100%

Scanned image of the page. Keyboard directions: use + to zoom in, - to zoom out, arrow keys to pan inside the viewer.

Page Options

Download this Issue

Share

Something wrong?

Something wrong with this page? Report problem.

Rights / Permissions

This collection, digitized in collaboration with the Michigan Daily and the Board for Student Publications, contains materials that are protected by copyright law. Access to these materials is provided for non-profit educational and research purposes. If you use an item from this collection, it is your responsibility to consider the work's copyright status and obtain any required permission.

September 08, 1995 - Image 4

Resource type:
Text
Publication:
The Michigan Daily, 1995-09-08

Disclaimer: Computer generated plain text may have errors. Read more about this.

4 - The Michigan Daily - Friday, September 8, 1995

(!be riiguuDav

, I Bi~rrr McIivrosu

MCINTOSH CLASSICS

Shorter and sweeter The

420 Maynard
Ann Arbor, MI 48109
Edited and managed by
students at the
University of Michigan

1 .1

MICHAEL ROSENBERG
Editor in Chief
JULIE BECKER
JAMES M. NASH
Editorial Page Editors

tale

Unless otherwise noted, unsigned editorials reflect the opinion of a majority of the Daily's editorial board. All
other articles, letters, and cartoons do not necessarily reflect the opinion of The Michigan Daily.
Houscleaning
..Housing shortage must not be repeated

place to lay their heads.
A= , That's the minimum most students ask
when it comes to University Housing. Lofts,
Ethernet and cable TV are modern ameni-
ties, but a place to sleep has been the dorms'
responsibility since Martha Cook and Helen
Newberry opened in 1915. Unfortunately,
this year the University has failed to provide
even that for many unlucky first-year stu-
dents. And many of those who do have beds
are crammed like sardines, three by three in
rooms designed for two.
1995's unprecedented housing crunch is
due to many factors, including an aggressive
recruiting campaign last spring that - when
added to the expected entering class - filled
the residence halls nearly to capacity. But the
numbers jumped over the top in June, when
the University accepted 333 more in-state
-residents in a gesture of goodwill to a state
legislature frowning on high out-of-state en-
rollment. More than 200 of the additional
students enrolled - and are now sleeping in
converted triples, lounges or rooms they will
have to vacate in January.
Much of the fault for the current crisis
lies with the Office of Undergraduate Ad-
missions rather than with University Hous-
ing. Before accepting the additional students,
admissions officers consulted with Housing
administrators, who expressed concern that
there would not be room for the new stu-
dents. Yet the University went ahead with
the admissions - without knowing whether
there would be space to house them.
Establishing goodwill with an increas-
ingly hostile state legislature is important,
and the University's intent was clearly good.
But Admissions made a mistake in accepting
students before determining whether there
was space to house them. Guaranteeing rooms
to students, and then admitting them despite
warnings that rooms might not be available,

is irresponsible.
With the damage already done, the Uni-
versity can only look toward the future. Its
first priority must be the students currently
living in Lloyd and Winchell houses of West
Quad. Originally scheduled to open as resi-
dent rooms in the fall of 1996, this space is
currently slated for student organizations to
move into when renovations force them out
of the Union in January. It is inexcusable to
uproot the West Quad residents in the middle
of the year - after they have already ad-
justed to roommates and surroundings, only
to move in all likelihood to converted triple
space in other residence halls. The Univer-
sity must make every effort to find other
space for the student organizations to oc-
cupy. If this is impossible, it should at the
very least offer the Lloyd/Winchell residents
substantial partial refunds of their housing
charges, as compensation for the inconve-
nience of moving in the middle of the year.
Furthermore, the University must take
steps to ensure that this situation does not
repeat itself in future years. One reason for
this year's crisis was the high number of
returning students living in residence halls.
Housing should consider limiting the num-
ber of spaces it gives to returning students,
who would be selected by lottery. This would
provide a set number of available spaces each
year for first-year students, so Admissions
would know what to expect. Other possible
solutions include building a new residence
hall and designing a building that could be
easily converted from residence hall to office
space depending on housing demands.
One thing is certain: This year's crisis
must not be repeated. Cramming students
into converted triples, lounges and tempo-
rary residence halls may seem like a good
crisis solution, but as a permanent policy it is
no solution at all.

The powers-that-be at this university
have of late hatched a dangerous and
subversive plot on the students of this fine
institution: They want us to call the building
directly southeast of the Grad by the letters
"UGL."
I, for one, will never call the UGLi by any
other name, and I call on you to resist this
sneak attack on the basic abbreviating rights
of the student body.
Surely, an UGLi by any other name would
smell as stale.
Another name is simply unnecessary.
Librarians of the world and regents of the
University, please don't tell me that "ugly"
is disparaging, that it detracts from this great
university - I know it is. That's why I use it.
New renovations, whatever: Ugly has
less to do with the facade of the place than its
relation to the Grad (which I will never call
the Harlan Hatcher Graduate Library as long
as I do live, so help me God).
The UGLi is the Grad's nasty little
brother. The Grad has over 6 gazillion books,
all of which you need for your 37-page
research paper. It is a monolith that marks
the physical and intellectual center of the
University campus.
The UGLi, on the other hand, has 12
books, and they're all on some subject en-

0ofa'U'
tirely unrelated to anything s
one in the history of this univ
the shadow of the Grad, the Ri
university buildings. And we
same reason that Bill's broth
every talk show in the En,
world. We do not observe the
site at most libraries. We do n
a library. We abuse it. Like w
Clinton.
And we love it for that. So
our speech, playfully perhap
You see, this is a war. Us
The right to call our buildings
to call them. It is the most bas
have, protected by the First
I call on you, brothers
defend your privileges as st
univeristy. Staff, professors,'
in our fight against big gove
Abbreviate anything andE
vigilant in your shortening ofb
be frugal in your expenditu
syllables.
Here are some suggestion
warrior against the tyranny c
tration, offer:
Call the Fleming Admin
ing (home to the name-chan
the DOLT. That stands for E

buildingname
tudied by any- Two, where - as far as our intelligence can
ersity. It sits in discern - our fine president has his offices.
oger Clinton of We have learned that he is being used as a
love it for the figurehead by the more radical name-length-
er has been on ening faction, and is secretly rebelling against
glish-speaking the scourge of violent librarians that threaten
silence requi- to dominate our collective consciousness.
iot respect it as That the name fits his captors is only a lucky
ve abuse Roger coincidence.
. Refer to the Angell Hall Computing
we deride it in Center as the AlHICC, but pronounce it like
s. that sound cats make when they're choking
against them. up a large hairball. The administration hates
s what we want it when you do that, and it will immediately
sic freedom we identify you to your fellow abbreviators as
Amendment. one who is no syllable spendthrift.
and sisters, to U Talk about Haven Hall as HH. Use the
udents of this same abbreviation for Hutchins Hall. Use
TAs -join us HA for Hill Auditorium, AH for Angell Hall,
rnment. HN for Helen Newberry, and NH for North
everything. Be Hall. This should sufficiently confuse any-
auilding names, one who opposes our cause.
re of precious Don't let your guard down for a second.
Don't ever refer to the "The South Quad-
s that I, humble rangle" or the Edward Henry Kraus Natural
f the adminis- Science Building. And don't forget to attend
the rallies we hold weekly on the M.
istration Build- Brent McIntosh is an LSA senior.
ging enemies) He can be reached over e-mail at
)ude On Level mctosh@umich.edu.

I

Jim LassE1R

SHARP AS TOAST
--

I

HAYLB

-171

r
REiTROSPECTIVE~

VE-OTB

NOTABLE QUOTARLE
'I don't make
jokes, I just watch
the government
and report the
facts.'
-- Will Rogers

t!

I'

%'
.1\

I

Reviewing the Contract
Dangers loom in budget debates

Looking back: the Black Action Movement
Editors'note: 25 years ago thisfall, the University opened with a new commitment to increase minority enrollment and supportfor minority
students. The promise followed a student strike called by the Black Action Movement in the spring of1970 protesting the University's lack of
concernfor black enrollment and student success. In theface ofgrowing opposition to affirmative action at the University and across the nation,
the Daily editorial page takes this opportunity to look back on what many view as the catalyst for affirmative action at the University. The
following is a Feb. 24, 1970 editorial by then-Editorial Page Editor Alexa Canaday.

ith the summer recess of Congress at
its close, the next budget looms large
on the agendas of both houses. Republicans
have their sights set on hammering out the
final versions of 13 appropriation bills out-
lined in the Contract With America before
the fiscal year ends Oct. 1.
The bills the House and Senate have passed
(no joint resolutions have yet gone through)
have adhered closely to the Contract's slash-
and-burn tactics and distaste for social ben-
efit programs. Medicare alone stands to lose
$280 million over the next seven years. Simi-
lr cuts to other programs - welfare and
Social Security, for example - are at the
moment coming closer to reality.
In a slash ofthe pen the Republicans hope
to deliver a blow that would signal the death
of programs that have endured since their
emergence from F.D.R. 's alphabet soup. The
GOP majority would like to balance the
federal budget in seven years - an admi-
rable goal - but in the process wipe out 60
years of federal programs. While many fed-
eral entitlements are wasteful and should be
liquidated, the Republicans have set their
sights on worthy programs while sparing
corporate subsidies.
Reform of federal social benefit programs
is a pressing problem (for instance, Medicare
is expected to be totally insolvent by 2002),
HOW TO CONTACT THEM

but it needs to be addressed in the spirit ofj
substantive change, not wholesale cuts. j
The Republican fiscal agenda is in many
ways self-defeating. In an era when educa-
tion and worker training is increasingly cru-
cial to a healthy economy, GOP plans would
cut three times more out of education and
training than out of other discretionary pro-
grams. In a similar vein, federal science pro-
grams would be gutted. Almost sacred dur-
ing the Cold War science race, research and
development programs remain vital compo-
nents of national economic development.
President Clinton can and should exercise
his veto power to block the GOP's draconian
measures. At the same time, the two parties
must quickly move toward a compromise. If
a new budget is not in place by Oct. 1, federal
agencies could find themselves without funds
to operate. In the past, continuing resolutions
have prevented the government from screech-
ing to a halt. However, Republicans have
irresponsibly threatened to let the govern-
ment go defunct unless Clinton signs off on
their budget.
With social programs, education and
worker training at stake, Clinton must not be
cowed by Republican threats. The opportu-
nity still exists to fashion a budget that bal-
ances federal finances without bludgeoning
essential social programs.

The demands of the Black
Action Movement (BAM) for in-
creased minority admissions cer-
tainly merit the support of the
University community.
Although the black student
community at the University has
increased dramatically during the
last few years, the overriding
impression of the University is
still one of a school for rich white
students as the Green report char-
acterized it in 1965.
The BAM proposal for chang-
ing this condition is reasonable if
not a bit conservative. In a Uni-
versity of more than 30,000 stu-
dents, it demands that only 900
black students be admitted next
fall - 450 freshmen, 150 trans-
fer students and 300 graduate stu-
dents. The demands also give the
University three years to increase
the proportion of blacks in the
University to 10 percent -more
than enough time.
The demands also take into
consideration the desirability of
supportive services to ensure that
the admitted students graduate.
Unfortunately, it is becoming
increasingly apparent that the
administration and the Univer-
sity community at large are un-
willing to give enthusiastic sup-

port to the program. The adminis-
tration argues that although the
proposals are theoretically desir-
able, the necessary financing is
not available.
It is noteworthy that the same
administration has proposed that
students be assessed $15 per term
for 30 years to finance the con-
struction of two IM buildings.
They considered that this request
would be reasonable, yet they are
unwilling to consider seriously a
similar proposal to finance mi-
nority admission submitted by
Students for Effective Action
(SEA).
The administration's lack of
support could be expected but
the failure of the so-called "lib-
eral" University community to
provide significant support is
disturbing.
One ofthe major objections to
the proposal is that they also feel
that financing is simply not avail-
able. Several methods for finding
adequate financing have been pro-
posed. A simple reversal of Uni-
versity priorities would help the
situation a great deal, and a good
start would be giving admissions
ahigherpriority than the IMbuild-
ing.
The BAM proposal for pro-

viding tuition waivers also is a
possible solution to financing dif-
ficulties. But the final proposal
by SEA is one that would show
how willing the community re-
ally is to support minority admis-
sions. It proposes that students
and faculty assess themselves $15
and $25 respectively. Self-assess-
ment is not a new idea, students
will almost surely vote for such a
proposal in order to finance a
student bookstore.
Arguments that minority ad-
missions is unfair to the poor
whites, or that the real problem is
the secondary and elementary
level miss the point entirely. They
are perfectly lucid arguments for
saying that minority admissions
is not enough itself to solve the
problem, but they do not justify
defeating the minority admissions
proposal.
Other poor should be helped
to get into the University, but
although the minority admissions
proposal does not do that, it does
help some of the poor and that is
desirable. And while the problem
lies at least in part with the lower
educational system, it is unac-
ceptable to ignore the people who
are already victims of that infe-
rior system. Instead, people

should push for education reform
while also trying to help the vic-
tims of the system as much as
possible.
Two other arguments, that the
quality of the University will suf-
fer and that it is unfair to lower
admissions standards are merely
examples of academic elitism.
The only real question in ad-
missions should be whether or
not the student can succeed at the
University, not what type of cre-
dentials he has to get in. The
innate ability of the students that
would be admitted under the mi-
nority admissions program is no
less than that of the majority of
students already here. With the
help of supportive services to fill
in the gaps that were caused by
poor academic backgrounds, not
lack of intelligence, the majority
of the students should be able to
succeed.
The quality of a university
should be measured only by its
ability to provide people who are
going to make significantcontri-
butions that will somehow change
the society for the better. If this is
the standard against which the
University is measured, its qual-
ity certainly will not suffer, and
perhaps it will be improved.

Sen. Carl Levin (D)
459 Russell Senate Office Building

Sen. Spence Abraham (R)
B40 Dirksen Senate Office Building

F

M

.. . :... titi t1,
.: .. . . .,,. , ,.. .?. ..,... ...,. !il:,.

Back to Top

© 2021 Regents of the University of Michigan