THE majority opinion fails to make clear that Question 5 is a non-binding referendum that asks our members of Congress to demand that Israel end its violations of Palestinian human rights and the occupation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip, support the establishment of an independent Palestinian state in those regions and cut off that proportion of US aid used by Israel to continue the occupation.

A "Yes" vote sends an effective message not only to our representatives, but to all of Congress. The violent suppression of Palestinian rights in the West Bank and Gaza by the Israeli army should not be condoned by the United States simply because Israel is a trusted ally. The U.S. could and should attempt to use our leverage with Israel--which receives nearly half our overall foreign aid--to implement a land-for-peace policy. Even many Israelis believe this policy would be in the interests of all parties concerned, as well as crucial for preserving human rights.

The current situation gives the Palestinians no base from which to negotiate and gives the Israelis little incentive to do so. By threatening to reduce our massive aid package, Question 5 merely aims to balance a skewed foreign policy in the interests of compromise. By voting "Yes" on 5, we are not "taking the side" of Israel's enemies.

The majority opinion questions the appropriateness of such a referendum by suggesting that it somehow undermines the concept of representative democracy. Far from it, the referendum represents participatory democracy at its best.

It's not anti-Israel to be pro-5.