w 4A - Monday, March 8, 2010 The Michigan Daily - michigandaily.com Elle Midiigan al Edited and managed by students at the University of Michigan since 1890. 420 Maynard St. Ann Arbor, MI 48109 tothedaily@umich.edu They are not prioritizing education. That should be at the top of the list - on top of everything. - University of California, Berkley freshman Yesenia Castellanos, commenting on tuition hikes at a demonstration last week, as reported by Time magazine on Friday. JACOB SMILOVITZ EDITOR IN CHIEF RACHEL VAN GILDER EDITORIAL PAGE EDITOR MATT AARONSQN 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. Wrongly redefined State Senate shouldn't limit stem cell research n November 2008, Michigan voters took socially progres- sive action when they voted in favor of a ballot initiative that loosened restrictions on stem cell research in the state. Since then, the state and the University have made promising progress in stem cell research. But those strides may soon be halted as legislation, which would redefine a crucial component of the bal- lot initiative, makes its way to the Senate floor. The legislation would be detrimental to the progress of stem cell research across the state. In order to continue to lead in this research, the state Senate shouldn't handcuff researchers by approving legislation that would limit stem cell research. 0 Aiding student loans The proposed legislation would alter the term "not suitable for implantation" of the ballot initiative. According to a Feb. 26 article in the Daily, the current propos- al states that embryos aren't suitable for implementation if they have defects or dis- eases. Under the proposed legislation, the classification of "unsuitable" would also apply to embryos that lack wouldn't suc- cessfully develop. Some critics of the proposal, like Sean Morrison, director of the University's Cen- ter for Stem Cell Biology Research, believe that it could stop researchers from find- ing- potential cures as more embryos are discarded. He points out that this legisla- tion might "force patients to throw away embryos" instead of "donating them for stem cell research." Proponents of the legislation, like state Sen. Tom George (K- Kalamazoo), ch'air of the Senate Health Policy Committee, claim that the new leg- islation would clear up the language used .ii the ballot initiative. Ballot initiatives are admittedly often too vaguely worded to operate properly and require more legislation to specify them. But the legislation before the state Senate operates counter to the intent of the ballot initiative by restricting stem cell research. This legislation would limit the research that Michigan residents sought to encourage when they passed the ballot initiative, and the Senate shouldn't take action that would directly contradict the will of the voters. i The new legislation would also be a dis- service to University research. The 2008 ballot initiative allowed the University to expand its research facilities and attract researchers. Greater restrictions would limit the University's ability to move these efforts forward. The legislation before the state Senate would damage Michigan's efforts to lead stem cell research. Most importantly, the legislation would hinder stem cell research that could lead to monumental breakthroughs in medi- cal science. Continued developments in stem cell research could help save lives and find cures to detrimental diseases like Lou Gehrig's disease, juvenile diabetes and Parkinson's disease. The state Senate shouldn't stall these critical advances. The state Senate must realize the nega- tive effects of the legislation before reach- ing a final decision that could very well hinder stem cell research efforts in Michi- gan. State legislators shouldn't take any action that would slow the progress of this vital research that is badly needed both by this downtrodden state and by the millions of people whose lives this work could one day improve. Back in September, the Daily reported that the U.S. House of Representatives had passed the Student Aid and Fiscal Respon- sibility Act of 2009, which would drastically reform the student loan system (How a i federal fittancial aid overhaul could affect 'U' students, 9/24/09). The PATRICK bill - which is 'A E strongly support- O'MAHEN ed by the Obama administration - was intended to improve efficiency, expand lending and Pell grant pro- grams, which would streamline the process of applying for financial aid and generally ease the burdens of col- lege students everywhere. Naturally, it's currently bogged down in the U.S. Senate, where legis- lation has long gone to die. One prob- lem is that there are 289 other House bills waiting for consideration in the Senate, which has been struggling to overcome Republican filibusters on everything from confirming presi- dential appointments to extending unemployment insurance. The other problem comes from several Demo- cratic senators representing bank- friendly states who seem dead set on weakening the bill's central propos- als that would both save the federal government money and expand stu- dent services. The legislation's major proposed changes deal with the provision of federal loans. Currently, federal stu- dent loans work in two ways. The more complicated one is the Federal Family Education Loan Program, which involves private lenders as middlemen. The government pro- vides private lenders with capital, subsidizes the interest rate and then guarantees the loan. In return for the subsidies, which amount to $4.5 billion annually, the private lenders provide the added service of... er... (Awkward silence) Well, actually no one is really sure what value the banks add to the transaction except for pocketing tax- payer money. Writing in the online magazine Slate in 2007, Michael Kinsley pointed out that the govern- ment already guarantees debt - its own borrowing to finance the bud- get deficit-for a considerably lower interest rate than it does for those it helps to subsidize under. the FFEL program. What would make sense theen is for the government to cut out the msiddleman and directly loan out its own money. After all, that $4.5 billion could fund roughly 900,000 additional Pell grants for needy col- lege students. Actually, the other major govern- ment loan program, Federal Direct Loans, already uses this mecha- nism. The student aid legislation that passed the House in September effec- tively cancels the FFEL program and makes all loans direct loans, then allocates the projected net $80 bil- lion in savings over the next 10 years to expanding funding for Pell Grants and improving community colleges. Let's see: the feds cut out inefficient subsidies and use the savings to pro- vide resources poor students desper- ately need. Who could possibly object? The first group consists of the usual Republican free-market blow- hards who object to a "government takeover" of the student loan mar- ket. This contention is hogwash, as the government is only taking over the government student loan pro- gram. No law prevents private lend- ers from offering their own student loans - they just wouldn't get federal subsidies to do so. That sounds pretty free-market to me. Besides, the gov- ernment still will bid out for private banks to collect and administer its loans, so it's not like private banks are completely getting cut out of the loop. The other opposition group con- sists of more familiar suspects - the private lending agencies that make a killing at the government feeding trough. They couldn't stop the House bill improving education, but now that it's cooling its heels in the Sen- ate, they're lobbying their states' sen- ators ferociously totry to water down the bill's death sentence for the FFEL program. Senators should reform student loan policies. These firms tend to be concen- trated in a few states with loose banking laws, like Nebraska, where Democratic Senator Ben Nelson - yes, the same one who nearly stopped health care reform - has been press- ing on behalf of his constituents like Nelnet, a lending agency in Lincoln, Nebraska. Of course the Lincoln Journal Star noted in 2007 that Nel- net also received $278 million in sub- sidies of highly questionable legality. But since the firm donated heavily to Nelson and other Nebraska polls, that makes it okay, right? Delaware is another state with loads of private student lenders, like Sallie Mae. Not surprisingly, as The Hill, a newspa- per specializing in covering Congress reports, the state's two Senators, Democrats Ted Kaufman and Tom Carper, have also been lobbying to weaken the proposal. So Michigan students, roughly 14,000 of you took out federal loans last year, and about 3,400 received Pell Grants. Maybe it's time for.you to call your senators and remind them who they really represent - espe- cially if you are from Delaware or Nebraska. Help your fellow scholars out and get the Student Aid and Fis- I cal Responsibility Act of 2009 passed into law. -Patrick O'Mahen can be reached at pomahen@umich.edu. a EDITORIAL BOARD MEMBERS: Nina Amilineni, Jordan Birnholtz, William Butler, Nicholas Clift, Michelle DeWitt, Brian Flaherty, Jeremy Levy, Erika Mayer, Edward McPhee, Emily Orley, Harsha Panduranga, Alex Schiff, Asa Smith, Brittany Smith, Robert Soave, Radhika Upadhyaya, Laura Veith MICHIGAN VISION PARTY I A continued vision for MVP LETTERS TO THE EDITOR: Readers are encouraged to submit letters to the editor. Letters should be fewer 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. The waiting is the hardest part Last year, the Michigan Vision Party was formed by a group of students upset at the direc- tion of the Michigan Student Assembly. We were passionate about changing MSA to make it transparent, accountable and, moost impor- tant, focused on students. By asking the simple question, "What's your vision?," we were able to return ownership of the Assembly back to the students. This semester, that passion is back. After a year of leading the Assembly, the Michi- gan Vision Party has delivered on our vision. We've provided real results and real progress for the University community. What are our real results? We've put on big events for students like, "Go Blue, Beat OSU Week," and we will be putting on a major con- cert on campus next month. In addition, we've done smaller events to unite the student body and make MSA more visible. These include our weekly MSA Mondays on the Diag (with free bagels) and a Campus Leadership Colloquium for studentleaders. We've fought for students' rights. We've taken the lead in working with the University admin- istration to revise the Statement of Students' Rights and Responsibilities to better protect students and we are lobbying the state to pass a law providing amnesty to minors who take their intoxicated friends to the hospital. To further protect students, we've increased awareness of laptop,registration, nearly doubling the number of registered laptops, and are working to give students the right to elect fellow students to the Department of Public Safety Oversight Commit- tee. Most important, we have fought for more state funding for higher education to help lower our tuition. We've worked to make the everyday Univer- sity experience better. We've reformed MSA to make it focused on students and student issues. Last year, we heard from students that the gov- ernment wasn't working for the students. In response, the Michigan Vision Party led the push to restrict MSA business so that only stu- dent-related issues are addressed. Members of MVP also led and are now rolling out the most comprehensive reform to student government in decades by way of the proposed new constitu- tion, which will make student government more effective. Furthermore, we worked to increased diversity awareness on campus, improve the campus climate for student veterans and sought change on a host of other issues. Finally, student organization funding increased by 18 percent this past year, meaning that student organiza- tions have received more money than ever to put on the events that enhance the Michigan experi- ence. Our guiding focus is that the student voice be heard and that a student solution is enacted. What's our vision for the future? We plan on building on the progress of this year. We want to continue putting on large campus-wide events for students to enjoy. And with the departure of the founder of MSA's Airbus, which transports thousands of students to the airport each break, we want to revamp Airbus to make sure it lasts for future students to use. We also needeto continue fighting for students' rights. The fact is that the administration doesn't take students seriously right now, and we want to change that so student voices are always heard. To do this, we're committed to putting quality students at every level of the administration to stand up for students when decisions are made. This goes all the way upto the regent level, where we will push a state constitutional amendment fdr a student regent. It's a radical idea, but unless there's a student on the Board of Regents fighting for students, students will always lose. Finally, our executives fully endorse and understand the new Constitution, and, should it pass, they'll be ready to lead a new, efficient stu- dent government from day one. Our vision is to make the Michigan Student Assembly a place for students to make campus a better place. MSA should be a forum for students to express their visions, have their voices heard and expect real results. To us, that's real progress. Real Vision. Real Results. Real Progress. MVP has made sure that our vision reflects student concerns and that we have delivered solutions. People may tell you that MSA doesn't do anything, but our results show that isn't the case. MSA has become an effective medium for students under MVP's leadership. But there is always more work to be done, and we look for- ward to continuing the real progress we have already made., Don't be fooled. You'll hear a lot of prom- ises this election - that is common in politics. We're proud to say that we have done some- thing uncommon: actually delivered on our promises. This viewpoint was written by John Lin on behalf of the Michigan Vision Party. Jm a shameless policy dork. I love debating the issues that are confronting our society. I'm fascinated by the ideas ema- nating from the brightest minds of history and , the world today. I even can't resist entering sponta- neous arguments with those people on street cor- AL.EX ners demanding President Barack SCHIII Obama's impeach-_ anent because - as one passionate little fellow put it - "global warming is politician code for depopulating the world." And to think of the good ole' '90's - when the president was impeached for get- ting blowjobs from an intern. How silly that episode looks now! I mean seriously, blowjobs? Lame. Obama's gonna pull the plug on grandma! But I have a long, complicated and self-abusive love-hate relationship with politics. Following politics this past year has been a lot like watching the 2009 Michigan football team. A new pool of promising players comes in (Democratic takeover of Congress and the White House = Tate Forcier and other talented freshmen), a few early successes give us hope that we can really achieve something this year (Notre Dame = passage of stimulus bill) and then everything implodes and we realize nothing has changed (ending 1-7 = liberal Mas- sachusetts electing Republican Scott Brown to the U.S. Senate right before health care reform is about to be passed). The legislative process has ground to a sputtering halt. Congress is approaching Michigan Student Assembly levels of impotency - and that's where I draw the line. After a few early victories for Obama, something happened that made this country border on ungovernable. I think it was right around the time that Republicans realized that a lot of people actually believe the lies they spread about death panels and mandatory abortions. Obama put everything on hold for health care reform, and when health care reform stopped, so did the nation. I'm not just complaining about partisan gridlock because I live in some Michigan Daily idealist fanta- syland where reform is possible with the snap of Obama's fingers. This is about uncertainty. Right or wrong, Obama has plans to reform the health care, financial and energy-related sectors of the economy that collec- tively make up about a third of our gross domestic product (17.3 percent, 8.3 percent and 8.8 percent, respec- tively) based on the 2009, 2006 and 2006 statistics (the latest data avail- able), according to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, a study by Roubini Global Econom- ics and the U.S. Energy Information Administration respectively. That's an undeniably revolutionary change. But with Congress acting like a bunch of toddlers arguing over who took who's boo bear, the outcome of these reforms and, by extension, the long-term fundamental structure of our economy remains mired in pro- found uncertainty. This uncertainty - not the substance of Obama's pro- posals - is damaging any hope for economic recovery. America is just emerging from an economic downturn that featured an inflation-adjusted 34.2 percent decline in investment spending, according to the Bureau of Economic Analysis. As businesses regain their footing, they are unlikely to resume investment of normal levels amid such gross uncertainty. Pfizer won't invest in a new can- cer treatment when it doesn't know the fate of health care reform or how it will ultimately affect the industry. J.P. Morgan won't even think about giving out loans at a reasonable rate again until they know how financial reform will affect them, so business- es will remain starved of the credit they need to expand their operations and hire more workers. Clean energy companies won't invest in the tech- nologies of tomorrow when they don't know if the energy market will continue to impose no price on pollu- tion and greenhouse gas emission. In short, why would anyone invest in their future when they don't know what the rules are goingto be? Uncertainty is stalling progress from happening. Economies thrive on invest- ment. Any economist will tell you that investment today yields higher growth for tomorrow. But with leg- islation that has the potential to have so much impact stuck in limbo, businesses are hesitant to invest in new projects and entrepreneurs are unlikely to embark on new initia- tives - two principal sources of job growth. In the end, whether you agree with Obama's proposals or not, markets care a lot more about certainty than they do about the sub- stance of the policies themselves. Passing reform and alleviating the uncertainty afflicting the financial markets will be the best stimulus our economy could ever receive. Congress, get your act together and pass the reform America voted for when it put the Democrats in con- trol of government. If the American people truly don't like the ideas that they have put forward, they will vote the Democrats out in favor of people that will repeal their legislation and go in the opposite direction. That's how democracy works when it's functioning properly. - Alex Schiff is an assistant editorial page editor and can be reached at aschiff@umich.edu.