Monday July 16, 2007
The Michigan Daily - michigandaily.com
5
EMMARIE HUEToTEMANc
The science ofpolitics
KARL STAMPFL 1'VIEWPOINT
Behind the polls
Following the incriminat-
ing testimony of former
Surgeon General Rich-
ard Carmona last week, the Bush
administration issued an immedi-
ate press release, which asserted
that Carmo-
nawasunder Cutting the
theinfluence
of emer- surgeon out
gency con- of surgeon
traceptives general.
at the time
of the hear-
ing, rendering him incompetent.
The release then said Voldemort
is to blame for teen pregnancy
in America, but everything's OK
because the White House already
responded accordingly by raising
the alert level to fire-engine red.
What? It's not like I claimed
that Dick Cheney was his own
branch of the federal government
or something silly like that.
With the overwhelming num-
ber of scandals that have plagued
the Bush administration since
election night 2000, our numb-
ness to revelations like Carmona's
latest testimony is not surprising.
But whether Americans react or
not, our country is faced with yet
another political controversy that
leaves me wondering where Ken
Starr is now.
As Carmona informed the
House Oversight and Government
Reform Committee last Tuesday,
the Bush administration repeat-
edly manipulated and stifled sci-
entific reports from the Office of
the Surgeon General, as well as
the former Surgeon General him-
self, during his term from 2002
to 2006. Fearing that scientific
reason might finally trump politi-
cal platitudes, the administration
prevented Carmona from speak-
ing on apparently trivial public
matters like emergency contra-
ception, stem cells and second-
hand smoke.
Refusing to be outed without
a fight, spokesman Bill Hall of
the Department of Health and
Human Services commented on
behalf of the White House: "It has
always been this administration's
position that public health policy
should be rooted in sound sci-
ence."
I can almost hear the creation-
ists and global-warmingnaysayers
murmuring in agreement.
For the sake of full disclo-
sure, Dr. C. Everett Koop of the
Reagan administration and Dr.
David Satcher of the Clinton
administration also testified at
the hearing. Both said that they
had also encountered adminis-
tration interference on the AIDS
epidemic and the effectiveness
of needle-exchange programs,
respectively. But the responses
of the former surgeons general
to such discouragement differed
from that of their colleague: Both
men released reports on the sub-
jects anyway.
During the hearing, Carmona
blamed political naivety for his
failure to disregard the adminis-
tration and do his job, saying it was
not until he consulted (not one,
not two, but) six former surgeons
general that he realized some-
thing was wrong. Top officials
edited his speeches, removing
politically unpalatable facts and
adding praise for the administra-
tion. His attempts at illuminating
problems within the correctional
health care system were thwarted
by the administration's unwill-
ingness to spend more money on
prisoners. And to prevent his tes-
timony, the administration even
told the government lawyer in the
case against the tobacco compa-
nies that its surgeon general was
incompetent.
As much as I would like to blame
Carmona for failing to honor his
duty to the people, my problems
with him all trace back to the
administration that appointed
him its puppet. I've had enough.
For seven years, the Bush admin-
istration has insulted our intel-
ligence, abusing the notion that
questioning our leaders is unpatri-
otic, especially in a time of war. If
anything, Americans have learned
that not questioning this adminis-
tration is dangerous.
Through the war in Iraq, Hurri-
cane Katrina and an awkward neck
rub for German chancellor Angela
Merkel, we've let President Bush
get away with things for which
China would execute a man. The
Democratic victory in 2006 seems
like a good start, but only if the
Democrats manage to steer clear
of squabbling and choose a decent
candidate - preferably, one who
will put the common good before
politics.
Emmarie Huetteman is the
summer associate editorial
page editor. She can be reached
at huetteme@umich.edu.
tgMORE ONLINE
at michigandaily corn
LETTERS
Readers are encouraged
to submit letters to the
editor. Please include
the writer's name, col-
lage and class standing
or other University
affiliation.Send letters
to totheduily@umich.edu.
BLOGS
Read more up-to-date
opinion at michigandaily
com/thepodium
The presidential campaigns of
Sens. Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.)
and Barack Obama (D- Ill.) could
learn a lesson about their chances
to win the nation's highest office
from Proposal 2, last fall's ballot
proposal that banned affirmative
action in Michigan public insti-
tutions.
Voters passed Proposal 2 with
a comfortable 16-point margin,
but before the election most poll-
sters were forecasting a tight fin-
ish or even a resounding defeat
for the proposal. The Detroit
Free Press released polls days
before the election that showed
49 percent of voters against the
ballot initiative, 39 percent for it
and the other 12 percent unde-
cided.
One pollster, though, fore-
casted the results correctly. Mark
Grebner, founder of the Lansing-
based Practical Political Con-
sulting, got it right. He predicted
Proposal 2 would pass with 60 or
more percent. It passed with 58
percent.
Grebner did one thing differ-
ently than the other pollsters.
He understands the fallibility
of phone polls, especially when
it comes to issues of race. When
pollsters called potential voters
and asked them whether they
would vote yes or no on Proposal
2, the voters heard a somewhat
different question: Are you rac-
ist? The respondents, who had
heard the anti-affirmative action
ballot proposal equated with rac-
ism many times, answered: No,
I'm not racist; of course I'll vote
no on2.
In order to give people the ano-
nymity of the ballot box, where
there's no one to judge whether
you're racist or not, Grebner
mailed respondents dummy
ballots. His results were much
closer to reality than the other
pollsters'.
Knowing that, it's difficult
not to be skeptical of the recent
Newsweek poll that reported 92
percent of respondents say they
would vote for a black candidate
and 86 percent say they would
vote for a female candidate. That
poll was conducted by phone. In
light of the Proposal 2 forecasts,
it doesn't seem to be as promising
for Obama and Clinton as some
would like you to believe.
-In the same pool, respondents
were asked whether the coun-
try is ready for a black president.
Only 59 percent said yes to that.
They were also asked whether
America is ready for a female
president. Only 58 percent said
yes to that. It's not surprising
that voters assigned racism and
sexism to their fellow Americans
but claimed they were less big-
oted when asked by a live human
being over a phone.
It's scary to think what those
numbers mean to the campaigns
of Obama and Clinton, who are
certainly both viable candidates.
It's even more frightening to
think what they mean for a possi-
ble Clinton-Obama ticket, which
many Democratic voters seem to
be clamoring for.
Most disturbing of all, how-
ever, is what these numbers say
aboutthe hidden racism still alive
and well in America.
Karl Stampfl isan RC senior and
the Daily's fall/winter editor in chief.
SEND LETTERS TO: TOTHEDAILY@UMICH.EDU
woman is a woman if she doesn't
Gender shouldn t have a certain haircut and cloth-
ing? Why should anyone even
matter to voters consider choosing a candidate
based solely on the "one biologi-
TO THE DAILY: cal fact" that she is a woman?
I was more than irritated It frustrates me that it even
when I read the recent viewpoint matters if a candidate is male
about presidential candidate or female, because true gender
Hillary Clinton (The vagina vote, equality means not taking that
07/02/2007). The inherent sex- factor into account. Unfortunate-
ism of the article concerned me, ly, it seems that our community is
particularly since it appeared to far from understanding that.
be written by someone who con-
siders herself a feminist. Megan Nestor
Why is it "hard to tell" if a LSA senior
" Free online banking ForYour Best Choice in
. Free online bill pay Financial Services
* No fee for incoming wires
* Fee-free ATMs on campus
" Three campus branches
" VISA credit card
" Free checking & VISA umcu.org
check card email: umcu@umcu.org
. 'M' checks phone: 734.662-8200
mom