4 - The Michigan Daily - Monday, June 16, 2003 420 MAYNARD STREET ANN ARBOR, MI 48109 SRAVYA CHIRUMAMILLA JASON PESICK O ro ~ im~t. ~letters@michigandaily.com Editor in Chief Editorial Page Editor U~fl NMI~flITIUTI~lalifEDITED AND MANAGED BY STUDENTS AT THE Unless otherwise noted, unsigned editorials reflect the opinion of UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN the majority of the Daily's editorial board. All other pieces do not SINCE 1890 necessarily reflect the opinion of The Michigan Daily. our years ago, the Michigan uate from college, they often migrate out of Legislature promised the four uni- D on 't et lS ie the state to regions in the country where versities composing the Michigan jobs for young people are more plentiful. Life Sciences Corridor $50 million in Statemu stfifr df o LifeS One of Granholm's stated objectives as grants for 20 years. Unfortunately, as a _ a___must tmu S iOu SCienCes O1T1tOr governor is to revitalize Michigan so that it result of the state's financial crisis, the ------ is no longer seen as a dying Rust Belt state. annual grants have been decreasing in size was once promised. The University has University, but will also help improve the Each year, the University graduates thou- to $40 million and $30 million. The grants invested almost a billion dollars thus far quality of lives and the length of lives for sands of bright, young individuals. Many of given to the University this year on May on the Life Sciences Initiative, and if the people around the world. The program stud- them have degrees in the sciences and are 28, totaled $7.28 million. While Gov. state doesn't provide the resources to ies ways to fight and treat diseases, quite currently having trouble finding work in Jennifer Granholm and the Legislature are allow the program to flourish, the possibly the most important and humane the state. These graduates depend on a facing acute funding problems, it is impor- University's contribution would be in dan- developments for the scientific community strong life sciences industry, which must be tant that the Life Sciences Corridor remain ger of appearing to be a misappropriation to be pursuing. Even with the decreased enhanced by the corridor. Granholm also a priority for state officials and that it not based on a false faith in the state. The funds, the grants received will be used to recently gave a speech on Mackinac Island be allowed to wither away as a result of selection of Mary Sue Coleman to be the research such important tasks as fighting to the Detroit Regional Chamber explain- stringent fiscal policies. University's president was likely largely cancer and brain lesions. There are budget ing her desire to make Michigan a more The four universities joined together to based on her strong background in the sci- cuts that need to be made, but policymakers "hip" state for young people. This goal will form the corridor consist of the University, ences and the expertise and strong con- must be cognizant of the important work be much more difficult to achieve without Michigan State University, Wayne State nections she has developed in the field. that the Life Sciences Corridor does before a robust Life Sciences Corridor to attract University and the Van Andel Institute in Her selection was intended to strengthen they make cuts to the program. Science and these young people. Grand Rapids. The benefits to learning LSI; the University's commitment in the important medical research should not be Not only does the corridor provide an created by the teaming of these institu- corridor is beyond question. the victims of a poor economy. opportunity to make tremendous medical tions and the joint prestige garnered from The Life Sciences Initiative does Another major motivation behind the advances and to improve the University's the large grant promised from the state are extremely important work that not only Life Sciences Corridor is to revitalize the prestige, but its success is vital to the now threatened without the money that promises to enhance the prestige of the state's economy. When young people grad- revitalization of the state. 4 Aid the masses Financial aid should go to public universities House goes tax nuts U.S. House should stop playing games with the poor After forty years of policies based on an ill-conceived ranking of priorities, it is time to change the way that the state of Michigan doles out tax dollars to college students in need of financial aid. For too long, the balance of aid in the form of state scholarships has been tipped in favor of private colleges and universities instead of the public universities that the government has a responsibility to support. Currently, 65 percent of state aid goes to private universities. Even tak- ing into account the high cost of private institutes of higher learning, this figure is astronomic considering the number of students attending public. universi- ties today. More and more students are pursuing a higher level of education as time progresses, and as a result of anti- quated programs such as this one, the state has been neglecting its responsi- bility to provide its citizens with such an education for far too long. A new program proposed by Gov. Jennifer Granholm, called the Michigan Opportunity Scholarship, which has already been passed in the state House and is awaiting approval from the state Senate, is intended to change this. Granholm's proposal would create a single pooled scholar- ship fund of $112 million out of five existing programs. Students at private schools would share the total collection of state aid with students at public col- leges and universities. The money will then be distributed according to a num- ber of factors, helping those students who need the assistance the most. As a result, the new plan will send approxi- mately 75 percent of funds toward pub- lic education - a figure with a much more pleasant ring to it. Strikingly, the current plan has been utilized for the past forty years. It is refreshing to see that Granholm is will- ing to roll up her sleeves and spend political capital in order to correct inequities and ensure that the state of Michigan provides a quality education for all of its citizens. Policy moves such as this one will also help elimi- nate the sour taste in the public's mouth resulting from the neglect of the state's education system as a result of horren- dous public policy under former Gov. John Engler. The changes put public tax dollars back into public education. Not surprisingly, private colleges and universities are concerned about the plan being unfair and crippling their institutions. They say that they are entitled to high levels of aid because their tuition rates are higher. During a period when the state is facing a seri- ous financial crisis, however, tax dol- lars should not be inefficiently spent on private universities, as public schools provide at least the same cal- iber education at a much lower cost. In addition, anyone claiming that a public university education is easily afford- able for the average Michigan family is stretching the descriptive powers of hyperbole. University students in need of additional financial support will be thankful for the reformulation of how aid is distributed as the extra aid will help ease the pain of outrageous tuition hikes as the University's budget grows smaller and the state prepares to cut funding to public universities. 4( 4 in't gonna happen." With these words, U.S. House Majority Leader Tom Delay (R-Texas) essentially crushed any hope of responsible tax relief for the country's most deprived families, claiming 6.5 million families would only get child credit increases if they were accompanied by another round of cuts for the rich. This reckless tax policy not only divides the country along economic lines, but also ignores the fiscal responsibilities the federal government faces. The recent $350 billion tax bill "acciden- tally" omitted such tax credit increases for 12 million children of the poorest U.S. house- holds in the final stages before final Congressional approval. Such an outcry erupted that the Bush administration quickly asked Congress to fix the problem in order to prevent a political backlash. Yet the House leadership used this mistake as an excuse to try for even more reckless tax cuts for the most affluent, refusing to give the $3.5 billion dollars of tax relief needed to change the child tax credit from $600 to $1,000, the amount of relief already in the mail for bet- ter-off families. In an act befitting Delay's lunatic zealotry, he included the $3.5 billion relief for the $10,500-26,000 tax bracket in an exorbitant $82 billion monster of a bill that the House passed last week. This rash move is likely to die in the Senate, also killing any chance that the least fortunate Americans will receive the same assistance the rest of the country will receive. Delay arrogantly accused the people who criticized his bill for being too large as being opposed to tax relief, despite the fact that they were predominantly the same people who called for it in the first place. Yet this type of circular and conceited talk is nothing new from the man, who, when asked to put out a cigar due to a federal law against smok- ing on government property, responded by saying, "I am the federal government." This way of thinking is evident in the tax policy that has been coming out of the House. House Republicans have been attaching themselves to simplistic maxims like "tax decreases increase growth." This overstatement not only ignores important economic truths, but also ignores the mas- sive federal deficit, the costs of a global war on terror, nation-building in two countries and serious looming funding crunches in Social Security and Medicare. Not giving tax cuts to the poorest 6.5 million in ques- tion does not make economic sense. These are the families that are most likely to spend the money that would jumpstart the econo- my, unlike the more save-happy affluent, who are unfairly getting the lion's share of these tax cuts. Delay believes that these poor should not get tax relief because they do not pay income taxes. Yet the taxes they do pay, such as property and payroll taxes, are infi- nitely more debilitating than even the high- est income tax bracket for the richest of the rich. They need the relief more, and what they do with the money will have better repercussions for the economy. While certainly not the most visible issue in this debate, the quietly looming deficit threatens to have the most severe long-term consequences. Three years ago, the nation was looking forward to more than $5 trillion in surpluses, yet this year alone it is looking at $400 billion in deficits. For an administra- tion that prides unilateralism to such a high degree, it is illogical that it would support a bill that would make us so dependent on for- eign investments. If the U.S. does not watch the deficit, we will be leaving a nearly intractable problem to future generations.