Sections

Strings attached

State should not prevent same-sex benfits

The state Senate Appropriations Committee voted last week to cut funding to public institutions -- including the University -- equal to the amount of money that the institutions spend on benefits for same-sex domestic partners. Since the University recently approved such benefits, this action represents a financial attack against the University. Moreover, the vote is a foolish attempt to impose Lansing's false morality on public institutions throughout the state.

A few weeks ago, Gov. John Engler's budget looked promising for the University; it signaled a new commitment to higher education funding. Last week's vote demonstrates that the optimism of February may have been premature. Regent Dan Horning (R-Grand Haven) is one of the most vocal supporters of the bill. His support and message of intolerance should concern the University community. Furthermore, any cut in funding for the University is troubling, regardless of the political strings attached.

However, the political strings are the most troubling aspect of the proposed legislation. The senators weighed in on the wrong side of the issue -- homosexuals deserve treatment equal to that afforded to heterosexuals. The husbands and wives of employees usually share in the employment benefits -- such as health insurance -- of the workers themselves. Since homosexuals cannot legally marry, they are often denied this protection. Employers who do not offer benefits to same-sex domestic partners are thus discriminating against homosexuals, denying them the "rights" that are assumed for heterosexuals. Progressive employers, such as the University -- which have extended these benefits to homosexuals -- are leading the way to a more enlightened society. It is troubling that reactionaries in Lansing are fighting the positive trend.

The coercive nature of the pending legislation is just as troubling. The senators are entitled to their opinions; however, they should not try to impose their thinking on the University. Even if Lansing disagrees with the personnel practices of the University, it still must recognize that the University -- along with the state's other public universities -- is an autonomous institution.

According to the state constitution, the authority for operating the University is granted to the Board of Regents -- whose members are elected on a statewide ballot. The Appropriations Committee's vote last week was an attempt to micro manage the state universities in order to impose the closed-minded agenda of some legislators on the state.

Fortunately, the legislation must clear many hurdles before it becomes law. Even then, it would be subject to probable court battles. In the meantime, the University should be strong in its opposition to the legislation. The message from Ann Arbor should be loud and clear -- the University will not be blackmailed into adopting the reactionary agenda of the legislation's supporters.