incentives to lean marketing strategies away from younger audiences. It may have also impelled tobacco companies to actively sponsor initiatives to end teen smoking. But personal objectives and re- election strategies brought senators to neglect the public good in favor of longer terms. One study found that of the senators who voted to kill the legis- lation by sending it back to committee, all either represent tobacco-growing states, or have no threatening election bouts on the horizon. Wednesday's vote was not reflective of the interests of America's youth, but of the political cir- cumstances facing the country's elected officials. Senators' neglect of the underage smoking issue seems unthinkable in light of the recent statistical findings. One study estimates that about 3,000 teenagers begin smoking every day. According to the American Cancer Society, 90 percent of new smokers are teenagers and 70 percent of them will be hooked long-term. Though shocking, these numbers have been build- ing steadily in recent years. Yet the gov- ernment has failed to respond with effec- tive steps to curb the level of teen smok- ing. Investigations of tobacco companies' practices have long found that the indus- try often orients its advertising toward younger audiences, prompting many youngsters to take up smoking unaware of the habit's effects. An affirmative vote for McCain's bill would have enabled senators to send a message to tobacco companies voicing abhorrence for the advertising ploy. But now the message remains undelivered. The public and its elected officials must act to protect the nation's teenagers, who often fall victim to malicious and irresponsible marketing schemes. We charge legislators with the responsibility of ensuring that children do not make this weighty decision before they are old enough to do so. Legislators must use votes to fulfill their responsibility to America's youth - not to protect their political careers. n virtually any street in America, one can find the trendy automobile of the 1990s, the SUV or sport utility vehicle. Popular brands such as the Ford Explorer and the Jeep Grand Cherokee have become tremendous sellers for their companies. And while the driving public enjoys its SUVs, many owners are unaware of the unique risks SUVs present. Dripvers of SUVs must be aware that their vehicles require a differ- ent style of driving than a conventional 4- door sedan. Automobile manufacturers and the buying public must take strides to increase the safety of SUVs. The particular danger of SUVs is their tendency to rollover. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration reports that SUVs rollover at a rate of 98 for every one million vehicles each year. The normal rate for rollovers is 47 for every one million vehicles. Clearly, the designs of SUVs give the vehicles a propensity to turn over if their drivers are not aware of the vehicles' limits. These vehicles have a high center of gravity due to their tall and narrow body shapes. SUVs were originally intended for off-road duties, where their high clearance could enable them to climb over rocks and other obstacles. Of course, traveling at high speeds in such conditions is out of the ques- tion. But day-to-day city travel requires high speeds and sharp maneuvering not originally meant for SUVs to handle. Too many drivers of SUVs apply the same techniques they use when driving cars. And when they need to make a quick swerve to avoid an animal, or other dan- ger, the vehicles lean (if the speed is great enough) much more severely than a con- ventional car. Rollovers sometimes result when the driver overcompensates as the SUV feels like it is about to lose control Educating drivers is the key to preventin such situations. Automakers should adopt the NHTSA recommendation to include eye-catch' tags for all SUVs that read "HighRisk Rollover." Already tags warning of the risk associated with airbags are common in nev vehicles. While many SUVs carry warnings particularly in their owner's manuals, abou the risk of rollover, a tag inside the vehicl< - perhaps on the visor - would be a mor effective reminder. Automakers should also look int( design improvements that could minim' the potentially deadly results of a rollox Improvements to make the roofs of SUV: less likely to crush inward on passenger: should be explored. Also, automaker: should seek out designs that could preven head and neck injuries when the vehicle: flip over. One must remember that SUVs are not by nature, unsafe. In fact, in multiple-vehich< collisionc, the occupants of SUVs are among the safest. The only drawback in these type: of crashes are that SUV bumpers do not r essarily line up those of the other vehicles Making SUV bumpers line up with the bumpers of conventional automobile: should be a goal of future designs. SUVs are extremely useful and offer fun-to-drive vehicles. But drivers must b< prepared for the SUVs' unique propertie: to operate them safely and effectively Automakers should take the initiative tc warn and educate their customers-- well as improve the vehicles structuratl - so that they come back to buy in the future. If customers do not know the in and outs of their vehicles, they might no come back at all.