4 - The Michigan Daily - Tuesday, June 1, 2004
420 MAYNARD STREET
ANN ARBOR, MI 48109 NIAMH SLEVIN SUHAEL MOMIN
40 tothedaily@michigandaily.com Editor in Chief Editorial Page Editor
EDITED 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.
For supporters of the University's
affirmative action policies, last
week brought welcome news.
Ward Connerly's Michigan Civil Rights
Initiative, which sought to prohibit the
use of racial preferences in state hiring
and public university admissions, was
declared dead - or at least dormant.
Campaign co-chairman Leon Drolet (R-
Clinton Township) recently announced a
decision to halt the MCRI for the 2004
election cycle, explaining that "the
intent now is to qualify for the '06 bal-
lot." While this unexpected develop-
ment is surely welcome, it must be rec-
ognized for what it is: a mere respite.
The demise of the 2004 MCRI was
not brought about because the Michigan
electorate rejected its premise; rather,
the MCRI became entangled in legal
technicalities. In March, Ingham
County Judge Paula Mandersfield
ordered the Board of State Canvassers
to nullify the petition - all previously-
collected signatures were rendered void.
MCRI: Dormant, not dead
Initiative not defeated; a continuing threat to 'U' policy
Following Judge Mandersfield's ruling,
MCRI advocates were unable to regain
momentum or funding. Faced with a
fast-approaching deadline, internal dis-
cord and disorganization, MCRI leaders
were forced to abandon their efforts.
What is crucial to understand is that the
MCRI petition was voided not because
it was inherently illegal, but because it
was incorrectly phrased.
Supporters of affirmative action were
remarkably lucky: minor legal techni-
calities unraveled the MCRI; an elec-
toral struggle for votes and support was
averted. However, proponents of the
University's policies can be assured that
those behind the MCRI will not make
the same mistakes in 2006. Therefore,
while Drolet and Connerly aim to
regroup their forces over the next two
years, advocates of affirmative action
must begin the campaign to defeat the
Initiative's 2006 variant. After valida-
tion at the Supreme Court level, and a
temporary victory against opponents at
home, the University and its allies must
engage in a large-scale campaign to win
the support of Michigan voters.
Affirmative action has never enjoyed
the public's endorsement; many predict
that the MCRI would have been passed by
the Michigan electorate if it had made it
onto November's ballot. In order to
secure the future of the University's poli-
cies, affirmative action must be embraced
by the electorate, to ensure it can muster
enough votes to survive a public referen-
dum. To do this, affirmative action sup-
porters must take the same aggressive
approach as their opponents. Instead of
simply defending University policies,
administrators must sell the merits of
race-conscious admissions; they must
convince voters that barring the policies
will have a negative effect. The fight for
affirmative action cannot be merely a
defensive battle; if so, there will never be
a strong consensus behind it.
Ultimately, the University and affir-
mative action partisans stumbled upon
luck. Careless mistakes by MCRI plan-
ners were manifested in a flawed peti-
tion which was fortuitously declared
invalid. In 2006, there is little hope that
affirmative action will survive so easily.
It is now, with over two years until the
next election cycle, that supporters of
affirmative action should begin a con-
certed effort to convince Michigan vot-
ers of the necessity of race-conscious
admissions. This temporary reprieve
should be taken for what it is: a short
delay before the battle begins anew.
Sorry, wroi
rig number
Plan to decrease voter apathy raises suspicion
V oter turnout is chronically and hor- While none of the organizations
rendously low amongst young explicitly announced plans to relea
adults, and campaigns of the past cell phone numbers they collect to
have seen numerous attempts to mobilize mercial telemarketers, such a list
apathetic youths. This coming election be a prime target for abuse since tl
year is no different. Youth-voter initiatives no national database of cell phone
ranging from MTV's now familiar Rock bers. Youth voter campaigns argu
the Vote campaign to new organizations their privacy statements would p
such as the New Voters Project are step- such abuse. This is of little comfort
ping up their efforts to register young vot- ever, in light of the fact that another
ers for the November elections. In an voter initiative, Declare Yourself, v
effort to use technology to engage college its own privacy policy earlier this}
age people, some voter-registration initia- sharing voter data, including cell
tives have begun collecting the cell phone numbers, with the aforementionec
numbers of potential voters. Voters Project.
Spokespersons for youth voting cam- Even if no privacy violation
paigns claim that collecting cell phone place, it is still doubtful that cell
numbers will allow them to reach out to calls would increase voter turn
young voters by providing information on these organizations claim.
registration deadlines and precinct loca- Americans, plagued by telemar
tions as well as reminders to vote. calls, regard any phone solicitatio
However, the lists of cellular phone num- nuisance. As most cell phone
bers could be taken advantage of and charge subscribers minutes ev
should be viewed with suspicion. At least incoming calls, it is difficult to se
one group, the New Voters Project, has young voters contacted by a pc
plans to provide its list of young voters to candidate's campaign would vie
"political marketers" in the fall. This, they call as anything but a waste of the
argue, will increase youth voter turnout as cious daytime minutes. The resu
candidates and political organizations will be a noble and well-intentioned
be able to directly contact young voters. tive that does more harm than g
This strategy of using cell phones its own cause. Of course the ball
could easily prove intrusive upon young should be extended to all demogra
voters' privacy. The New Voters Project, and issues such as the environme
for example, collects cell phone numbers onerous cost of college tuition
through sticky notes attached to state ballooning national debt forcibly
voter registration forms that ask for a eled onto the shoulders of colle
phone number and email address and citizens make it crucial that youn
whether the person wants "election infor- ple be encouraged to vote. Howev
mation." Nowhere on the sticky note or on risk that these cell phone number
the organization's website, is there any bases will violate young people's
notice that the information will be provid- cy and further alienate them as po
ed to - third party "political marketers." voters outweighs the supposed be
s have
ase the
com-
would
here is
num-
ae that
revent
t, how-
r youth
iolated
year in
phone
d New
s take
phone
out as
Many
keting
on as a
plans
en for
ee how
olitical
:w the
ir pre-
lt may
initia-
ood to
ot box
aphics,
nt, the
and a
shov-
ge age
g peo-
ver, the
r data-
priva-
tential
nefits.
Bushwhacked!
President's Iraq speech misleading, lacking in substance
0
Recently, in a speech at U.S. Army
War College, President George
W. Bush addressed the country in
an effort to clarify his plans for the June
30 transfer of sovereignty to the interim
Iraqi Governing Council. Yet, his
"details" were remarkably nonspecific;
his speech was filled instead with broad
rhetoric about democracy, liberty and
freedom. While it is encouraging that
Bush feels it necessary to engage the
public on the issue of Iraq, it is impera-
tive that he stop using the worn-out
phrases that have characterized the vast
majority of his foreign policy pro-
nouncements. A clear and honest
assessment of the challenges on the
ground, as well as a realistic plan for the
future must be presented to the
American public.
Bush claims that after June 30, Iraqis
will have full control over their state and
that the Iraqi people will be allowed to
govern their own affairs. As a sign of
goodwill, Bush has guaranteed that the
Coalition Provisional Authority will be
stripped of power and replaced by the
Iraqi Governing Council. However, Bush
does not emphasize either that 138,000
American troops will have a continuing
presence in Iraq, that the United States
and coalition partners will retain final
say in matters of security or that the Iraqi
Governing Council will have no power to
pass new laws. When Bush points out
June 30 as a crucial landmark in putting
Iraqis in charge of their own destiny, he
conveniently disregards many caveats he
should rightfully mention.
The core of Bush's plan, the Iraqi
Governing Council, will itself not even be
truly representative of the Iraqi people -
a United Nations taskforce will nominate
it. While this is less controversial than a
council chosen by American interim
administrators, it is nonetheless still not
true Iraqi self-determination. When Bush
repeatedly claims that Iraq will have sov-
ereignty on June 30, he means to say tha
an appointed council will have limite
power to plan future elections. Like his
speech, the upcoming "transfer of power"
will be merely superficial. It constitutes
an attempt at assuaging concerns and
dressing windows while actual substan-
tive change remains obscured by the shad-
ow of the future.
The President has been placed into a
position where many citizens ar
demanding that he elucidate a course of
action in Iraq. Theoretically, then, Bush's
speech was an attempt at providing this
vision of the future to the American peo-
ple. Unfortunately, instead of painting a
realistic strategic picture of Iraq, Bush
flooded the airwaves with half-truths.
While honesty and straightforwardness
may be lofty expectations for politicians,
politics and electoral maneuvering
should not influence Bush's wartime
decision-making. While it may be politi-
cally expedient to convince Americans
that Iraqis will be running their own
country in less than a month, to say so is
a blatant misrepresentation of reality. On
the grand scale, Bush has an obligation
not only to Americans and Iraqis, but
also citizens of the world to present a
plan for the future of Iraq. If Bush plans
to overcome the international and
domestic tensions he created by taking
unilateral and polarizing action in Iraq,
he must employ honesty, not political
doublespeak.