4 - He ichigan Daiy - Monday, August 6, 2001 Edited and managed by Editdaents at ae JACQUELYN NIXON AUBREY HENRETTY University of Michigan + + Editor in Chief Editorial Page Editor 420 Mlanard Street Unless otherwise noted, unsigned editorials reflect the opinion of majority o the Dailys editorial boad. All o her artics, letters Ann Arbor, MI 48109 cartoons donot necessarily reflect the opinion of The Michigan Daily. Pickerel Lake - the peaceful, pond-sized refuge in nearby Dex- ter - may soon be home to more than nature lovers; the Michigan Department of Natural Resources plans to 'improve" the 23-acre lake and its surrounding area by building a boat launch on its small sandy slope. The lake is unusually deep for its size, which - according to the DNR - makes it especially good for trout fish- ing; the DN R says the launch will bene- fit local fishermen. Unfortunately, the boat launch will do more than make this area accessible to trout-seeking anglers; it will disrupt the atmosphere at the lake and possibly harm the area's deli- cate ecosy stem. The plan ca s for gravel to be added to the small "beach" and to the nearby dirt parking lot. A group of about 300 dissentients - swimmers, picnickers, kayakers and other lake-lovers - has been the DNR's most vocal opponent. Calling them- selves Friends of Pickerel Lake, mem- bers of the group point out that a new ramp will appeal to more than just fish- DNR should not allow motorboats at lake ermen. Where there are boat launches, The DNR currently manages only there are often high-speed watercraft. one lake in all of Washtenaw County - Additionally, motor- Mill Lake in Water- ized vehicles bring HELP REEP MOTORIZEDCRAFT OUT loo Recreation Area noise pollution as OF PICKEREL LAKE. - where motorized well as air and pos- watercraft use is sibly water pollu- restricted. That tion. To VOICE CONCERNS, CONTAC'I translates into 163 The marshy area out of 6054 water and woods sur- RoNEY STOKES acres devoted to rounding the lake DIRECTOR OF "passive recre- also deserve the PARKS AND RECREATION ation." Friends of DNR's protection. Pickerel Lake say As huge department MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF that space must be stores an malls NATURAL RESOURCEs set aside for bird- continue to pop up watchers, sun- in formerly serene P0 BOX 30257 bathers and others areas across the LANSING, M1 48909,7757 whose presence will country, it is our not include chemi- responsibility to preserve our local nat- cal pollutants. ural treasures. The parks bureau maintains that Pickerel Lake is maintained with marine fuel revenue, funding that's only supposed to go to areas with boating access. But Pickerel Lake does have a. small wooden pierused by canoersan kayakers; these vessels are no less "boats" than their large, pollutant-spw ing counterparts. Bringing more traffic to the Pickerel Lake area would do far more harm than good. It would wreck what little beach there is, leaving little room for families on picnics and bring unwelcome noise. Also, it would endanger the rich, valu- able wetlands around the lake. If the DNR won't speak up in the lake's defense, responsibility falls to private citizens who don't want to see their lake ruined. Washtenaw County residents - and anyone else who thin Pickerel Lake should remain a sae haven for interesting plants, animals and visiting people - should join the Friends of Pickerel Lake in their plight to preserve the beautiful spot. The DNR should not be allowed to construct this boat launch without a fight ... and we are the last line of defense. Power to the people Time is now for election reforms Off the road SUV makers should improve fuel economy 4 n the aftermath of the presidential election, a leader without a mandate from the people occupies our nation's most powerful political office. George W Bush defeated Al Gore after the Supreme Court ruled 5-4 and denied the Gore team's request for a recount- of the votes in Florida. Bush's victory became official one month after the nation cast its vote - an entire month during which no one knew who our democratically elected 43rd president would be. What has happened since the United States, the bastion of democracy, botched the most fundamen- tal aspect of our system of government? The bipartisan National Commission on Federal Election Reform publicly released its recommendations Tuesday for improving the election system. The com- mission (headed by former Presidents Jimmy Carter and Gerald Ford) analyzed the farce of this past presidential election and devised changes that, if implemented, would prevent similar debacles from hap- pening. These recommendations are intended to restore faith and efficacy in the nation's democratic system. Some of the recommendations that Congress has incorporated into bills include: ® Allowing state-wide provisional vot- ing. Voters whose eligibility in a particu- lar locality is not verifiable, for some reason or another, would be given provi- sional ballots instead of being turned away. Their eligibility would then be con- firmed or denied based on more in-depth research. * Utilizing technology to improve accessibility. New voting machines that would those with visual impairments and those not fluent in En lish to vote. * Declaring Election Day a national holiday so that voters will have ample time to reach polling places. The voting system is one of the funda- mental aspects of our democratic system of government. Implementation of these recommendations would result in a voting system that serves as an effective conduit of the American people's desires. During the November presidential election, there were many incidents of eli- gible voters being turned away from the polls, particularly in Florida; this must not continue in the future. Florida also saw big problems with antiquated voting technoogy that could have been prevent- ed. Finally, Americans should not have to risk choosing between working and vot- ing; a national voting holiday would ben- e fit all. Unfortunately, the bill(s) that would bring about these changes current- ly sit idle in the legislative process because of bipartisan bickering. There are two versions of an election reform bill currently in the Senate. Both versions would give the states approxi- mately $3 billion of federal aid to imple- ment the needed changes. The difference between the two bills centers around the approach used to implement election reform. On the one hand, many Democrats prefer federally mandated reforms so that states would be obligated to comply. On the other hand, many Republicans prefer to give states more leeway and instead advocate a quid- pro-quo approach that would allocate money to states only if they voluntarily implement the changes. Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said of the disagree- ment, "You get the impression [Democ- rats] sort of want to stick their thumbs in President Bush's eye." Reforms this fundamental to our democracy should not be framed in politi- cal bargaining between federal and state governments. Senator McConnell should not attribute Democratic preference for federal mandates to bipartisanship but should realize how crucial election reform really is. The term "energy crisis" - a favorite amon primetime news anchors and poltical speechwriters - does not adequately describe the energy situation in the United States; it is a dismissive (if ominous) expression often used to explain away the United States' conspicuous consumption. When Californians face rollin blackouts on hot days, it's because of the "energy cri- sis." hen gas prices skyrocket, the "energy crisis" is invariably responsible. It's a convenient, non-human, seemingly inevitable scapegoat. Blaming this i lu- sive crisis shifts the blame from those most deserving of it: People. Think about it: The U.S. Department of Energy is currently run by a man who once co-sponsored a bill that would have abolished it. Consumerism dictates that bigger is better. Less is never more; more is more. Although the world's pop- ulation is only about five percent Ameri- can, the Bruntland Commission reports that the United States consumes approxi- mately thirty percent of the world's resources. Despite the grim reality, U.S. leaders are doing little to stop the energy crisis from becoming the energy disaster; the U.S. House of Representatives voted 269 to 160 Wednesday not to require sport utility vehicle manufacturers to signifi- cantly increase fuel efficiency by 2007. Just days before the vote, the National Academy of Sciences released a report stating that the technology necessary to reduce automotive fuel use does exist; furthermore, it suggested that the fuel economy gap between cars and SUVs could be significantly narrowed over a period of several years. While fuel economy has not improved for cars or SUVs since peaking in 1986, SUVs are far less fuel-efficient than reg- ular cars. The average SUV runs from 10-20 miles per gallon of gas, compared to the Honda Civic's 38 miles per gallon. According to the Sierra Club, 'switching from an average new car to a 13-mpg SUV for a year would waste more ener- gy than leaving a refrigerator door open for six years, a bathroom light burning for 30 years or a color TV turned on for 28 years." Because they demand s much more fuel than cars, SUVs are ter- rible for the environment; the gasoline the burn is a limited natural resource and their CO2 emissions contribute to global warming. In addition to being notorious gas- guzzlers, SUVs have a so proven to be quite unsafe; SUV drivers and other motorists alike have been harmed by these hazardous vehicles. The Sierra Club reports that "an average SUV o pickup is more than twice as likely as a car to kill the driver of the other vehicle in a collision and an SUV is four times as likely to roll over in an accident." Furthermore, government regulations do not require auto manufacturers to out- fit SUVs with bumpers of quality com- parable to those on normal cars; these weak bumpers have often been the big losers in low-speed crash tests. The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety conducted a series of such tests earlier this summer with very unflatterin results. In five m.p .h. rear collision tests, the Suzuki Grand Vitara racked up about $5800 in damages. Although improving SUV fuel economies would be costly for automak- ers, government regulations should require them to do so; they can retain their profit margins by increasing the cost of each vehicle. If SUV drivers are willing to risk their personal safety, the safety of others and the environmental well-being of the planet just to be able to see over the other cars in heavy traffic, it's only fair that they pick up at least part of the tab.