MichiganReview THE
The Journal of Campus Affairs at the University of Michigan www.michiganreview.com
VOLUME XXVII
Gun Sale Increase After Presidential Election
November 25, 2008
ISSUE 7
Face-Off:
Abstinence Only or Comprehensive Sex Ed? ON BACK
ON PAGE 6
The Truth About Diving Diversity Two Years After the Ballot Proposal, Were the Critics’ Claims Substantiated? 2007 Freshmen Enrollment
Total Students Enrolled: 5,139
Total Students Enrolled: 5,086
% 3.5 ts 1 den Stu 686
7% 14. nts de Stu 757
31
St ud 19 en 9S ts tu 0. de 6 nt s3 % .9% 374 S tuden ts 7.4 %
50 St ud en ts 267 1% Stu den ts 5 .2%
334 Studen ts
2008 Freshmen Enrollment
6.5%
3,741 Students 72.8%
3,796 Students 74.6%
INFORMATION PROVIDED BY UMICH PRESS RELEASE, HTTP://UMICH.EDU/NEWS ILLUSTRATION EUN LEE / MRSTAFF
BY ADAM PASCARELLA ‘10
With thousands of activists on the Diag October 26, 2005, Reverend Al Sharpton expressed his discontent with the Michigan Civil Rights Initiative (MCRI), a ballot referendum that would ban affirmative action practices throughout the state. As Sharpton spoke to the crowd, he declared that if affirmative action was not defended, segregation would return and gender inequality would widen. “It is hypocritical to mourn Rosa Parks and then make sure her grandchildren can’t get an education
in the state of Michigan,” he declared to the thrilled crowd. The despondent rhetoric about the disastrous effects of removing affirmative action did not subside after Sharpton left Ann Arbor. Throughout the MCRI campaign, harsh rhetoric had a propensity to misrepresent key facts in the debate. Carl Cohen, philosophy professor at U-M and one of the authors of the MCRI, feels that fierce accusations were a natural part of such a campaign.
“In the heat of a campaign people sometimes say things that they really know are not true; others may believe those claims. Opponents said things that were totally unwarranted: for example, that women’s health centers would be closed, and that the University would be re-segregated if the Initiative was adopted,” he said. The initiative passed with 58 percent of voters favoring it on November 7, 2006. Two years have elapsed MCRI Continued on PAGE 5
Waxman Gains, Representative Dingell Loses Gays Banned from U-M Blood Battle BY ALEXANDRIA SANBORN ‘11
John Dingell (D), US Representative currently representing Michigan’s 15th district, was recently defeat-
mail to
ed in his bid to be reelected as Chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee by the US representative Henry Waxman (D) who represents California’s 30th district. The decision was made on November 20, 2008 in a 137-122 vote by the Democratic House Caucus. Dingell has held this position for a cumulative total of 13 years and is also the 4th highest ranking member in the House. Though Dingell can easily cite instances when he WAXMAN Continued on PAGE 10
BY NATHAN TORREANO ‘12
A group of students lined up to donate blood on November 21, at East Quadrangle Residential Hall. The Red Cross worked diligently in order to accommodate the large turnout, a turnout fueled by the desire for University of Michigan students to “out-donate” Ohio State University students in the annual Blood Battle. Blood banks were set up at various locations through BLOOD Continued on PAGE 10
www.michiganreview.com
Serpent’s Tooth
11.25.2008 4.1.08
PAGE 2
THE MICHIGAN REVIEW www.michiganreview.com
Editorial Board Lindsey Dodge Editor-in-Chief Jane Coaston Executive Editor Adam Pascarella Managing Editor Eun Lee Graphic Design Editor
. . . A Bite of News
Recently, a 20-year college student in China was bitten by a panda bear named Yang Yang because he was hoping to give him a hug. “Yang Yang was so cute and I just wanted to cuddle him. I didn’t expect he would attack,” said the student. Since Barack Obama’s victory on November 4, a company has released an official Obama commemorative coin. Fortunately, we were too busy investing in the commemorative Barack Obama condoms.
Jonathan Slemrod Editor-at-Large Nathan Stano Cherri Buijk Assistant Editors Business Staff Karen Boore Publisher Jonathan Slemrod Anna Malecke Associate Publishers Michael O’Brien Editor Emeritus
In a special edition dedicated to our departing Editor in Chief, we now reminisce about Lindsey Dodge: the woman and the legend... Lindsey Dodge once wore a sorority sweatshirt, pink shorts, brown leggings, and pink fuzzy boots to a meeting. Initial reports indicated 50 dead, twelve wounded. Lindsey Dodge can fit two thousand issues of the Review into the back of her Volkswagon Beetle, right next to her extraordinarily large purse. Lindsey Dodge has the score to “Mamma Mia!” on her cell phone. On a related note, Jane Coaston has an unexplained hatred of Lindsey Dodge’s cell phone. Lindsey Dodge WAS born approximately 10 minutes, two weeks, three months, and two hundred years late.
Staff Writers & Photographers
(in alphabetical order)
Alex Chiriyath, Anna Dickey, Austyn Foster, Christine Hwang, Brittani Kagan, Evgeny Magidenko, Alissa Ng, Julianne Nowicki, Alexandria Sanborn, Shanda Shooter, Katie Singer, Eden Stiffman, Nathan Torreano, Sreya Vempatti
Letters & Viewpoints The Michigan Review accepts and encourages letters to the editor and viewpoints. Letters to the editor should be under 300 words. Viewpoints can be arranged by contacting the editorial board. We reserve the right to edit for clarity and length. Send all correspondence to mrev@umich.edu.
About Us The Michigan Review provides a broad range of in-depth coverage of campus affairs and serves as the literary voice of conservatism and libertarianism at the University of Michigan. The Review is published bi-weekly September thru April.
Donate/Subscribe The Michigan Review accepts no financial support from the University. Therefore, your support is critical and greatly appreciated. Donations above $40 are eligible for a 1-year (12 issues) subscription. Donations can be made on our website at www.michiganreview.com, or mailed to:
911 N. University, Suite One Ann Arbor, MI 48109 The Michigan Review is the independent, student-run journal of conservative and libertarian opinion at the University of Michigan. We neither solicit nor accept monetary donations from the University. Contributions to The Michigan Review are tax-deductible under section 501 (c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Service Code. The Michigan Review is not affiliated with any political party or any university political group. Unsigned editorials represent the opinion of the editorial board. Ergo, they are unequivocally correct and just. Signed articles, letters, and cartoons represent the opinions of the author, and not necessarily those of The Review. The Serpent’s Tooth shall represent the opinion of individual, anonymous contributors to The Review, and should not necessarily be taken as representative of The Review’s editorial stance. The opinions expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect those of the advertisers or the University of Michigan. Copyright © 2007, The Michigan Review, Inc. All rights reserved. The Michigan Review is a member of the Collegiate Network.
Lindsey Dodge has used the word “contrarian” more than anyone in the history of recorded time. Lindsey Dodge HAS a “look of disgust” that has broken three windows, two stereos, and fifteen hearts. Lindsey Dodge has inspired fifteen nicknames: Dodge Driver, Dodge Viper, Dodge-a-ma-Todge, Dodgederoo, Rutherford B. Dodge, Dodge Durango, Dodge Ram, The Notorious LRD, “um....Lindsey?”, and six others that have had their usage restricted to extreme circumstances. Lindsey Dodge was the first female editor of the Review, and perhaps the only one to have a perfectly practiced imitation of “Miss Piggy.” MR
Letter from the Editor
The end of a semester, the end of a presidency, the end of an era. For a long time Republicans have been in power, and now the country is ready for a little something new. So am I. Next semester I will be studying English literature at Oxford, which seemed pretty suitable. This will be my last issue as Editor-in-Chief for the Michigan Review, although I’ll be back senior year to hassle the new staff I’m sure. It’s a reflective moment for the country and for me, before the start of something entirely new. But let’s face it: time keeps on going, and I have no doubt that the Review will be very busy in the upcoming years. I have no worries for the future, as I’m leaving with a young, excited staff ready and willing to question the unquestioned on U-M campus and beyond. This issue focuses on the wrap-up of the election, yet begins to delve into the upcoming changes and issues that are already becoming more apparent at U-M. After the election, there was certainly a shift in the politics of the country. In Michigan territory, Eden Stiffman ’12 discusses Chief Justice C.J. Taylor losing his seat, and Alexandria Sanborn ’12 covers the extremely significant move against Dingell by Waxman in Congress. Outside the Midwest but far-reaching in scope, Evgeny Magidenko ’10 looks at the Proposition 8 decision in California through the lens of ethnic voters. Tailgating the Bailout decision for Wall Street comes the Auto Industry’s proposed bail-out, and the inevitable after-effect. Valiant Lowitz ’12 explores this reaction and how pork-barreling could corrupt the decision. Probably the best result (ironi-
cally speaking of course) is that gun sales are up since Obama’s election. That and our Face-Off “The Pro-Life Divide with Obama” beg the question: What does Obama’s election mean? We don’t have the answer, we just like to bring it up occasionally. Rediscovering the perennial issue of the MCRI, Adam Pascarella ’10 finds out why the apocalypse did not occur when the MCRI passed, and how its passage has played out in the last two years. Another often over-looked event at the University is the dorm system, and with Stockwell going co-ed Alissa Ng ’12 looks into the evolution of the dorm system’s rules and regulations at Michigan. Arts and Culture had lots to cover this issue with the premiering of a new musical “Ella Minnow Pea” in the Department of Music, Theater, and Dance and the book review of “Cry Wolf,” a modern day fable with good ol’ Republican values. The column touches on the irritating tendency of modern college life towards hook-ups, leaving a lot of conservative women feeling isolated in their own times. Whether this will be ameliorated in the future only time will tell. Hopefully this issue strikes the right balance between the tough-nosed journalism for which we’re known, covering the interesting and prevalent issues at U-M and affecting conservatives, as well as a little humor thrown in for good measure. I’ve truly enjoyed my time with Michigan Review, and I hope that you, our readers, continue to find what you need from our journal. Good luck, everybody. MR Best, Lindsey Dodge Editor-in-Chief
11.25.2008 4.1.08
Editor’s Notes:
PAGE 3
An Editorial Page for Those Who are Interested in How the Other Side Thinks
Spread Mary Sue’s Wealth
The University of Michigan has a $7.6 billion endowment- third largest among all U.S. public universities, and the fastest growing in the nation. With such a large endowment, it would make sense that U-M hires one of the most qualified faculties in the nation. Actually, it should be expected that U-M hires one of the most qualified faculties in the nation, especially for a Political Science department ranked 4th in the nation by the National Research Council. Rather, recent news shows that U-M decided to hire and retain LSA Political Science lecturer Lawrence Greene, a lawyer that stole money from his clients and was disbarred not once, but twice. Greene was disbarred once in 1998, and also more recently in 2003. The University owes an explanation to students that pay everincreasing tuition rates to attend U-M. The Michigan Review asked Director of Public Affairs, Kelly Cunningham, why Greene withdrew from his classes. Her response was simply, “we don’t discuss personnel issues on whether someone has withdrawn or not.” To prevent the influence of political clout or ideology in hiring faculty, the University needs to be run with more transparency. When the University does decide to hire someone that has been disbarred twice, it needs to be able to offer students a thorough explanation of the reasons why. This problem of transparency could have been eliminated with a thorough background check of Lawrence Greene. WXYZ’s Channel 7 reported various complaints of money stolen from clients in Greene’s past. These clients reported that Greene didn’t do the work he was hired to do. If Greene had such a sketchy past, why would the University hire Greene to work at U-M, a highly respected institution? The University of Michigan is able to afford a quality faculty, minus less than stellar backgrounds like Greene’s. If the University did conduct a thorough background check of Lawrence Greene, yet consciously chose to hire him anyways, there needs to be a further discussion of hiring policies between students and the University of Michigan. Choosing to handle matters by simply not “discussing personnel issues” is not acceptable. Students should not pay exorbitant amounts of money to be taught by professors with a serious past of violating ABA standards, and even further, a past that may potentially include theft from clients. The American Bar Association has strict standards for practicing attorneys, and violating them, or even getting disbarred, shows a lack of professional conduct. Students that work hard to pay for their education deserve better professors without troubled pasts. What is even more troubling is that if these allegations against Greene were not revealed, Greene would have been eligible for tenure at U-M relatively soon. According to the U-M Faculty Handbook, professors with at least eight years of full-time teaching are eligible to receive tenure. However, in practice, professors with six or seven years can be reviewed to receive these benefits. Since Greene started teaching at U-M in 2003, he could have been eligible for tenure next year. Do we really want a faculty member of this caliber to be committed to the University for the rest of his teaching career? Ultimately the University needs to come clean about Greene’s hiring. In the vetting process, it is highly unlikely for the Michigan Political Science Department to miss that Greene was disbarred twice in his career as an attorney. As students, it makes us wonder just what it takes to become a professor at U-M. The hiring committee must have seen something in “Michigan’s Worst Lawyer” that made quite an impression. MR
Editorials
The Michigan Difference campaign has just ended, resulting in over $3 billion raised for the University. The University’s endowment grew to $7.6 billion despite rough financial times. Yet, next semester, your tuition is likely to rise. To add salt to that wound, Dr. Mary Sue Coleman, the President of the University, is getting paid $760,000, on top of the use of two residences at the disposal of the University president, making her the fifth highest paid public university president. Simply put, this is ridiculous. It is absurd for the University to have piles of money, and tuition increases semester after semester. The University lobbies the Michigan Congress for more funds, and when budgets don’t go up enough, the University warns of impending doom for higher education in the state. Despite the fact that the University seems to be “one budget cut away from closing its doors” each time budget cuts must be made, there are numerous building projects around campus, from the Art Museum, to North Quad, to Mosher-Jordan, to Stockwell, to Newberry Hall, to Mott Children’s and Women’s Hospital; twenty three building projects have been started since 2003, with the state of Michigan footing the majority of the bill. In fact, when these projects finish, around 2010, the University has plans for more. Granted, education is a competitive business. We realize the University must remain competitive. However, being affordable to more people, ostensibly a goal of the University can be a huge factor to the University’s competitiveness especially in tough economic times. No student wants to leave with $40,000 worth of debt. Having alumni classes with disposable income could help convince them to donate to the university, especially if you can find $3 billion in a recession. On the issue of the president’s compensation, granted, President Coleman manages one of the largest, most prestigious universities in the Western Hemisphere, with a revenue of $5.35 billion. However, the CEO of Toyota, a multinational company with revenue of $262 billion, only gets paid $200,000 more than Coleman. The CEO of Amazon.com makes only $240,000 more than Coleman, with company revenue of $15 billion. While Coleman’s service is both important and valuable, there is no doubt the two men mentioned above have much harder jobs, in more competitive fields. Does President Coleman provide $760,000 worth of services? Maybe if you gave her a nickel for every time she said “diversity”… What is frustrating is the lack of a student response. Sure, last year the MSA bussed students to Lansing to demonstrate to stop University funding cuts. News flash: the University has money; the state of Michigan doesn’t, Capisce? If students really didn’t want to see tuition hikes, they should have protested outside of Mary Sue’s house, not the State Capitol. Students need to demand that their university works for them, not vice versa. The University prides itself on making a Michigan degree affordable to all, yet those people who take out loans for $4,000 per annum or more to pay for their education are most likely in the majority. With the job markets in the US cooling, and practically freezing here in Michigan, having $16,000 or more worth of loans aren’t going to help student’s financial situations one iota. Would, or should, the University pay the way for all students? No, there’s just not the money for that. However, it could make a better effort to provide more financial aid to students, especially those in the middle class who can supposedly “afford it”. At current, the University seems content to fill its coffers and the pockets of its president. MR
Who’s in Charge Here?
A Requiem for Sarcasm
of a “change.” But the word ironic itself is also often overused. Maybe it’s so prevalent now that people don’t understand what it means to be ironic. But with Obama, our generation is becoming more involved. If we’re not all just passively observing, then maybe there will be less irony. If we’re more actively involved in the direction the country is heading towards, then will be less willing to attack it with sarcastic statement? In a November 21 article in The New York Times, entitled “Irony is Dead. Again. Yeah, Right.,” author Joan Didion, known to be notoriously ironic herself, is quoted saying, that she believes in the era of Obama , the United States has becoming an “irony-free zone,” where “naïveté, translated into ‘hope,’ was now in” and where “innocence, even when it looked like ignorance, was now prized.” The state of the economy is certainly a target of cynical jokes. This may be because we believe we are un-affected, or possibly again because it seems so far beyond our control. There certainly are times when irony is acceptable, but reacting to every event with cynicism and contempt makes us seem distant and uninformed. Let’s face it, being ironic and cynical may make us sound cool, but it won’t make us happy. In his 1999 book “For Common Things,” Jedediah Purdy asserted that irony is to blame for a lack of civic virtue. He said that it is ‘’a quiet refusal to believe in the depth of relationships, the sincerity of motivation, or the truth of speech -- especially earnest speech.’’ Doesn’t that sound like sound like a bunch of angsty college students you might know? MR
XU PHOTO JOSEPH
No one will ever call us the “Hopeful Generation”, but the recent election has inspired a growth in optimism. How we react to the constant bombardment of optimistic messages of “change” and “progress,” may vary, but are we going to have fewer opportunities to be ironic? Blame it on our tendency to be detached and react to current events with cynical, sarcastic snipes. We grew up with TRL, Eminem and a general sense of malaise. Our generation was apathetic and cynical before the Daily Show told us it was cool, and as our economic circumstances and foreign policy have deteriorated, as has our sense of hope. In the wake of 9/11, irony seemed in bad taste. We didn’t know how to handle the tragedy, but it was obvious that no one would be able to appreciate sarcasm, at least not for a while. But like death, taxes, and Rihanna, irony returned with a vengeance as the Bush Administration left much of America cold and confused. The election of Barack Obama posed a challenge to our national tradition of cynicism and apathy, but not for very long. Perhaps it’s an attempt to distance ourselves from things we feel are too big for us to have an effect on. By making a joke out of the past 8 years, we diminish it to an even lower level. When former generations would have protested, we’ll retort with some sort of a witty attack. We began to see Obama’s buzzwords being used ironically soon after he started campaigning. Students started dropping “hope” and “change” wherever they could sarcastically add it in. Ironically, as he compiles his cabinet, people are speculating as to whether his campaign really will be that much
PAGE 4 P.
11.25.2008 4.1.08
Opinion
Pre-Med? I’m Too Creative for That
The Editress-in-Chief
Yes, You Did
Marriage: Fact or Fiction?
BY EUN LEE ‘10
BY LINDSEY DODGE ‘10
“Yes, we did! Yes, we did!” students celebrated in the early hours of Wednesday, November 5th as I sat in my bedroom speechless by the projected results. My roommate, a conservative Republican, had a look on her face as though as if she just sipped some coffee and realized it was not the decaf she had ordered. My cell-phone inbox was crammed with text messages from friends insisting that I “come down 2 the Diag.” There was one voice message, and when I began to listen, all I heard was eun the crowd deafeningly chanting and my friend lee screaming directly into the mouth piece, “Eun, come down here right now!” I never did join the riot. History was in the making, but I felt as though it was not my history. I did not vote on November 4th, 2008, because I was not allowed to register as a non-citizen. Therefore, “Yes, you did.” As a U-M student, I keep busy with academics, extracurricular activities and the occasional frequenting of house parties on the weekend. But ever since the most recent election, I have sincerely questioned the significance of my status as a noncitizen in the U.S. As a lawful permanent resident, I own a registered green card and have permanent residence status in the U.S. I emigrated from South Korea when I was a toddler, and although my first language was foreign, I am fluent and educated in English. I am more familiar with U.S. history than Korean history. I can recite and sing 50 states in alphabetical order under one minute. I am expected to abide by the same laws, pay taxes and am entitled to the same inalienable rights as citizens, such as the freedom of speech. Yet, when it comes to voting rights, I have none. Months, weeks and days before the day of the election, I walked by the same volunteers on Central Campus. Every time, a volunteer confronted me, and I politely smiled and uttered an apology that I could not register to vote. Every time, the volunteer asked me why, and I answered that I was a non-citizen. Sometimes, a volunteer genuinely sympathized and curiously asked about my situation. Most of the time, volunteers simply said, “Have a nice day.” I was frustrated and discouraged throughout most of the election chaos. I cynically referred to myself as an “educated non-voter,” because I had a perspective on politics, was informed about the candidates and followed the election coverage in the news regularly. I attended events on campus held by different student-run organizations promoting voter registration. I even bought a couple of t-shirts supporting the candidate for whom I would have voted. Unfortunately, the process of becoming a citizen in the United States is neither short nor simple. Especially after 9-11, the process has become more difficult. There are multiple sources online which describe in detail how the process works, including the U.S. Citizen and Immigration Services website (USCIS.gov), FreeAdvice website on Immigration Law (Immigration-Law.FreeAdvice.com/) and the U.S. Citizenship Information website (USCitizenship.info/). The process requires time, effort and money – and more than what most citizens might assume. For instance, depending on how many forms are needed to be filed and what requirements need to be fulfilled by the prospective citizen, the application cost can range from a few hundred to a few thousand dollars. Furthermore, the difficulty of the citizenship test itself has been altered and debated. Educators, researchers and journalists found that most average, red, white and blue-blooded American citizens cannot pass the test easily. An article on FoxNews.com by Jennifer Lawinski, “The New Citizenship Test: Can Americans Pass It?”, says, “The exam… [is] not as easy as you might think.” Regardless of whether or not the new president will actually approve of changing the immigration policy, and regardless of whether or not I choose to become a U.S. citizen, the right to vote is not an inalienable right in this country; it is a privilege. The debate on who deserves that privilege continues in the White House, and more importantly, among citizens and non-citizens alike. MR
The results of the California ban of gay marriage have been turning in my mind for a while now, and I’d like to posit some tentative conclusions. First off, let me just say this – I hate the word “homosexual.” It’s such a sterile categorization, an over-intellectualization of something that’s been pretty normal throughout history. We might have called them “aunties and uncles” a hundred years ago, but people have been gay since the dawn of time. So if I’m not being fastidious enough with the word “homosexual,” I apologize in advance. Since I am straight, not particularly religious, and no lindsey longer living in California, I can’t say exactly why the condodge flict strikes me so particularly. I find myself moved by both sides’ emotional arguments, so I decided to start from the very beginning. Marriage, from what my research shows, is either a civil union defined by law or a sacrament. The civil union from the creation of English Common Law, from which American law is derived, is the result of common practice and usage. It was created primarily for the creation of a secure family unit and the healthy raising of children. But let me be specific with the historical context of “healthy” child rearing. Men and women can, and from what I understand frequently do, have children together. Someone needs to take care of them. Thus it made sense to create an institution in which a man and a woman were legally joined together into a protective unit called a family. Although love in marriage is historically variant, it helps make the union more stable. The other definition of marriage, the sacrament as laid out by the Catholic Church, defines marriage as a “divine love” between man and woman. If matrimony is a civil union between man and woman for legitimizing their sexual congress resulting in children, thus ensuring that the child is taken care of, then homosexual unions do not fit the definition. A man and a man can never have children, a woman and a woman can never have a child, and intersexed individuals are by definition, incapable of producing children. If matrimony is a “divine love” between man and woman, then we have to understand why they are particular. The reason is that a man and a woman are biologically capable of producing life, which is defined as a miracle. For the same reasoning as above, homosexual unions do not fit the criteria. Furthermore, many religions find homosexuality morally wrong. Although I disagree, freedom of religion is protected in this country, and the law tolerates their opinion as long as homosexuals are protected as well. This leaves homosexual men and women with a right to marriage that does not fit their inclination. Whether they choose to be gay or not is beside the point, because the government has no reason to interfere in the sexual actions of two consenting adults. Therefore, as law is determined by tradition in the “common practice and usage” of their citizens, there should either be a separate state created to accommodate homosexual unions, or marriage should be redefined. In this election, the people of California comfortably declared that the state of marriage worked for them and that civil unions for gay people would suffice. To this end, there has been rioting. The audacity of people who claim these actions are comparable to Gandhi and Martin Luther King is absurd. Non-violent resistance is different from violent resistance. Just as the democratic will of the people was exercised to vote Barack Obama as President-Elect, so the democratic will stated that marriage was still a functioning institution. Respect the foundations of democracy to appeal to them. People bring up the high divorce rate as a reason to allow gay people to marry. There are two flaws with this argument. First, laws are guidelines, not absolutes; this means that just because a thirteen-year-old can drive does not mean we should lower the age restriction. Secondly, the argument that because an institution is not functioning we should let more people into it is insipid. If as a majority voters decided that homosexual unions should be considered marriage, then I would not protest. I think that the passage of Roe V. Wade has forever altered the social fabric of sexual relations, and that may alter the meaning of marriage in the future. But not yet. MR
THE MICHIGAN REVIEW is now in your ear. Check out our award-winning podcasts online with guests and commentary! WWW.MICHIGANREVIEW.COM
11.25.2008 4.1.08
Ethnic Voters Sway Results of Proposal 8
PAGE 5
IMAGE LATIMES.COM
BY EVGENY MAGIDENKO ‘10
MCRI Continued from FRONT PAGE
since its passage, so now it is possible to see if the MCRI critics’ initial claims were credible. One of the common claims about the MCRI was that minority students, particularly African-Americans, would disappear from college campuses. Besides Sharpton’s rhetoric, Maricruz Lopez, campus co-chair of By Any Means Necessary, a pro-affirmative action group, claimed that “the passage of [the MCRI] will open up a new phase of the struggle for affirmative action integration and equality throughout Michigan.” Recent statistics have been mixed when showing underrepresented minority enrollment at U-M. This year, to the surprise of many pundits, African-American enrollment increased 12 percent, from 334 to 374 students. While the number of African-American students has increased, Hispanic enrollment fell from 267 to 199 students and Native American enrollment dropped from 50 to 31 students. Cohen, however, was not that shocked by the admissions numbers. “It was absurd to claim that the MCRI would resegregate the University of Michigan. That claim was plainly false – but it was also patronizing. That suggestion was an insult to the intellectual quality and integrity of minority applicants,” he said. Besides the claims that minority applicants would be eliminated from campus, other critics declared that programs benefiting women in targeted trades would disappear. In June 2006, Susan Kaufmann, Associate
proved vital. Many homosexual rights activists appealed to Latinos and blacks that gay marriage was a civil rights issue, commensurate with the civil rights movement of the 1960s. Los Angeles Spanish-language radio talk show host Fernando Espuelas said, “The irony of Latino support for Prop. 8 is sad. That a community that continues to struggle for basic rights would deny them to another is particularly baffling.” Opponents of gay marriage raised concerns regarding the message that the failure of Proposition 8 would send, as well as its effects on children’s education and what they are taught in school. Opponents also admonished gay rights activists for likening the fight over homosexual marriage to the civil rights movement, saying that such a comparison is a wholly false analogy. The day after the ballot initiative passed, various organizations submitted legal challenges to Proposition 8, vowing to fight it tooth and nail. An argument that is presented by some organizations and individuals is that Proposition 8 was not only a constitutional amendment, but a fundamental change to the state’s constitution, meaning that under California law, that it must also be approved by the state legislature. California’s Attorney General stated that all gay marriages registered between June and November of this year would not be retroactively deemed invalid, although it is unclear how the courts will rule, and it is expected that there will be challenges against such marriages, some of which may be successful. The lead-up to the election resulted in a considerable amount of verbal sparring between the two sides of the debate, and even some violence. The passage of Propo-
sition 8 led many gay marriage supporters to protest, both in California and elsewhere. Although some protests were peaceful, others turned into riots. There were numerous cases of random violence and verbal abuse against African-Americans and Christians by same-sex marriage activists. Someone who was in attendance at a Christian peaceful protest following the passage of the ballot initiative on November 14 put up a video on YouTube depicting the violence, describing the GLBT activists that confronted him and his fellow protesters as an “angry mob.” He writes: “At first, they just shouted at us, using crude, rude, and foul language and calling us names…Then, they started throwing hot coffee, soda and alcohol on us and spitting (and maybe even peeing) on us.” He later describes a group of men gathering around and blowing whistles inches away from his ears. He concludes with: “It wasn’t long before the violence turned to perversion. They were touching and grabbing me, and trying to shove things in my butt, and even trying to take off my pants - basically trying to molest me. I used one hand to hold my pants up, while I used the other arm to hold one of the girls. The guys huddled around all the girls, and protected them.” MR
Director for the Center for the Education of Women at U-M, wrote a report claiming that since a similar affirmative action ban (Proposition 209) passed in California ten years earlier, comparable consequences to that proposal would follow in Michigan. “The California experience suggests that those effects [from the MCRI’s approval] could include decreases in college enrollment of underrepresented students of color and… [harm] recruitment or apprenticeship programs designed to increase opportunity for minorities and women in the skilled trades,” the report claimed. On Election Day, the Michigan Daily took that accusation farther by claiming that, “The University’s Summer Bridge and Women in Science and Engineering programs would be affected… it would interfere with programs to interest junior high school girls in science and prohibit efforts to include minorities and women in public contracting, to name a few areas it would impact.” Looking at the current status of these programs today, however, those critics were exaggerating. Women in Science and Engineering (WISE) is an organization that attempts to encourage young undergraduate women to pursue a career in engineering. The U-M chapter, founded in 1980, focuses on hosting workshops for undergraduates and K-12 outreach programs throughout Michigan. Even after the MCRI’s passage, WISE continues to hold events for students.
“There has been no drop in the number of participants,” said Dr. Cinda-Sue Davis, director of WISE at U-M. “We are operating much as we did before the MCRI.” In addition to WISE, critics claimed that U-M’s Summer Bridge Program would also be dramatically affected. However, the program, which focuses on preparing recently accepted students to the rigors of college academia, is still present and continues to be a vital component of the University’s Comprehensive Studies Program. The MCRI’s early consequences are starting to become evident, and it is clear that some of the rhetoric in 2005 and 2006 was overstated. In the end, Cohen is not sure if MCRI advocates could have expressed their message more effectively. “We did the best we could; we had limited resources and had to address issues that were most important for the majority of Michigan citizens. Many of the claims that programs would be eliminated as a result of the Initiative were outrageous, and were later shown to have been unsubstantiated,” he said. MR
News & Continuations
Californians voted on Election Day on Proposition 8, a ballot measure that would introduce a constitutional amendment stating that “only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.” The measure passed by a comfortable 52.2% for the ban versus 47.8% opposed to it. Back in 2000, Proposition 22, an initiative banning gay marriage, passed in California with 61% of voters in favor of it. On May 15, 2008, the California Supreme Court ruled in a 4-3 decision that the law enacted by Proposition 22 was unconstitutional because it “violated the California constitution’s guarantee of equal rights.” In June, the California marriage license application introduced gender-neutral language, leading to over 18000 gay couples being granted marriage licenses up through November 4. As soon as the California Defense of Marriage Act entered the scrutiny of the state Supreme Court, supporters of Proposition 8 began the push to get it on the ballot. In examining voter turnout and exit polls, there is compelling evidence that Barack Obama’s presidential candidacy may have contributed to the success of Proposition 8. Black turn-out was unprecedentedly high, constituting approximately 10% of all voters. Even though an overwhelming majority of black voters cast their ballots for Obama, the liberal candidate, they also voted in support of Proposition 8, a socially conservative initiative, with 70% in favor of it. Hispanic voter margins were more in line with the general vote, with 53% of Hispanics voting for Proposition 8, compared with 52% of the general population. However, the unusually high minority turn-out, paired with their considerable support for the ballot initiative,
PAGE 6
SAPAC: A Campus Profile
News
BY ALEX CHIRIYATH ‘12
SAPAC, the Sexual Assault Prevention and Awareness Center, is just one of the many preventative measures set-up by the University of Michigan to deal with sexual abuse. Many Resident Advisors mention its services during the first hall meeting or during one of the informational workshops for freshman. Unless one makes an effort to utilize the services SAPAC provides, it is likely that one will not know exactly what SAPAC does or how it functions. The university takes a strong stance against sexual violence. SAPAC defines sexual assault as any form of unwanted sexual contact obtained without consent and/or obtained through the use of force, threat of force, intimidation, or coercion. As the name would suggest, SAPAC helps prevent sexual harassment by spreading awareness and offering advice in matters pertaining to sexual abuse. As Samara Hough, Co-project Director of UMVPP (the University of Michigan Violence Prevention Project), says, “We educate the campus about issues concerning any form of sexual abuse; what to do when confronted with incidents dealing with sexual abuse [and the] tell-tale signs of sexual abuse or any other form of interpersonal violence. SAPAC also mainly focuses on the prevention aspect of sexual abuse.” SAPAC collaborates with the Ann Arbor Police Department, the Department of Public Safety and many campus groups. SAPAC partners with the Office of Institutional Equity and the Office of Student Conflict Resolution to efficiently respond to incidents involving sexual abuse. SAPAC deals with people that have suffered from sexual abuse, the Office of Student Conflict Resolution, the seat of the Student Code of Conduct, deals with the accused students. SAPAC also collaborates with various volunteer groups to put out workshops and host events like film screenings and organize events art galleries and other events. At SAPAC, there is almost always an advocate on call. If not, students can either make an appointment with SAPAC or just walk in and talk to a counselor. SAPAC also had a 24-hour crisis line open to ensure that help is always available. SAPAC is assisted by a multitude of student volunteers and staff. As volunteers, students undergo seventy hours of training in two semesters. They are trained to effectively deal with any incident pertaining to sexual abuse and to empathize with the people they counsel. Student Staff members claim that working with SAPAC is definitely an eye opening experience and that they have become more aware of the widespread nature of sexual abuse. MR
11.25.2008
Justice Taylor Loses to Democrat BY EDEN STIFFMAN ‘12
Chief Justice Clifford “Cliff” Taylor lost his seat to Democratic candidate Diane Hathaway, a Wayne County Circuit Court judge, for the next eight-year judicial term. Taylor is the first incumbent justice to lose his seat since 1984 and the only Chief Justice to lose since Michigan was given statehood. He was first appointed to the court by former Republican Governor John Engler in 1997 and has been Chief Justice of the seven-member Michigan Supreme Court since 2005. During the 12 years that John Engler was governor, the Michigan Supreme Court swung to the right. With the election of Hathaway, the Republicans still have a 4-3 majority. While judicial elections are technically nonpartisan, the candidates are nominated by political parties and campaigns are becoming increasingly political. Even into the late 90s, political parties provided only minor funding for candidates. Funding came almost exclusively from members of State Bar associations. But more recently, heavy spending and support from political parties and special interests have allowed for millions of dollars to be spent on vicious television ads and other forms of political advertising. Under Michigan’s campaign finance law, the Chamber of Commerce and the Democratic Party don’t have to report the spending in their campaign finance reports because the advertisements don’t mention voting, focusing only on issues. Prior to the election, the Michigan Democratic Party ran a television advertisement against Taylor, showing him nodding off during the hearing of McDowell vs. The City of Detroit (2006), a case concerning six children who died in an electrical fire, and quoting relatives of the victims. Referred to by some as “the Sleeping Judge,” Taylor denies this accusation, claiming that “it wasn’t true, but it was a very compelling piece of political theater.” In a survey published in the Michigan Lawyers Weekly of attorneys who appear before the Supreme Court, Taylor was voted lowest in preparedness, thoroughness, efficiency and overall knowledge of the law. He has been criticized for using his taxpayer-funded state car for personal business. He was also found to be conducting personal business through the state e-mail system. However, Patrick Wright, senior legal analyst at the Mackinac Center for Public Policy opined that “Chief Justice Taylor is an excellent jurist and the fact that he was not reelected is disappointing. For the decade that he has been on the Michigan Supreme Court, it has been a national leader in making certain that courts follow the law as written by the legislature instead of trying to ‘interpret’ the laws to suit the judges’ policy preferences. For years, critics have assailed the court for this philosophy and the electorate consistently rejected those attacks, which led to some shady campaign advertisements on issues other than judicial philosophy that proved to be effective this election cycle.” Wright went on to say that “Judicial selection is a difficult issue. Executive appointment with approval by a Senate has its own problems as one can see with regard to federal judges. Appointment committees of lawyers will tend to favor candidates that State Bars favor; usually these groups are populated with trial attorneys who have interests that generally conflict with the general public. One benefit of elections is that it forces the judges to go out and meet and interact with the public. I certainly have not been made aware of a judicial-selection method without any flaws.” MR
Gun Purchase Increase After Election BY NATHAN STANO ‘11
With the last year full of conflict on gun regulation, from the Heller case’s overturning of the DC handgun ban, to the primary contests, where Obama derided Middle Americans for, “clinging to guns,” this year has provoked many into investing in a firearm, and since the election of Barack Obama as president, gun sales across the nation have taken off. According to FBI numbers given to the Associated Press, 62,000 more people have applied for background checks last month than October 2007. Newspapers across the nation have stories of gun shops whose sales have doubled, or at the least have seen massive increases. President-Elect Obama has had a somewhat ambiguous position on gun rights and regulations. While stating on the campaign trail that he had no plans to reinterpret the Second Amendment, he had come out in favor of the Washington DC handgun ban, which he considered constitutional. Senator Joe Biden, remarked that he had no concern Obama would take away his guns, let alone anyone else’s. Obama’s position on guns centers on state and local control of guns. In a primary debate in Philadelphia, Obama stated, “just because you have an individual right does not mean that the state or local government can’t constrain the exercise of
that right, in the same way that we have a right to private property but local governments can establish zoning ordinances that determine how you can use it.” This has done nothing to assuage the concern of many, who have turned out in droves to buy firearms. With the Democrats firmly in control of Congress, many have doubts about whether gun restrictions passed by Congress would really stop at the president’s desk. Engineering sophomore Graham Kozak recently purchased and AR-15, the civilian, semi-automatic equivalent of the M-16. Though the election of Obama wasn’t his specific reason for purchasing the weapon, it was something he thought about. “It moved my timetable of getting one up,” he stated, “it was only a matter of time [until he got one].” What concerned him most was the possible renewal of the assault weapons ban. The original ban was not renewed after it expired in 2004, but the bill has been proposed to replace the ban, HR 6257, has been cosponsored by five Republican congressmen. However, the major difference is that the 1994 ban had a sunset clause, expiring after 10 years, the new one, does not. This ban would be permanent, as well as expand the number of weapons banned. . “[Another assault weapons ban would be] a bad way for a Democratic Congress to test its power,” Kozak said. Kozak also discussed the assault weapons ban, specifically, what constituted an “assault weapon”. According to the ’94 ban a semi-automatic rifle that accepts detachable magazines and has two or more of the following: a folding stock, a pistol grip, bayonet mount,
flash suppressor or grenade launcher was considered an “assault rifle”. Kozak commented that a number of these additions did not make a weapon any more dangerous, specifically that bayonets are no longer a major threat in the 21st Century, and that the odds of a civilian getting their hands on rifle grenades are pretty close to zero. “[It is a] play on people’s notion of criminals from the movies…It doesn’t really have an effect on crime and they know it,” he stated simply. When asked about the effectiveness of bans, Kozak had significant doubts. “Weed is illegal, but think of how many people smoke it…think of how many people aren’t stopped by that ban…where there’s a will there’s a way.” According to a 2004 Justice Department study of the 1994 ban’s effect, the use of assault weapons in gun crimes was between 2%-8%. Post ban, the number of gun crimes using assault weapons declined between 17% and 72% in the six urban areas studied. However, “The decline in the use of AWs has been due primarily to a reduction in the use of assault pistols (APs), which are used in crime more commonly than assault rifles (ARs). There has not been a clear decline in the use of ARs, though assessments are complicated by the rarity of crimes with these weapons and by substitution of post-ban rifles that are very similar to the banned AR models.” Whether or not a ban will be implemented remains to be seen, but any ban that comes up will likely provoke a long fight on the hill, and will not help the popularity of the Congress or president that supports it. MR
11.25.2008 4.1.08
Event Celebrates Michigan Difference Campaign
BY NATHAN TORREANO ‘12
In the midst of much fervor surrounding US economic woes and the subsequent election of Barack Obama, the national focus has diverted from the US occupation of Iraq. However, the war will be at the forefront of president-elect Obama’s agenda. All signs show that he will handle it quite differently than current President George W. Bush. In fact, the potential success or failure of Iraq War policies during this presidential transition will likely go far in defining the legacies of both the current and future presidents. For Bush, a favorable historical image hinges on the future stability of the Iraqi government. For Obama, bringing the troops home safely without any major incidents would suffice as honorable. Furthermore, the presidential transition affects, as much as anyone else, the men and women enlisted in the US military. Obama and Bush characterize polar ideologies with regards to the Iraqi occupation, an occupation that has been greatly unpopular among the general American population. Barack Obama opposed the Iraqi War from the beginning, regularly stating that the war on terrorism was not centered in Iraq. Rather, he has asserted that the battle against terrorism is most imperative in countries like Iran, Pakistan, and Afghanistan. He campaigned for the 2008 presidential election on the platform of a 16-month troop withdrawal from Iraq. On the other hand, Bush believed that the war in Iraq was a just war, a war in which the Iraqi people’s freedom must be gained at any cost. He consistently reinforced the fact that he would not agree to a troop withdrawal unless it was “conditions-based”. With the presidential transition looming, however, Bush seems to have gone back on his word in an attempt to help facilitate the change of power at the White House. The Washington Post reported that this past week Bush agreed to a fixed deadline for the withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq. The deadline projects all US forces to be out of Iraq by the end of 2011. Bush
The biggest fundraising campaign in the history of any public university in the U.S., The Michigan Difference Campaign, held its finale on the 14th of November at Hill Auditorium. The campaign, which began in 2000, will officially end on the 31st of December 2008. The event brought together donors, alumni and all the officials involved in shaping the campaign to celebrate their success and elaborate on the changes that the campaign has helped bring on campus. The MCs for the program were Michigan alumna Andrea Joyce, a sports anchor for NBC, and her husband Harry Smith, who co-hosts CBS’s ‘The Early Show’. They spoke about the impact that the school has had on their family, especially since all of Joyce’s siblings went to U-M, and how proud they were to see their older son enroll as a freshman at Michigan in 2008. The keynote speaker for the event was Boston College professor Paul Schervish, who is a renowned figure in the world of philanthropy. “Your generosity is not just towards your institution; you’re looking to make other human beings happy. The more you take with gratitude, the more your generosity is mobilized”, he said, going on to talk about how much the school had benefitted from people’s donations and how it had become a “tool for your good work.” There were alumni from the different schools at UM who spoke about their experiences, what impact the school had had on them and their career and how they were helping out the school right now, such as helping at the Ruthven Museum and establishing endowed professorships. Mary Sue Coleman, President of U-M, said, “The University of Michigan is an investment like no other. It is an enterprise that advances worthy ideals, creates productive jobs, and opens the doors to infinite possibilities. Our support for students is greater than ever, particularly with endowed scholarships and fellowships. The greatest gift you have given the University of Michigan is your confidence – confidence in our mission to enrich
IRAQ Continued on PAGE 10
DIFFERENCE Continued on PAGE 11
BY SREYA VEMPATTI ‘12
The Fiscal Future of Michigan: A Bleak Budget Forecast BY JULIANNE NOWICKI ‘10
The Citizens Research Council of Michigan has recently published an in-depth research study analyzing the financial future of Michigan. The Council has found that if current spending and taxing policies remain unchanged in Michigan, a $6 billion gap will develop in the General Fund in 2017. Furthermore, a $3.6 billion gap will develop in the School Aid Fund. The Citizens Research Council of Michigan is a privately funded, non-profit research organization founded in 1916. The purpose of the CRC is to “provide factual, unbiased, independent information on significant issues concerning state and local government organization and finance.” When asked about Michigan’s financial future, Eric Plourde, President of the College Libertarians, shared his thoughts. Plourde said, “Michigan’s financial future looks bleak. As more and more companies and individuals leave, they take their tax dollars with them. As painful as it may be, the state needs to make the tough but necessary cuts in spending and taxes to attract investment and residents. Otherwise, states like that have lower corporate taxes or no income tax are going to attract more of our companies and residents.” Charles Fehl, a leader of Young Americans for Freedom, also shared his thoughts. “I am appalled that Jennifer Granholm has been appointed to serve on President-Elect Barack Obama’s economic advisory board considering our economy ranks among the lowest in the nation. I see this as a gross misjudgment of President Obama and a distraction for Governor Granholm, who should focus on the state economy she was elected to serve.” He continued, “With the current state of affairs, I do not foresee any general expansion for Michigan’s economy in the near future.” Specifically mentioned in the research report is the Single Business Tax created in 2007, formerly known as the Michigan Business Tax. The Single Business Tax is a tax applied to both the profits and gross income of a business. The CRC has determined that this change in taxation, meant to increase revenue for the state budget, will “result in essentially no change in revenue” for
the state budget. Plourde said, “When companies are looking to relocate, and they see that Michigan has a Single Business Tax, they take that into account. It would be wise for Michigan to follow the lead of states that are faring better economically, such as those in the South or the West, and decrease taxation and overregulation dramatically.” The report also focuses on 6 other major taxes which are the bulk of revenues to the General Fund (GF) and School Aid Fund (SAF). In the future, the CFC expects that “spending pressures are projected to grow from $10.1 billion in FY09 to $17.1 billion in FY17, an annual growth rate of 6.8%.” Health care coverage is noted as one of the major spending pressures. The research report offers suggestions on where Michigan government can cut on spending. “Higher education is one area of the budget where legislators have discretion over spending and which has recourse to financing sources outside of the General Fund, so it is an area that can be cut more easily when the State is facing budget shortfalls.” The research acknowledges that as tuition continues to increase at obscene rates in an unstable economy, that students may not be able to afford to attend college. The current economic situation in Michigan is directly connected to a lack of business incentive for outof-state companies and the loss of much-needed tax dollars. Until the State of Michigan reforms its economic and business policies, it seems students will continue to seek employment outside of the state and the economy will continue its downward spiral. MR IMAGE SCHOOL.DISCOVERYEDUCATION.COM
Mary Sue Coleman: University President and Humanitarian BY ANNA DICKEY ‘12
Campus
New Year, New Military Policy in Iraq
PAGEP. 7
University of Michigan President Mary Sue Coleman was a recipient of the “Humanitarian of the Year” award, presented Nov. 6 by IMAGE UMICH.EDU the Michigan Roundtable for Diversity and Inclusion. Honored for her work within the University to ensure the prevalence of diversity on campus, she accepted her award in Detroit’s Cobo Hall during the 61st Annual Humanitarian Tribute. “Dr. Coleman is regarded as a national spokesperson on the educational value of affirmative action and diverse perspectives in the classroom. Her vigorous support of this aspect of educational philosophy is one of the distinguishing qualities of her tenure as the University of Michigan’s 13th president,” stated on the website of the Michigan Roundtable 61st Humanitarian Tribute. Coleman’s work within the University, especially in the wake of the ban on affirmative action, to legally promote racial and ethnic diversity on campus was commended. Coleman accepted the award in the presence of more than 500 individuals of business and community service, who twice stood for an ovation to honor Coleman’s work. “Many, many people at the University of Michigan deserve praise for our deep commitment to supporting a diverse and welcoming campus for students and faculty,” Coleman stated, within her acceptance speech featured on the UM Office of the President webpage. Coleman’s involvement and leadership within the Association of American University Executive committee, the Internet2 Board of Directors, the National Collegiate Athletic Association Board of Directors, the Knight Commission on Intercollegiate Athletics, and the American Association for the Advancement of Science and of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, among several other groups, was also noted within the Roundtable’s featured statement on the recipient located on their website. Also honored with the award was Rev. Daniel Kirshbaum,, former CEO of the Michigan Roundtable and head operating officer for the state of Michigan. Heaster Wheeler, executive director of the NAACP Detroit Chapter, was also honored with the William Beckham Jr. Community Service Award. Domino’s Pizza CEO Dave Brandon, chair of the event, presented all recipients their honors. The Michigan Roundtable for Diversity and Inclusion, based in Detroit, MI, is a non-profit organization that advocates the active elimination of racial, ethnic, and religious discrimination within communities, schools, businesses, and other institutions within Southeastern Michigan. “Our approach is to help clients clarify their own business cases for diversity and inclusion and to create a safe ‘no fault’ learning environment that results in improved communication, mutual respect and organizational productivity,” stated the “Adult Diversity” section of their website. Most recently, the Roundtable has commenced panel discussions focusing on the issues of “white privilege” within the US and how it will be affected by President-elect Obama. They also facilitate programs for children to be able to actively learn and participate in the dismantling of racial and ethnic boundaries within their communities. Their “Interfaith Initiatives” facet promotes the existence of a substantive and healthy role of faith within communities, as well as positive understanding and co-existence. The Roundtable is also a member of the National Federation for Just Communities. MR
Arts & Culture
PAGE 8
Come on, It’s College BY BRITTANI KAGAN ‘11
Why waste our time forming meaningful relationships with the opposite sex when we can just get drunk and hook up with them? We have our friends for everything else. It seems that when it comes to girls and guys, the quintessential college experience means that anything teetering the line of exclusivity, or dare I say it, a relationship, is too much for us to handle. The thought of having a relationship has become so stigmatized that people, mostly males, go so far as to steer clear of girls they could potentially really like in fear that they might succumb to the emotional pressures of having a girlfriend. Back in middle school, a girl would have a crush on a boy because he’s cute and fun. They become boyfriend and girlfriend and talk on AOL all the time. They hang out at the movies or in his backyard. It lasts a few weeks and then she’s on to another boy she danced with at someone’s birthday party. Maybe we had the right idea back then. Nowadays everything is backwards. We make out before we exchange phone numbers. We do the walk of shame before we become Facebook friends. It seems that our interaction with the opposite sex has become just as impersonal as our text messages. Is this how we plan on forming long-term relationships in the future? We say, “it’s college,” but do our habits now have a greater impact on how we approach relationships in the future? Kathleen A. Bogle, author of Hooking up: Sex, Dating, and Relationships on Campus contends that after college, some 20-somethingyear-olds she interviewed were not sure “if they were on a date or just ‘hanging out and hooking up.’ Some of the people… had never been on a formal date until after college, so figuring out the rules for the “new” system was a big adjustment for them.” Bogle also claims that, “several studies of college student social life noted a major shift away from traditional dating to ‘group partying’ in the 1970s. Clearly our pattern of interaction stems from this “group partying” phenomenon, which condones the art of the casual conversation followed by the casual hook up. What happens after that? For the most part, we might send some text messages, after 9 PM on a going-out-night that is, to find out what party or bar our most recent conquest will be attending. Beyond this short-lived attempt at another encounter, you’re looking at an awkward, insincere kiss on the cheek or halfhug next time you see each other. Our hook-up culture has become a system that consists of certain norms and expectations. As college students, whether we clash with or contribute to the system, we are inextricably tied up in it. Sure, you might want a boyfriend, but there exists an undeniable protocol that you must follow to even explore the possibility. And good luck. We have created a system where we view college as an isolated environment that almost doesn’t count. We behave as if college is the specific place and time in our lives when we can let loose, hook up, and have fun. However, the system leaves many unsatisfied, confused, and generally disappointed in the shallow nature of hooking up. It limits our individuality and instinctive tendency to try to get to know members of the opposite sex as real people. Max Suchov, a senior, admits that, “realistically, every guy is looking for something more.” He pointed out that single life and relationship life each have its pros and cons. When asked if he realized a turning point that led him to want a relationship, he explained that, “when you’ve decided you’ve found the right person, that’s the turning point. It’s a question of what you’re willing to give up to get it. You have to be ready to give up the pros of one to experience the other.” So, is it the right time or the right person? Suchov asserted that it’s, “based entirely on both the girl and the time, but the right girl has more weight RELATIONSHIPS Continued on PAGE 11
Thomas Sugrue
11.25.2008
Author of “Urban Crisis” Promotes New Book
PHOTO CHRISTINE HWANG / MRSTAFF
BY CHRISTINE HWANG ‘10
Renowned academic and author Thomas Sugrue’s talk at Shaman Drum on Tuesday, November 18 began with a question: “Is anyone here from the South?” asked the man introducing Sugrue. Onlytwo people raised their hands. The man continued to tell his story of growing up in the South. In particular, he talked about the fundamentals he was taught about what the South represented. “I knew, even as a kid, that I wasn’t getting the whole story,” he said. He spoke of moving to Philadelphia—“The first time I realized it mattered what kind of white people you were.” Here, the North, is where Sugrue’s talk commenced. Sugrue was presenting his newest book, Sweet Land of Liberty: The Forgotten Struggle for Civil Rights in the North. He began his talk with this very theme of “forgotten,” quoting James Baldwin, an unknown Civil Rights activist in the North. “Most people in this book are not well-known,” said Sugrue, referring to the numerous northern Civil Rights activists overshadowed in history by the likes of southern activists Martin Luther King, Jr. and Rosa Parks. Before referencing the history that is accounted in his book, Sugrue spoke of modern race issues. Citing, among other things, that there are an expanding number of African-American students in higher education, he said that America is no longer in the age of Brown v. Board of Education. He spoke of how some believe the election of Barack Obama embarks on post-racialism. However, he does point out that today’s financial situation is the “burden of all Americans, but disproportionately those of color.” In essence, Sugrue said that today’s America is understanding and redefining notions of race. He explained that “there is no better place to do it than examining the North.” The vast majority of Civil Rights scholars are from the South. This “blinds us,” according to Sugrue. Before he explained how, he explained that the juxtaposition between the North and the South is one of “colorblindness versus color-consciousness” and “MLK versus Malcolm X.” Fundamental differences exist between the North and the South, Sugrue claimed, but “what I found in doing research for Sweet Land of Liberty is how similar the North and the South were.” History classes often
teach about segregation in Nashville and Greensboro, but not the segregation in the North.” At restaurants in Detroit, African-American customers were often hidden in separate sections and sometimes not even let in. The “black YMCAs” were the only northern hotels that permitted African-Americans. African-Americans were often not allowed in swimming pools except on “Negro Days” on which they would drain out the water afterwards. “What happens in the North is something very similar to what is happening in the South,” claimed Sugrue. What was different, however, is how most northerners perceived race issues. For most of the history of the North, Sugrue claimed, northerners have innocently separated themselves from the Civil Rights movement in the South. They were aware of it, but it was not their concern despite the segregationist and racist policies practiced in the North. “The Civil Rights movement in the North is what changed public opinion about race in the 1960s,” said Sugrue. He cited the work of several Civil Rights activists. One of these Civil Rights activists was Hermann Ferguson, a schoolteacher from Queens, New York who chained himself with eight other activists around a crane in a construction site demanding the employment of skilled black workers. Ferguson later joined the movement for the “black nation” that Malcolm X advocated. Another was Anna Arnold Hedgemen who, as Sugrue describes in his book, “came of age as millions of blacks headed north in search of opportunity but faced a regime of racial proscription there that was every bit as deeply entrenched as the southern system of Jim Crow.” This was a woman, who, in short, ended up encountering Klansmen, poverty in Harlem, and “hypocritical white liberals who mouthed their commitment to racial equality but continued to profit from it (inequality).” This was a book that covered new ground, filled with information unknown to most Americans. “I hadn’t even heard of a lot of it before I researched the book,” Sugrue said. Much of the information Sugrue gathered was from African-American newspapers in the North, as most northern and national newspapers did not report on such incidences. Till now, many of these stories of the Civil Rights struggle in the North have been long forgotten in American history. MR
PAGE 9
11.25.2008
BY ALISSA NG ‘10
In past decades, coeducational dorms were virtually absent from college campuses. Up until the 1960s, the rule known as in loco parentis, gave permission to University of Michigan staff, including Resident Directors and resident advisors, to act “in place of parents.” Ground rules were set regarding student curfew and what to wear to dinner, especially for women. When the University had weekly “open-opens,” where dorms were open to visitors, males and females had to abide by the “three feet on the floor rule,” which referred to the distance between them if they were alone in a room. While these rules may seem overly strict to us now, they were social norms at the time. But by the 1960s and 70s, American universities became increasingly more relaxed with their rules. Senior women didn’t have to return to their dorms by a specific time in 1962, and three years later, this rule grew to include junior women and then sophomores. James Tobin of Michigan Today said that the then-director of South Quad, Thomas Fox, allowed occupants to close their doors during visiting hours while a member of the opposite sex was in their room. Resident Directors from the 1960s, however, would be shocked to see current dorm protocol. Today at UM and many other universities, both sexes can actually live on the same floor. Additionally, single sex residential halls are becoming a less popular choice as space constraints and housing demands have risen. The Stockwell Residence Hall has always housed only females in recognition of the first female student admitted to U-M, but University Housing has decided to make it coeducational when it re-opens after intensive renovations in Fall 2009. This decision has been based on “student input and support,” according to the U-M Housing website. A discussion memo sent via email from Peter Logan, Housing Communications Director stated that, “requests for all female housing at UM have been trending down. Only about 240 first-year students declare their preference for all female housing each year.” Changing times reflect the growing liberalism of universities as they become increasingly flexible with their housing policies. Now, U-M has stated its support for transgender individuals by making it possible for students to request gender-neutral accommodation. However, this is offered to these students on a case-bycase basis and there is no guarantee that their preferences will be met. Until “sex reassignment surgery is
complete,” students are assigned rooms according to their birth gender. Despite the University’s increased flexibility regarding LGBT students, there is no talk of changing housing policy to let heterosexual students share a room. Yet, other universities, including traditionally conservative schools, have loosened their rules to allow students of the opposite sex to share rooms. Brown University, the University of Pennsylvania, Oberlin College, Stanford University and Clark University are among 24 schools that have changed their policies to accommodate student needs. In an e-mail interview, Logan stated that, “[U-M] is continuing to have informal conversations about gender-neutral housing… and to watch the trend in gender-neutral housing and the trials and successes experienced at the schools taking the lead.” Dorm regulations regarding controlled substances have changed in recent years to reflect cultural norms. In 1967, Mary Markley Hall’s Van Tyne House announced that it would not consider any cases involving alcohol in dorm rooms unless it breached rights of other students. This was a new step towards more flexible policies, and while the basic rules of alcohol consumption still prohibit the possession or consumption of alcoholic beverages in public areas of the residence halls, they allow residents over 21 to “bring small amounts of alcohol in dorm rooms… provided the room is not designated substance-free”. Changing dorm rules inevitably come with conflict, with parents of students concerned about how their children act while they are away at college, but according to Tobin, most professors, RAs and Housing staff support lax rules. After a few months of the implementation of coed living, residents became relatively blasé about the presence of the opposite sex, according to Fox. The presence of women may not necessarily lead to promiscuous behavior, as a Couzens RA attests. “Privacy is not necessary for excessive displays of affection.” Morals and beliefs became more open-minded after the 1950s as student activism rose, but as Tobin explained, it is not necessarily a bad thing. He said that residence hall rules are now derived from “a new theory of campus life—that students [are] to be understood not as children under the supervision of a substitute parent, but as members of a community with obligations to respect the rights of others and of the community as a whole.” MR
“Ella Minnow Pea” Musical Just Misses the Mark BY LINDSEY DODGE ‘10
“Ella Minnow Pea,” a new musical by writers Scott Burkell and Paul Loesel, had its first performances at the Arthur Miller Theater November 20-23. Debuting through the Department of Musical Theater in the U-M School of Music, Theater & Dance, the production reflects both the excellent technical skill of the U-M department as well as the modern Broadway trend of mixed directions in storytelling. The story is based on the novel by Mark Dunn, which describes the fictional island of Nollop off the coast of South Carolina in modern-day. Nollop is named after their only famous progeny, Nevin Nollop, who is famous for inventing the classic pangram “The Quick Brown Fox Jumped Over The Lazy Dog.” This quote appears on the town seal, but when the letters start falling off, the town’s High Council determines it to be an omen from Nollop. They decree that all usage of dropped letters is forbidden, which becomes increasingly more ludicrous as almost all the letters fall except for “LMNOP.” The protagonist is Ella Minnow Pea, a young woman unsure where her life’s work lies. When more and more people suffer harsh punishment or banishment for using forbidden letters, Ella and her beau Nate (who’s from Georgia) hurry to find a pangram shorter than Nollop’s. The answer comes just in time at the end in a letter from Ella’s banished alcoholic father, “Pack My Box With Five Dozen Liquor Jugs.” The High Council escapes to Florida and everyone else lives happily, if somewhat more wisely, ever after. The performances by the U-M students reflect the particular emphasis on music in the Musical Theater department. All the voices were well-trained, and some even had fun with their roles, like the flamboyantly pseudo-French Georgeanne Towgate (Emily Glick ‘09) and her Eddie Haskill of a son, played by fifth-grader
Christopher Jon Torrella. Beth Kuhn ‘09, who perfectly captured the trusting banality of the towns-people, surprisingly provided the comic relief. The problem with the new musical was it couldn’t make up its mind. I found myself sitting in the dark wanting them to make it more like South Park. Yes, that sounds ridiculous, but hear me out. The thing is, it’s a pretty dark musical. There are public flagellations and suicides shown on-stage as a result of the town council’s extreme censorship. Because the premise is far-fetched in comparison to American culture, it would have been far more enjoyable if instead of taking themselves so seriously in the construction of this musical, they had made the absurdism funny. So when Georgeanne loses it on-stage and kills herself and her son, it could have been like in South Park when Butter’s mom loses it every few episodes and lashes out at Butters. There were so many moments of humor that weren’t utilized to their full potential. The fact that the father is an alcoholic who asks for “five dozen liquor jugs,” that could have been like Gerald and his “cheesing” addiction. It’s not really about making the musical like South Park, it’s that humor is a more effective tool at making people realize their frailties than inculcating the message with songs such as “Pencil to Paper” where the characters invoke using their minds more and the importance of thinking. This issue was exacerbated by the Sondheim-esque use of recitative. The meandering inclination of the music only underlined the lack of dramatic direction. Without Sondheim or Webber’s talent at recitatives, they can be unbearably tedious to sit through. Although there were moments of entertainment, on the whole the musical needs more work before it travels to the great white way. MR
A Modern Book of Conservatism ...and Wolves
Arts & Culture
From Curfews to Co-Ed: Stockwell
BY KATIE SINGER ‘12
By definition, a fable is “a short allegorical narrative making a moral point, traditionally by means of animal characters who speak and act like human beings.” Traditionally, the fables that have been ingrained into our society tend to have a liberal bent promoting the idea of social justice. Paul Lake’s Cry Wolf, on the other hand, does almost the exact opposite: it presents an entertaining fable with a conservative ideology behind it. Paul Lake, an English professor at Arkansas Tech University, models his story off of the classic Animal Farm by George Orwell. Both novels are centered around farm animals that are trying to maintain a political community. In Cry Wolf, there is a strong division between the tame animals that live on the farm and the wild ones that live in the forest. As the animals in Orwell’s Animal Farm want to escape from human oppression and institute their philosophy of animalism, the animals in Paul Lake’s Cry Wolf struggle to hold on to their ties to human beings, or their tameness, and promote the benefits of “manyanimalism.” Throughout the course of the novel, the tame animals of Green Pastures Farm struggle to keep control of the farm that is being overwhelmed by wild animals from the forest. The domesticated animals of Green Pastures Farm initially enjoy their way of life, following a strict-interpretation of the farm’s laws: the most important one being “NO TRESPASSING.” Early in the book, they find themselves with a security breach when a sick deer stumbles over the fence separating the farm from the wild. After taking this deer under their care, they are soon faced with the problem of illegal immigration and must come up with a plan to allow others to become citizens of the farm. Eventually, they resort to a plan of general amnesty and shortly after, they see their nice, orderly lifestyle disappear before their eyes. Soon, the “forest-born” (to be politically correct) begin to take over and institute multiculturalism in the form of “manyanimalism” and judicial activism. The animals are overly concerned with their conceptualizations of social justice and are too scared to stand up for their beliefs because those who have are exiled or killed. This book paints a scary picture of what can happen when animals (or people) begin to abandon their fundamental beliefs and ideologies. Paul Lake’s fable has been credited as an illustration of how good intentions can easily become destructive when too much emphasis is placed on fairness and equality. After the farm animals have been accused of social injustices, they soon abandon all of their laws, and when the wild ones come into power, laws that embody opposing ideas are enacted. As a result, the government of Green Pastures Farm no longer provides its citizens with the safety and security that it once did. Laurie Morrow, political columnist in The CRY WOLF Continued on PAGE 11
PAGE 10 P.
11.25.2008 4.1.08
Continuations
BLOOD Continued from FRONT PAGE
out the competition. Donors had to fulfill certain criteria before their blood could be accepted: they needed to be healthy, at least 17 years of age, and 110 pounds. And oh, yes, the donor also could not be a sexually active gay male. Jim Dulin and Eric Burkman, seniors at the University of Michigan, discovered in the midst of a conversation that they both felt the ban to be unnecessarily discriminatory towards gay men. The two decided to take action by first setting up a table next to the blood bank at South Quadrangle Residential Hall. They provided flyers and fielded any WAXMAN Continued from FRONT PAGE
has supported pro-environment legislation and currently holds a 100% rating with the League of Conservation Voters, some have felt Dingell’s ties to the auto industry have caused him to be less supportive of strong environmental policies that would significantly decrease greenhouse gas emissions. Dingell’s former position as Chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee allotted him strong authority in this area as well. Waxman’s bid for the chairmanship position challenges Dingell’s authority on energy policy. Dingell’s protective measures of the auto industry have gained him praise from many. If he were to force these local strongholds to comply with difficult environmental regulations it would lead to further financial trouble for the companies, which would mean more job losses in his district. Nathaniel Styer, Chairman of the College Democrats at the University of Michigan and a supporter of Dingell says that “at a time where the American auto industry is facing its most difficult situation ever, it is important to have somebody who is knowledgeable about the industry and about its impact on the region in charge of the committee that can deal with this.” IRAQ Continued from PAGE 7
conceded to make the deal in part because of Iraq’s relatively improving conditions. Regardless of the reasons, Bush’s cooperation will undoubtedly give Obama more flexibility as the nation approaches the beginning of a new presidential term. Although the general University of Michigan student population tends to be opposed to the War in Iraq, many would expect the University of Michigan’s ROTC (Reserve Officers’ Training Corps) cadets to be credulous of a relatively inexperienced, anti-Iraq War Commander-in-Chief such as Obama. However, this supposition proves faulty when speaking to cadets on campus. Thomas Junhoo Kim, a University of Michigan freshman ROTC cadet, certainly
PHOTO AUSTYN FOSTER / MRSTAFF
questions posed by inquirers. They also gathered email addresses in order to send letters to congressmen and the Food & Drug Administration. The Red Cross, the organization in charge of the blood drives, has publicly expressed opposition to the ban, which was established in 1985 due to newly emerging information about the HIV virus. However, the FDA has yet to lift the ban, passing it again in 2000 by the slim margin 0f 7-6. One recent FDA statement issued, “Men who have had sex with men since 1977 have an HIV prevalence (the total number of cases of a disease that are present in a population at a specific point in time) 60 times higher than the general population, 800 times higher than first time blood donors and
8000 times higher than repeat blood donors.” One can understand the FDA’s logic. What is not acknowledged in that statement, however, is the accuracy of current HIV testing technology. Although experts insist that the testing is not infallible, it’s accuracy is such that mistakes are exceedingly rare. Dulin addressed the issue of HIV rates among sexually active gay men, “When someone is concerned about the transfer of HIV we acknowledge that all of the blood is tested. We do not pretend to be experts, but the Red Cross claims they can handle the blood safely and other countries have shown that this is the case.” Opponents of the ban have also noted that African American and Latino women are actually the fastest growing “HIV” population, yet there is no type of ban for them. Dulin accepted the FDA’s logic but stated, “We believe there are reasons to reject blood, but those reasons are not as broad as the bans made by the FDA. Several countries, such as Italy, Australia and South Africa, have changed their requirements to address risky sexual behaviors rather than dismissing all men who have sex with men since 1977. There are men in monogamous relationships that know their HIV status better than some of the people that donate on a regular basis. We want the FDA to realize that wording and practice of the current ban is unnecessary. We are not purposing any particular solution, but instead we are asking for more inclusive practices.” The history of blood shortages, especially for particular rare blood types, has only elevated the controversial nature of the ban. However, gay men do not comprise the only group restricted from donating blood; for example, those who have had a stroke or multiple sclerosis are not allowed to donate. The difference is that most “gay blood” is not infected, and although there is a miniscule chance that an HIV blood test could be flawed, that possibility exists for HIV infected heterosexuals as much as it does for homosexual men. As new information emerges and medical technology further improves, a reversal of this ban could be imminent. Only time will tell, but Dulin is content thus far with the movement, “We are happy to see the large amount of support we have received and thank everyone who has contributed.” MR
Jodi Seth, Energy and Commerce Committee spokesperson for John Dingell released a statement on November 20, 2008 that Representative Dingell promises a “smooth transition” and to “work closely with Waxman on the issues facing the Energy and Commerce Committee”. He also promises the people of the Michigan 15th Congressional District a continued “commitment—to protecting and creating jobs, to providing health care for all Americans, to working to getting our state and nation’s economy back on track… is a fight I will continue to wage in Washington.” Waxman’s office was also contacted. Caren Auchman, Press Assistant on the Committee of Oversight and Reform says Waxman will “work with all parts of our Caucus and across the aisle to deliver the change that the American public expects us to deliver.” Environmental groups, who push hard for tougher legislation on energy policy, would benefit from this transition in power. The Sierra Club, an interest group that is a huge proponent of pro-environment policies says of Waxman’s recent victory, “Henry Waxman will continue [the] strong leadership tradition as the head of the Energy and Commerce Committee.” But some note now that Dingell is out of power and Waxman is in, trouble may loom for the local auto industry and those supported by it, no longer having the strong backbone of support that Dingell provided as Chairman. Metro Detroit AFL-CIO President Saundra Wil-
liams “was disappointed to hear that because Dingell was an asset to that committee and certainly advanced Michigan’s causes.” Styer was also “very disappointed because Dingell was a huge support to the University of Michigan students as well as the state of Michigan; you wouldn’t find bigger supporter and was sad to see his party vote this way.” Of Waxman, Styer notes “he will be effective,” but Styer would prefer him to “have an ear to the working class.” Students from college newspapers in Waxman’s district were contacted for comment, but none were able to provide any comment at the present time. Some organizations and individuals who supported Dingell in his re-election bid included the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance, Ducks Unlimited, American Rivers, and Trout Unlimited, Rep. John Lewis (D-GA) along with five other members of the Congressional Black Caucus, Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers Jr. (D-MI.) and Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charles Rangel (D-NY), Artur Davis (D-AL). He also had a whip committee to garner support for himself. Waxman privately sought support from other House members. Those who supported him were newer, younger, more liberal House members. MR
does not fit the mold of that stereotype, “I personally disagree with the war in Iraq because I don’t believe that the US should be playing world police at the cost of American lives.” Furthermore, Kim said he has yet to hear grumblings regarding the election results among his ROTC comrades, “Obama becoming a president has not had a great affect on my peers or myself. And so far I have not heard of any problems amongst my peers about Obama’s ideals and his political standing.” Despite the call for support of the troops from nearly every major politician, the public has not always been friendly to people in the military. The Boston Globe reported that at Boston University the ROTC office was vandalized last year due to anger with the Iraqi War. So why would students elect to serve in a time of endless warring if they do not personally support
the some of the wars? One possible motivation is the money the ROTC and similar programs offer its cadets; another common, and basic, motivation is the desire to serve one’s nation. However, in addition to service, Kim also has an ulterior reason, “I joined ROTC for the military experience and the chance to improve my leadership. On top of that ROTC is able to help me get a great education in Michigan, so that was also a bonus.” Regardless of one’s political or ideological beliefs, the success or failure of this current presidential transition will likely have wide-ranging effects throughout the United States and abroad. MR
11.25.2008 4.1.08
PAGE 11 P. 11
DIFFERENCE Continued from PAGE 5
the student experience, advance health and well-being, fulfill the promise of science and technology, inspire a life of arts and culture, and prepare tomorrow’s leaders.” The Chair of the campaign, Rich Rogel talked about how the school had raised more than $80 million in need based aid for undergraduate and graduate students alike and had established numerous professorships. The event included a performance of ‘Seasons of Love’ from the musical Rent by students from the school of Music, Theatre and Dance and was concluded with an inspiring appearance by the Marching Band. The grand finale was the announcement of the total amount so far - $3,115,644,057 as of November 14, 2008. According to Robert Groves, who is the Vice President of the Office of Development and was the Campaign Director, some of the biggest successes were “adding more than $910 million to the endowment, raising more than $463 million for capital projects and increasing need based undergraduate scholarships.” The campaign was not all success, however. Groves
than the right time.” It seems that our hook-up culture comes unnaturally to us. Perhaps we call it the “walk of shame” because we really are ashamed. Perhaps we avoid people we’ve hooked up with because we really are uncomfortable with our behavior. Perhaps we overestimate each other’s satisfaction with this system. CRY WOLF Continued from PAGE 9
Montpelier Bridge, expressed an interesting view that “what seems, at first, a gentle fable about farm animals who enjoy a kind of ordered liberty, turns quickly into a grim allegory about man’s dark impulse toward the collective.” The most outstanding quality of Paul Lake’s Cry Wolf is how accurately he portrays different groups in society and the problems or issues that we face in modern times. After reading this book, one will seriously contemplate society’s stance on illegal immigration, racism, discrimination, freedom of speech, and political correctness. This short book exemplifies how easily pluralistic thought can quickly evolve into chaos and anarchy. Like many great books, this one proves to be thought provoking
WE WANT
YOU TO VISIT WWW. MICHIGAN REVIEW .COM
We must reevaluate the conventions we blindly follow in the name of conformity. Let’s embrace this amazingly unique opportunity to get to know each other, and invest just as much. Come on, it’s college. MR
and conversation starting. MR
www. michiganreview .com
Advertisements & Continuations
RELATIONSHIPS Continued from PAGE 8
says that “We did not meet all our goals for faculty support especially endowed professorships; but this was offset by a dramatic increase in programmatic support including centers, institutes and other forms of flexible funding for academic initiatives.” He also said that the biggest challenge faced during the campaign was communicating to students the impact of the campaign and all the positive change it has created so far. Some of the biggest changes attributable to the campaign include the construction of new buildings for the Ford School and the Ross School of Business and expansion of the Art Museum. Hail to the Victors indeed! MR
Face - Off
PAGE 12 P.
11.25.2008 4.1.08
Abstinence Only Education?
With the inauguration of President-elect Obama, there will be a sharp shift in education policies concerning sexual health. This poses financial and societal questions for parents as well as those wrapping up their education. In this issue’s Face-Off, we look at both sides of the sex education debate.
Pro Abstinence Only Education BY JULIANNE NOWICKI ‘10
Pro Comprehensive Sex Education BY SHANDA SHOOTER ‘10
Abstinence-only education is not ignorant or naive, nor is it ineffective. Abstinence- only education gives parents the freedom to raise their children without the interference of state-imposed values. Sex education severely impedes a parent’s freedom to raise children with values of their own choosing. Some parts of society try to propagate an image of abstinence-only education as irrational and uncivilized, when, on the contrary, abstinence-only education is an effective and intelligent means to lowering teenage pregnancy rates in the United States and securing parental rights. In 2006, President-elect Obama voted in support of an amendment to “teen pregnancy” education which ultimately supports sex education that’s “age appropriate,” meaning even kindergartners would receive sex education in public schools. The idea that pro-contraception programs somehow lower teenage pregnancy rates, and abstinence only programs do not, is incorrect. A study was conducted in Monroe County, New
The study found that the pregnancy rate for girls ages 15 through 17 in the country, fell by a very significant amount. York, regarding the “Not Me, Not Now” abstinence program. The study found that the pregnancy rate for girls ages 15 through 17 in the county, fell by a very significant amount. The rate fell from 63.4 pregnancies per 100 girls to 49.5 pregnancies per 1000 girls. According to the Heritage Foundation, only 8% of parents believe that promoting contraception is more important than abstinence. Parents are the ones who have been left out of the political discussion regarding sex education. Ironically, parents are the ones paying the taxes for this education, whether or not this education aligns with their true values. Parents should be the ones doing the parenting, not the state. “Comprehensive sex-ed programs” and “safe sex” programs are only myths. There is always a serious amount of risk in sexual activity for women and men, and these programs do not emphasize that risk enough. Condoms and birth control are not 100% preventative, and they should not be portrayed that way. The message that it’s okay to have sex, as long as “protection” is used, is simply misleading. Yet, it’s portrayed constantly in sex-ed programs throughout the country. To take “comprehensive sex-ed programs” a step further, Barbara Whitehead also makes some good points in The Atlantic. She argues that these sex-ed programs fail because they assume that knowledge acquired at earlier ages will influence behavior. “However,” she writes, “the empirical evidence suggests that younger teenagers, especially, are unlikely to act on what they know.” A solution she suggests is that parents be more involved in their younger teenagers’ lives. The facts reveal that sex before marriage has harmful consequences- like it or not. According to the Heritage Foundation, sexually active young adults are more likely to be depressed and commit suicide. The earlier a teenage girl becomes involved in sexual activity, the more likely she will encounter sexually transmitted diseases, in fact, a CDC study released earlier this year, an estimated 1 in 4 girls between 14 and 19. She’ll also be more likely to suffer increased rates of single parenthood. Why would we support education that prepares teenage girls for such morbid life circumstances? From a fiscally conservative standpoint, abstinence only education also proves to be a better option. The Heritage Foundation reports that the government spends $12 to promote contraceptive education for every $1 spent on abstinence education. Abstinence-only education saves the government money, in addition to allowing parents the right to teach their children about contraception rather than the State. In the future, President Barack Obama should start by encouraging parents to be more involved in their children’s lives, rather than support legislation for new sex-ed programs that hamper on parental rights. The research shows that abstinence-only education continues to be effective in lowering depression and suicide rates in teenagers, as well as lowering teenage pregnancy rates. MR
There is quite a bit of debate about President-elect Barack Obama’s stance on abortion. He has been endorsed by both Planned Parenthood and NARAL as pro-choice. His current website also says he will do everything he can to prevent any constitutional amendment that will overturn Roe v. Wade. Yet he has a 100 percent pro-life voting record in the Senate and is even endorsed by the group Pro-Life, Pro-Obama. Undebatable, however, is Obama’s belief that women should have access to contraception, health information and preventative services. He co-sponsored a piece of legislation called the Prevention First Act that will increase funding for family planning and sex education. The hope behind said legislation is that the occurrence in un-wanted pregnancies will decrease and as a result the number of abortions will decrease as well. Withholding reproductive health information and services from the public in favor of abstinence-only education is a dangerous mistake. Preaching only abstinence in schools and beyond will not create hordes of pure, chaste people waiting for marriage or until they’re ready for children to have sex. The decision to be sexually active is a very personal choice that should not be taken lightly, but in the likely event that a person chooses to do so, their ability to be safe should not be hindered. It seems unnecessary to point out the obvious, but human nature and hormones cannot be ignored or controlled nationwide by an ignorance of reproductive health. Religious ideology does not outweigh the great risk we put our youth at by teaching only abstinence. When teens who have undergone such education do become sexually active, they are more likely to be unsafe than teens who’ve been taught preventive measures. Not only does this lead to more unwanted pregnancies but it also leads to an increase in sexually transmitted diseases. Of course abstinence is the only 100% effective way to prevent STD’s and unwanted pregnancy, but it shouldn’t be presented as the only option. Education that teaches how to use contraception does not increase the frequency of sexual activity or encourage teens to become sexually active sooner. Many supporters of abstinence-only education do so for religious reasons and believe the unnatural prevention of a naturally occurring function of humanity is wrong. “Playing God” by preventing pregnancy is considered almost as much of a sin as abortion in the eyes of some. However, I fail to see how they can make no distinction between the prevention of creating a human life and the destruction of one. Education and providing safe sex services does not hurt anyone. Denying contraception or education on the use of contraception will only lead to more unwanted pregnancies. This translates to either more abortions or alternatives such as adoption or acceptance of the child. All of which could lead to a potentially damaging outcome for the child. There is not an unlimited supply of loving homes willing to adopt unwanted children. Also a majority of unwanted pregnancies occur in the lower-income brackets where the child may not be properly cared for. Even in the unlikely event that Roe v. Wade is overturned, the decision will likely be passed to the states. Only states with a pro-life majority will ban abortion and at the most it is only likely to happen in 16 states. Since it is so unlikely that abortion will ever be banned nationwide, the best option for those who are uncomfortable with it is to try and decrease the number of people seeking abortions. Abortion is often a last resort contraceptive and providing people with preventative contraceptives is the most effective way of decreasing the use of abortion. Providing women with reproductive health information and care is prolife. Comprehensive sex education will lead to a decrease in unwanted pregnancies and as a result fewer abortions. The practice of abstinence may be right for some, but shouldn’t be portrayed as the only alternative to unsafe sexual activity. Science has proven there are alternatives and to deny the public that information and care is unfair. Tax money should not be used only to show abstinence as the lone option, especially when the result is likely to hurt so many. MR
Conservative? Libertarian? Just Sick of Political Correctness Already? If so, join...
THE MICHIGAN REVIEW
For 25 years, THE MICHIGAN REVIEW has been the sole voice of conservatism and rationality on campus.