.1 4A -Monday, February 4, 2008 The Michigan Daily - michigandaily.com Edited and managed by students at the University of Michigan since 1890. 420 Maynard St. Ann Arbor, MI 48109 tothedaily@umich.edu cc TA! I know that I can win the presidency once I win your nomination:' - Republican presidential candidate, John McCain, on his chances of winning the general election if he wins the Republican nomination, as reported Saturday by CBS News. Democrats andyour tuition bil 4 ANDREW GROSSMAN EDITOR IN CHIEF GARY GRACA EDITORIAL PAGE EDITOR GABE NELSON MANAGING EDITOR Unsigned editorials reflect the official position of the Daily's editorial board. All other signed articles and illustrations represent solely the views of their authors. The Daily's public editor, Paul H. Johnson, acts as the readers' representative and takes a critical look at coverage and content in every section of the paper. Readers are encouraged to contact the public editor with questions and comments. He can be reached at publiceditor@umich.edu. A dual responsiblity In 118th year, Daily's strength rests on input and vigilance "The Daily is unique in its ability to describe, discuss and debate before the entire University community its individual and collective activities and problems." ittingly, those words appeared in an editorial on Sep. 16, 1957, the first day that The Michigan Daily began stating on the front page how many years of editorial freedom this paper has enjoyed. These two ideas - the role of the Daily as a forum for critical debate and the notion of editorial freedom - are inseparable and reinforcing. And nowhere are they more, important than on this editorial page. However, maintaining the Daily as a voice for students and an open forum for debate is only possible when there are commitments from both the Daily and from students - both of which must be reinvigorated in the upcoming year. F or college students looking for a Democratic presidential candidate who would signifi- cantly lighten their tuition bills, there's good and bad news. The good news: one exists. The bad news: he dropped out of the race. John Edwards, the populist former . senator, peppered A RL his early cam- paign with policy STAMPFL proposals to help- students deal with the ballooning cost of higher educa- tion. These weren't everyday abstract commitments to "America's future" or "our children." His most dramatic idea was to pay the first year of tuition, fees and books at a public college - all of it - for 2 million students who work part-time and fulfill several other requirements. But there's more good news. Edwards may have been steamrolled in the early primaries, but his ideas weren't. He pushed rivals Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton to the left, and they now share his zeal for mak- ing college accessible for everyone. So is Clinton or Obama better for students? That's not a simple question. Both propose making a welcome change to the way students and their parents apply for financial aid. Instead of filling out the Free Application for Federal Student Aid - whose com- plexity and length Obama notes pre- vents many uneducated families from sending their children to college or receiving aid - there would be a box to check on the federal income tax return. Families who checked the box would then receive a letter from the Department of Education listing their aid eligibility. "This will save families and stu- dents 100 million hours a year," Clin- ton said in her impressive Oct. 11 speech at New Hampshire's Plymouth State University in which she outlined her education plan. "It'll save the gov- ernment money. And it will increase, we estimate, the college-going rate by about 5 to 7 percent." That last esti- mate sounds too optimistic, but it cer- tainly would have a positive effect. Both also propose tax breaks for families who have children in college. Under Clinton's plan, a tax credit of up to $3,500 would be given to families to offset college costs. Obama is pro- posing a $4,000 credit. Both propos- als promise that the money gets to the families in time to pay the tuition bill (they differ on how) and that ifa fam- ily doesn't pay that much in taxes, the remainder will be refunded to them. One of Clinton's proposals that Obama isn't touting is a new GI Bill. She says it would pay for tuition as well as athree-year "living allowance" for military veterans with four years of active duty. That's a good thing to hear, and I hope Obama starts talking about this more, especially given his grandfather's debt to the original GI Bill, which sent him to college. Two other major ideas are unique to Clinton. One is mandating a fixed tuition rate for each freshman class at a public college. That means if stu- dents pay $22,000 for the first year, they'll pay the same for the remain- ing three. The second is changing the way AmeriCorps participants are rewarded for their public service commitment from a static percentage - which has remained the same since her husband created the program in 1993, even as tuition has risen - to a $10,000 scholarship. Obama has taken one giant leap on financial aid policy that Clinton hasn't. Proddedby Edwards, he is pro- posing the elimination of subsidies to private student loan providers in favor of direct lending by the government. Some experts say this could pump bil- lions of dollars into federal financial aid by cutting expensive - and often misused - subsidies. Clinton and Obama both have strong records on education, so these aren't empty promises that will dis- appear around February 2009. For an idea of how seriously Obama takes college affordability, consider that the first bill he sponsored asa U.S. senator would have increased the maximum Pell Grant. Both supported regular Pell Grant increases and voted for one Would Clinton or Obama be better for financial aid? last year. How they're going to pay for all of this is not entirely clear, but for most of their proposals they've provid- ed some rough calculations. Clinton, for instance, says she would freeze the estate tax at 2009 levels, and the resulting tax revenue from estates val- ued at more than $7 million would help pay for financial aid improvements. Like most issues, there's not much difference between Obama and Hill- ary when itcomesto financial aid. Still, because of his commitment to direct lending, Obama's proposals would be slightly better for students' wallets. If any of this gets done, though, be sure to thank John Edwards. Karl Stampfl was the Daily's fall/ winter editor in chief in 2007. He can be reached at kstampfl@umich.edu. I I For the Daily, and specifically this page, there are many sides to this commitment. Unapologetically, this page's first and fore- most responsibility is to students. Before we cover regional, national or internation- al issues, we give preference to the issues that directly affect this university and the lives of those on campus. The Daily is not a national newspaper like The Washington Post or The New York Times, and students deserve a newspaper that reflecfs their unique circumstances and concerns. If we don't cover these issues, few, if any, news- papers will. However, this page has a responsibility to do more than just mirror the obvious arguments. While we reflect on the issues important to students, we should also drive the debate toward the areas we think are important but overlooked. In both duties, it is our obligation to challenge readers to critically evaluate and reevaluate the world around them. Some people call the results from our thinking liberal; some call it progressive. Unfortunately, these are only vague labels that have come to define the Daily and keep many from accepting our most important overarching ideology developed over 118 years: Complacency is not acceptable. This ideology transcends labels. On our campus and in society, there are some principles that must be upheld. Equality. Free speech. Checks on exces- sive power. Tolerance. These are more than buzz words and require more than a vague commitment. We won't compromise these values and we expect the University administration, our government and our society to hold to a similar commitment. When you as a reader feel that we have gotten something wrong it is your respon- sibility to engage in the debate. This can be as simple as writing a letter to the editor or writing a longer viewpoint. It can also mean that you join us at our editorial board meetings. In either case, we will make sure that all relevant sides of a debate are heard, whether they are contrary to the Daily's views or not. As editorial page editor, I will be aggres- sive in facilitating this input. Unlike the Daily's news section, the opinion section offers an opportunity for student groups to write about the issues they care about even if these issues are not front-page news. If any group or person thinks an important issue is not being covered fairly, the opin- ion page is the place to express this. Unless this exchange occurs, both parties are partly at fault. For 118 years the Daily has enjoyed edito- rial freedom. This freedom is only possible because of our vigilance and the engage- ment of students. One does not function without the other. The costs behind the degrees Gary Graca Editorial Page Editor MIRA MOOREVILLE Be green, not gullible How much does it cost to edu- cate an English student? It's a question the state legislature has been pondering with urgency while it desperately search- es for some fat to trim from the state's . skeletal budget. The answer, of course, is a lot. It mightsurprise a few A Republican state ANNE legislators, but even VANDERMEY an English degree requires more than a copy of the Penguin Classics. There are the costs of the classroom space, secretaries, administrators and count- less other incidental expenses. But most important, there are the profes- sors' salaries. The foundation of a school's prestige is its faculty. Relative prestige is impor- tant because it dictates the quality of applicants, donations and the number of research grants. But hiring the best academic minds in any field is never cheap. So far, the University has done a remarkable job of attracting academic stars without going bankrupt. But its tenuous position is a perfect example of how - whether we like it or not - cash directly impacts education and how the quality of education is up for sale. Of course, money isn't everything. Harvard University's endowment, at about $34 billion, is almost five times larger than the University of Michi- gan's $7.1 billion endowment. How- ever, few would argue Harvard is five times as good. The University may lack the unlim- ited funds at the disposal of the Michi- gan of the East, but it's still building impressive new buildings, attracting unprecedented numbers of students and making waves in medical and social research. The best students here are just as good as the best stu- ALEXANDER HONKALA dents there - even though students at the University can only dream of Ivy League-style grade inflation. But the University does fall way behind mega- endowed schools like Harvard in one contentious area: These schools can lure away the best professors. The University is in a particularly vulnerable position. It pays full profes- sors on average a salary of $130,400 a year, making itthe fourth-highest-pay- ing public research university in the country. That's about one-third more than the average salary for all public research universities, accordingto data released by the American Association of University Professors. However, the University's average salary is still less than the average at private research universities: $136,689. Harvard pays an average annual salary of $177,400. To stay competitive, public schools have to make a better offer. And so, suddenly, the gaping disparity between public and private means it costs a whole lot more to educate an English student. The University is the fourth-best- paying public school; it likely isn't a coincidence that U.S. News & World Report ranks it as the nation's fourth- best-public school. However, the Uni- versity is ranked the 25th best school overall in the country. since several substantially wealthier private schools are ranked much lower, this means it's leaps and bounds ahead of its better- funded, private counterparts. Still, while it might be tempting to look at the University as a cham- pion of public universities, taking up arms against the elitist private schools, there's really not much moral high ground it can claim. In March, an entire department of medical researchers at an institute in Syracuse will have picked up shop and moved to Ann Arbor, where, in a shocking display of professor poaching, the University has promised them more money and better facilities. The argument for this kind of preda- tory behavior is that it centralizes research and learning in a few places. Proponents would argue that spread- ing brilliant people indiscriminately across the country encourages uniform mediocrity. The argument against the practice is that it can grossly divide the quality of education for students of dif- ferent socioeconomic backgrounds. The culture, of course, it not some- thing the University can change by itself. In the meantime, it has to try to retain its faculty from other equally opportunistic schools. To do this, it could keep upping tuition or allow professors to spend less time with stu- dents, both dangerous propositions. Or, it could let them go. It's true, the When universities meet free market economics loss of top professors might drain the University's prestige and the research funding that often comes along with it, but it might be a better alternative than accommodating superstars. Professors who want to be drawn away or are apt to be swayed by extended sabbaticals might not fit in here anyway. The University has already proven itself remarkably adept at remaining competitive without a budget compa- rable to the top private schools'. And the faculty members who choose to stay despite the modest pay and the extra hours with students, are the most valuable ones. Still, if the state budget appropriation continues to wane, the University might not be able to keep up the gambit much longer. Anne VanderMey was the Daily's fall/winter magazine editor in 2007. She can be reached at vandermy@umich.edu. Q What comes to mind when you think ofthe environment? Hippies? Al Gore? Crunchy granola? Regular granola? Or maybe none of the above. These days, it feels like we are swimming in a messy pool of fact, fiction and waste. With all the hoopla and assumptions surrounding what it means to be "green," it is hard to know what to believe. Many ques- tions, opinions and lies float around with no clear indication of whether we are going in the right direction. Oh, Magic Eight Ball, please tell us which presidential candidate will really take action in our worldwide energy crisis. How do we find out what ingredients are actually in our food? What will be the effects of global warming? And can someone figure out how to answer "paper or plastic"? Fortunately, some of our burning ques- tions can be answered, while others have no easy response and force us to use our best judgment. Unfortunately, many companies take it for granted that consumers won't ask questions because we are supposedly sheep driven by money, beauty and the latest con- venient craze. Butifwe don'tthinkabouthowouractions will affect the environment, then the aver- age person will continue to use an estimated 80-100 gallons of water per day; water, air and soil pollution will contribute to 40 per- cent of deaths worldwide; Americans will keep using about 86 billion plastic bags each year; and 112,000 tons of construction waste will go on to being buried in landfills annu- ally. In spite of these facts, are you content just watching the world function as it is? If not, then ask, question and confront the big- shots. Don't accept what you are told and assume it to be correct. Every trinket, morsel of food, drop of water and glob of shampoo has a story behind it. Every item you buy, whether it is an iPod, a pair of sneakers or a seemingly innocent bottle of water has gone through some type of journey to land in the shop around the corner. Therefore, I challenge you to constantly find out where your products have come from, how they were made and by whom. Think about your ecological footprint: how much waste you leave behind and what you give back to the Earth. Once you get on the eco-train - buying reusable shopping bags, refusing plastic bot- tles of water and reducing energy use - you realize that there are good, clean options everywhere around us. You simply have to look, and eventually the right choices will come naturally. But no one is perfect and occasionally, green is not synonymous with cheap. In that case, defy consumerism and buy one pair of organic cotton jeans instead of five toxic pairs. Make an effort to alter your behavior in whatever ways possible. The environ- ment matters in all areas of life: art, medi- cine, food, architecture, business, law and fashion. Take a stand by using eco-friendly materials, adopting a philosophy of sustain- ability or developing a connection with the Earth. So, be brave and do more than replace your light bulbs. There are some nifty items out there that can satisfy your needs and make a huge environmental difference. For one, Apple just released the MacBook Air. Thin enough to require 56 percent less packaging waste, the laptop comes with a longer battery life, a recyclable aluminum case, a mercury- and arsenic-free display and polyvinyl chloride-free internal cables. Or try the solar voltaic backpack, which is designed to charge cell phones, iPods and laptops while you are outside. Or order a T- shirt from onetonco2.com, and the company will offset one ton of carbon dioxide - the equivalent saved from a passive solar home for 154 days - with each purchase. At the end of the day, figuring out what is and is not green may get overwhelming. We live in a nation overloaded with informa- tion. So sit down, relax and pour yourself a nice, cold, organic beer. Mira Mooreville is an LSA freshman. My fellow Americans, my speechwriters have nothing of substance to say. EDITORIAL BOARD MEMBERS: Emad Ansari, Anindya Bhadra, Kevin Bunkley, Ben Caleca, Satyajeet Deshmukh, Milly Dick, Mike Eber, Emmarie Huetteman, Theresa Kennelly, Emily Michels, Arikia Millikan, Kate Peabody, Robert Soave, Imran Syed, Neil Tambe, Matt Trecha, Kate Truesdell, Radhika Upadhyaya, Rachel Van Gilder, Rachel Wagner, Patrick Zabawa. LETTERS TO THE EDITOR: Readers are encouraged to submit letters to the editor. Letters should be less than 300 words and must include the writer's full name and University affiliation. All submissions become property of the Daily. We do not print anonymous letters. Send letters to tothedaily@umich.edu.