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.