4 - The Michigan Daily - Monday, May 22, 2000 Edited and managed by GEOFF GAGNON PETER CUNNIFFE students at the Editor in Chief JOSH WICKERHAI University of Michigan I Editorial Page Editors 42 Maynad StreetUnless otherwise noted, unsigned editorials ret the opiion of the Maynard Street oritof the Dailysseditorial board. All otherarticle.oletters and Ann Arbor, MI 48109 cartoons do not necessariltrellect the opinion of The Mchigan Dailt. Sa e lnkregent elvs eions State should rethink regent elections Committee needs to divest tobacco stocks* L ast week, the Michigan Senate began reviewing the system under which the governing boards of the state's three research universities, The University of Michigan, Michigan State and Wayne State, are elect- ed. Some state senators are unhappy with the way nominees are selected at party conven- tions, while others think the statewide elec- tions should be scrapped entirely in favor of gubernatorial appointments. The method by which members of the University's Board of Regents and their counterparts at the other schools are selected is far from ideal and changes should be considered. The nomination of regent candidates at party conventions is hardly the best way to find the most qualified people and can easi- ly lead to the selection of party lackeys over those with the most relevant experience and abilities. One alternate proposal is to force candi- dates to participate in the primary and peti- tion processes that candidates for other elec- tive offices undertake, although it is difficult to see how this would improve the situation. It does not increase the likelihood of more qualified candidates being selected because a statewide primary for such a little-known office would undoubtedly involve candi- dates unfamiliar to most voters. The winners could end up being nothing more than the result of random votes. Holding primaries for regent candidates also does nothing to address the overt politi- cization of the regents' posts that are also the results of convention nominations. Being elected as a Republican or Democratic can- didate for the office constricts a regent with too many party expectations. Therefore, approaching the job of regent should not be a partisan enterprise. Regents should only concern themselves with the well-being and success of the university they are serving, not what their party colleagues think of their actions. Another idea being considered by the Senate is having governor-appointed regents, like Michigan's other public univer- sities. This would be the worst possible sys- tem for selecting regents. At Michigan's public, non-research universities, the gover- nor is allowed to appoint no more than five members of their own party to the schools' eight-member governing boards, which basi- cally ensures the appointment of five mem- bers of the governor's party and only contin- ues the politicization of the regents' posts. For example, Central Michigan University saw the hijacking of its governing board when Engler's appointees to the board of trustees began to serve the governor's broader political goals. Instead of focusing solely on the success of their university, Eogler's appointees used the college to cre- ate charter schools across the state. While these two alternatives are receiv- ing the most consideration in Lansing, nei- ther is any improvement over the current system. This does not mean alternatives to the current system should not be explored. While the concerns many state senators have with the current system revolve around how parties nominate their regent candi- dates, what they should be considering is an alternative to statewide partisan regent elec- tions. Because the responsibilities of these positions are known little outside their respective university communities, regent elections are heavily influenced by the top of the ticket. If a party is doing well in any par- ticular election cycle, that helps the party's regent candidates. Regents end up getting elected based on the strength of a senatorial or gubernatorial candidate, rather than their own efforts and abilities. Also most of the people casting votes also have no idea how the various unIversities operate or how the candidates would do their jobs. An extremely desirable alternative would be giving students at these universities a larger role in selecting their school's regents. Allowing one or more seats on any school's governing board to be filled by a vote of the university's students seems reasonable. Regents should be first and foremost con- cerned with meeting the needs of students. Making them more accountable to the stu- dents would certainly accomplish this. Another possibility is increasing the influence of a university's faculty and staff in the regent election process. As people with a deep knowledge and concern for their uni- versity's well-being, faculty and staff are well qualified to choose who would make the best regent. An idea that might also be considered is allowing the alumni of a university to select members of its governing board. This option, which is used at many private uni- versities, provides a large and diverse elec- torate that has a good understanding of a university. Alumni know far better than the general public how a school operates, its aspirations, both educationally and socially, as well as its strengths and shortcomings. Some may justify the current system of selecting regents by pointing out that Michigan's research universities are public schools that receive a great deal of money from the state and so state residents deserve some say in how the universities are run. However, the federal government also pro- vides large amounts of money to the schools - more than the state in the University of Michigan's case - but does not demand seats on the universities' governing boards. And considering the voter ignorance in statewide regent elections, how can the best qualified candidate be selected? There are strengths and weaknesses to any of the proposals for altering regent elec- tions, but considering the serious problems with the way in which members of universi- ty governing boards are currently selected in Michigan, these ideas, and others, should be seriously examined. ith the formation of a committee of students, administrators, alumni and faculty to decide the fate of the University's $25 million investment in tobacco stocks, a 3-year debate will soon find resolution. In 1997, the Senate Advisory Committee on University Affairs urged the Board of Regents to divest the stock after protests from students and faculty. This committee must consider the compromising position the University remains in by maintaining monetary support for an industry that has continually shown disregard for the public good. The University has a responsibility to divest tobacco stocks from its endowment and distance itself from these reprehensible companies. As a socially responsible institution, the University has a responsibility to set the course on important issues, not follow the pack. While the court of public opinion has condemned tobacco, the University will still send a strong message if it removes all tobacco stocks from its endowment. The tobacco industry has consistently shown a disregard for public health. Through constructing and maintaining ciga- rette addiction with heavily monitored nico- tine levels and continued advertising cam- paigns that construct a positive image asso- ciated with smoking, thousands have suf- fered. According to the Center for Disease Control, over 400,000 deaths a year, as well as $50 billion in health care costs are attrib- uted to tobacco use. Yet, recruitment of new smokers by tobacco companies continu4 Thousands of teenage smokers are hooked every day to maintain big tobacco's existing markets. The University's investment is a monetary endorsement of this behavior, and anyone affiliated with the University shares a common responsibility to change this stance. It is clear that the University must divest its tobacco stock. The committee must mak the rational decision to get far away fro0 tobacco and the negative effects it has on public health. With quick action, the University can still send a message that big tobacco is undeserving of investment and undeserving of any continued debate on this clear-cut issue. Sweatshop swooshes More schools should dump Nike " A lthough the Workers' Rights Consortium proved a stunning victory for students of the anti-sweatshop move- ment, the University is now dealing with the short-term consequence of loosing its athlet- ic contract with Nike. After Nike backed out ofnegotiations earlier this month, saying that it would not be policed by concerned institu- tions under the power of the WRC, the University Athletic Department began a scramble to find a replacement supplier of official athletic equipment. And though Nike threatened that no other company could fill the demand of such a large school, several companies have stepped up to negotiate for future contracts. With the new season only months away, though, the athletic department was forced to stay with Nike because of time con- straints. And instead of being paid by Nike, the University will now pay $760,000 for the necessary athletic gear. Few knew the effects of the WRC would be as swift and drastic as these recent finan- cial dealings have proven to be. Although it may be easy to pin blame on the WRC for a loss of revenue and the loss of the Nike name, this ignores the fundamental gains that have come from setting an example that will be remembered as being ahead of its time. Sending a message to corporations who would exploit workers, as well as uni- versities that continue supporting these com- panies is a substantial victory for the exploit- ed third world workers of many companies. This short-term financial loss is a small price to pay, and the University should ignore Nike's false threat that no other com- pany will be able to fill the demand or pay as much to the Athletic Department as it has in the past. If the response from other athletic apparel companies is any indication - with calls coming in the day after negotiatiqgg were cut off - Nike has made the wrong gamble and the University should have no problem replacing that trademark swoosh with something more socially responsible. Nike's withdrawal also shows the true power of student movements. Without watchdog groups like the WRC, corpora- tions in this largely global economy are increasingly being given free rein to exploit workers. Without having to answer to con- cerned students for their actions, t exploitative business practices of compan like Nike will continue to go unnoticed by largely apathetic consumers. Nike's scare tactics and refusal to cooper- ate should simply show schools considering signing the WRC that they fear of being held accountable for the treatment of its workers. It is only through continued efforts by student movements that corporations will be made responsible for their exploitative practices. Nike has chosen to ignore the demands0 students. When this is all over, the little logo and the loss of money this year will be over- shadowed by the powerful statement sent by signing the WRC and ignoring the threats of Nike.