4A T Monday, March 12, 2012
The Michigan Daily - michigandaily.com . g
4A - Monday, March 12, 2012 The Michigan Daily - michigandailycom *
IRWI
Edited and managed by students at
the University of Michigan since 1890.
420 Maynard St.
Ann Arbor, MI 48109
tothedaily@michigandaily.com
ASHLEY GRIESSHAMMER
JOSEPH LICHTERMAN and ANDREW WEINER JOSH HEALY
EDITOR IN CHIEF EDITORIAL PAGE EDITORS 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.
Imran Syed is the public editor. He can be reached at publiceditor@michigandaily.com.
Stamp out smoking
Education, advocacy can stop tobacco epidemic
ver the past 20 years, youth smoking prevention has been
one of America's success stories. Across the country,
young people are taught smoking is unhealthy. But the
war against smoking is not over. According to the Surgeon Gen-
eral, 3,800 youth under the age of 18 smoke their first cigarette each
day. Youth smoking has recently become an epidemic and instead of
focusing on blame, the country needs to focus on tobacco use pre-
vention in the most effective ways possible.
From Russia with love
VYTEGRA, Russia -
While many of my peers
flocked south to get their
tan on this spring break,
I spent my time
in provincial
northwestern
Russia - a part
of the world not
often considered
a springtime ,
hotspot, and
rightly so. After
all, the weather DANIEL
in northern Rus- CHARDELL
sia this time of
year makes our
Michigan winters seem mildly cool
at worst.
A subzero temperature was just
one of many expectations that I
entertained as I set out for Russia.
Organized through the Univer-
sity's Center for Global and Intercul-
tural Study, the 10-day alternative
spring break excursion was intended
to give participants (about a dozen
undergrads, myself included) the
opportunity to experience the Rus-
sian provinces firsthand and to
witness the ambiguities that com-
prise Russian national identity -
the ambiguous position between
the European West and the Asian
East, between the status of former
superpower and a nation in decline,
between the urban modernity of
Moscow and St. Petersburg and the
rural backwardness of, well, just
about everywhere else.
The roads outside the city were
rough. We quickly found that the
bustling metropolis that is St.
Petersburg is the exception and that
miles upon miles of wilderness are
the norm.
You can't truly grasp the sheer
vastness of Russia until you spend
a day sitting in a chartered bus, tee-
tering along some long-neglected
highway, watching the breathtaking
landscape uniformly covered with
snow pass by outside your window
for hours on end. It was stark, but it
was beautiful.
This was where we spent most of
our time - in the towns and villages
located hours away from the Euro-
peanized St. Petersburg. This, some
would tell you, is the real Russia.
In addition to volunteer work in
local museums and public schools,
I was to conduct an independent
research project on provincial
attitudes toward the federal gov-
ernment and the then-ongoing pres-
idential election (obvious spoiler
alert: Putin won).
I planned on conducting inter-
views with local administrators
and townspeople, gathering some
information on the campaign and
then continuing on my way. But the
people whom I encountered on the
ground changed my outlook entirely.
In all of the villages, I was over-
whelmed by the generosity of the
individuals we met, young and old.
Local businesspeople enthusiasti-
cally sat down to speak with us.
Local officials were eager to dis-
cuss their new initiatives. Teachers
were thrilled to have native English
speakers visit their students. The
children were especially kind. As
we departed, they humbly handed
us small gifts - pictures they drew,
letters they wrote and crafts they
made. Some gave us their most
prized possessions, which they
insisted that we, their new Ameri-
can friends, take home as a reminder
of our new friendships.
In one memorable moment, an
older high school student asked me
what I thought about the U.S. mili-
tary. I told her that I believe in sup-
porting American troops, butI don't
believe in many of the wars that we
fight. She smiled, telling me in bro-
ken English that she agreed. She dis-
liked the American interventions in
the Middle East, but she didn't hold
my government's actions against me.
These kids deserve better. Their
schools are underfunded, opportu-
nities for employment are decreas-
ing and the government makes
sacrifices at the expense of young
people as opportunistic politicians
consolidate their own power.
I went to Russia with Putin, poli-
tics and protests on my mind. I left
10 days later thinking only of the
friendly students we'd met, the lives
they lead and the uncertain future
they face.
Putin's preordained victory
seemed insignificant in light of what
I'd seen. My research project seemed
trivial. I caught only a glimpse of
provincial northwestern Russia, but
I saw enough to know that there are
more important things - real issues
affecting real people - than a sham
of an election. Politics mean a lot, but
they aren't everything.
In political conversation, it's con-
venient to make blanket statements
- to say, for example, "the Russians"
when you really mean Putin, "the
Iranians" when you really mean
Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad,
and "the Israelis" when you really
mean Prime Minister Benjamin
Netanyahu and his majority Likud
Party. It's easy to forget that these
individuals don't necessarily speak
for all those under their author-
ity and that there is human depth
beyond the statements of the most
prominent few among them.
Behind the
generalizations
are diverse
opinions.
Whenyouhear talk of an abstract
"Russia" impeding the passage
of a UN Security Council resolu-
tion condemning the bloodshed in
Syria, know that this action rep-
resents the will and interests of an
infinitesimal fraction of individu-
als who occupy positions of power.
Their decisions do not mirror the
character of a single, cohesive Rus-
sian people. As in any country, pure
national solidarity does not exist.
Just as Americans would resent
outsiders presuming that there is
consensus among us and that we
passively support all government
policies and wars being waged, it's
worth bearing in mind that such
statements make complex realities
unrealistically simple.
Look past the obvious. Behind the
impossible generalizations, there
are millions of diverse opinions.
Behind the smokescreen, there are
innocent children for whom politi-
cal theater means little. Behind the
politics, there are very good, very
real people.
- Daniel Chardell can be
reached at chardell@umich.edu.
The Surgeon General released the latest
report on tobacco use last Thursday. Statistics
show that while the rate of youth smokers has
decreased, there is still a significant problem.
According to the report, 19.5 percent of high
school students are smokers - down from
the 27.5 percent reported in 1994. While the
improvement is good, it can be better. Of the
3,800 youth who smoke their first cigarette
each day, more than 1,000 of them become
daily users.
Smoking has huge economic costs to the
United States. According to the World Health
Organization, the main cost of smoking
comew from healthcare costs and loss of pro-
duction from smokers who aren't ableto work.
Treating lung, tongue, jaw and throat cancer
for dying smokers costs a lot of money, and
sometimes that money comes from taxpayers.
Smokers who are in the hospital or unable to
work are not contributing to society. Compa-
nies must find replacements or hire additional
workers, all at higher costs. Smoking preven-
tion is important to decrease these strains on
the economy.
In the past, educational smoking preven-
tion has worked well. The U.S. prides itself
on the degree to which smoking is discussed.
Schools and families have taken on the job
of educating the young about the dangers
of smoking. Programs such as Drug Abuse
Resistance Education support these goals and
help lower the amount of kids smoking. While
educational prevention must continue, there
are other options to consider. In Australia,
the government has passed a law stating that
in Dec. 2012, all cigarette boxes will be plain
green with health warnings covering the back
and the front. Brand names will only be print-
ed on the front, and logos or trademarks will
not be allowed. Australia is allowing market
forces to stop the sale of cigarettes. Lack of
advertisement on the boxes should discour-
age newcomers from buying them. Australia's
plan is cost effective and will effectively deter
people from purchasing cigarettes.
With the Surgeon General's announcement
that smoking needs to be stopped, the U.S.
should also stop its exportation of tobacco
products. The U.S. is the biggest exporter
of cigarettes to developing countries in the
world. It's hypocritical to put time and money
into decreasing smoking in the U.S. while
shipping the deadly substance to poorer coun-
tries. The U.S. should work to stop smoking all
over the world, not just at home.
While the U.S. had one of the most effec-
tive smoking prevention programs in the
world, our progress has stalled in the past
10 years. Smoking is a strain on the economy
and is bad for society. The U.S. should look
for more effective ways to end youth smoking
by following the lead of other countries and
increasing educational programs.
EDITORIAL BOARD MEMBERS:
Aida Ali, Kaan Avdan, Ashley Griesshammer, Nirbhay Jain, Jesse Klein, Patrick Maillet,
Erika Mayer, Harsha Nahata, Harsha Panduranga, Timothy Rabb, Adrienne Roberts,
Vanessa Rychlinski, Sarah Skaluba, Seth Soderborg, Caroline Syms, Andrew Weiner
MANISH PARIKH AND OMAR HASHWI
Saluting our adversaries
CONTRIBUTE TO THE COVERSATION
Readers are encouraged to submit letters to the editor and viewpoints. Letters should be fewer
than 300 words while viewpoints should be 550-850 words. Both must include the writer's full
name and University affiliation. Send submissions to tothedaily@michigandaily.com.
KYLE SMITH I
Focus on jobs, not re-election
Negative campaigning has been a hallmark
of politicalraces throughout history, with some
of the most well-documented cases coming
from various American presidential elections.
Colloquially referred to as "mudslinging,"
negative campaigning involves emphasizing
your opponents' negative characteristics and
weaknesses, rather than focusing on your own
positives and the serious issues at hand. In its
worst form, negative campaigning can involve
character defamation, slandering and even at
times racially primed political rhetoric - just
ask Thomas Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln and
John Quincy Adams.
In less than two weeks, students will cast
their votes in the most hotly contested and
competitive election in the recent history
of the Central Student Government at the
University of Michigan. With so many stake-
holders and candidates, it's easy for a few to
forget the values of integrity and fair play,
and indulge in mudslinging to gain political
dividends.
As the only independent candidates con-
testing the CSG presidency and vice presi-
dency, we, Manish Parikh and Omar Hashwi,
pledge we will not engage in mudslinging -
we will focus on the issues at hand. On our
part we will champion issues that the stu-
dents truly care about: A 24-hour cafe, cal-
endar reform, more concerts on campus and
greater engagement through social media.
Most importantly we will fight for what the
students truly want.
But in pursuingthis fight, and a victory, far
from criticizing and condemning our oppo-
nents,we salute them all. We had the pleasure
of interacting with each of them yesterday,
and would like to take this opportunity to
praise rather than criticize them:
To the Defend Affirmative Action Party, we
salute that you have made one single issue the
focus of your political party. It's commend-
able that you have always remained true to
this issue, and that each of you are contesting
this election because of a belief in this issue,
rather than political power.
To Shreya Singh, and YouMich: we had the
pleasure of making your acquaintance and
were humbled by your kindness and warmth.
The fact that you have involved so many
minorities in your party is commendable.
To our friends at the Students For Puppies
party, we can only say that we all love pup-
pies, that it would be great to have more pup-
pies on campus and that love for puppies and
other animals,with a disdain for cruelty to all
animals, is a noble cause - we hope you will
champion the latter.
To MForward, and Aditya Sathi, I congratu-
late you on winning the presidential nomina-
tion of MForward - no easy feat - and the
various issues you have tried solving over the
past few years.
Finally, to the newly formed OurMichigan
party, the cause you support, the Coalition
for Tuition Equality, is a noble one; we com-
mend you for championing the rights of the
less fortunate in society.
Which leaves us with... us. We sincerely
hope that you, the students, will give us your
vote come election day. Manish Parikh and
Omar Hashwi will nt wear suits and ties -
this is not the U.S. pi.sidential election - we
will not make tall and empty promises, we
will not work for our resumes and we will not
put any one before our students.
We are running as independents, because
we are not and never will be politicians. Man-
ish wants to become a social entrepreneur
someday, and Omar wants to become a doctor
and save lives. Simply put, we're candidates
who like to focus on the issues outlined in
our platform rather than the skeletons in our
opponents' closets.
We hope thatour opponents will follow our
lead in fair play and good conduct, and that
they will pledge to avoid slander and negative
campaigning at all costs. We love Jefferson,
but we'd like to refrain from his style of cam-
paigning by saluting our adversaries, and ask-
ing them to keep it classy.
Manish Parikh is a Businessjunior and CSG
presidential candidate, Omar Hashwi is an LSA
sophomore and CSG vice-presidential candidate.
Recently, campaign politics have unfortunately seemed
to take priority over job creation for President Barack
Obama. The president announced just several weeks ago
that he would not allow the construction of the Keystone
Pipeline Project, a transnational oil pipeline that would
have created more than 20,000 jobs and reduced our reli-
ance on oil from politically unstable nations. Even after
several local and state officials approved the project and
lobbied hard on its behalf, the president refused because
he didn't want to anger the special interest environmen-
tal groups that support him.
The Keystone XL Pipeline is a venture by the energy
company TransCanada to create a 1,700-mile pipeline
connecting an oil rich region of Alberta, Canada to U.S.
refineries in Texas. This projectis ahands-down win-win,
both creating badly needed construction jobs throughout
the Great Plains and providing the United States with
a greater percentage of oil from our northern neighbor.
In terms of job creation, this project is the definition of
"shovel-ready," with 20,000 jobs created almost immedi-
ately after the president signs the approval papers.
Upon completion of the project, analysts have specu-
lated that 700,000 new barrels of oil per day would flow
into the United States from Canada instead of being
shipped by tanker from the Middle East or Venezuela. In
the long term, BusinessWeek estimated that the pipeline
would have created an additional 500,000 U.S. jobs by
2035. However, because the president has denied con-
struction permits, those jobs will now likely end up in
Asia, as Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper is now
looking to China asa customer for this energy.
Obama initially delayed making a decision on the Key-
stone Project until 2013, asking for another environmen-
tal review that would conveniently conclude right after
the presidential elections. The Obama administration
has a history of delaying important policy until 2013.
Both the execution of Obamacare and the raising of the
debt ceiling are other important issues that the president
had attempted to punt past November in order to escape
the political consequences of poor policy. This time, the
president decided to play campaign politics again, costing
America 20,000 jobs, claiming the environmental conse-
quences were too great.
Obama's denial is confusing and unexpected mainly
because a three-year environmental review has already
taken place, and the project was given the go ahead.
The only thing that was delaying construction was the
fact that because the pipeline is transnational, the State
Department has to approve it, giving Obama the abil-
ity to sign the approval. The concern that the president
originally cited after the first environmental review was
the impact on an aquifer in Nebraska, which the pipeline
was planned to run through. Soon after the initial delay,
TransCanada offered to move the pipeline around the
aquifer, incurring significant additional costs, but the
president still refused to act.
The Keystone Pipeline pits two important sectors of
Obama's base, labor unions and environmental groups,
against each other, leading to a delicate political situation.
Instead of making the tough decisions, working through
the issue, and taking a small political hit for the guaran-
teed creation of 20,000 jobs, the president tried to stall
the decision for more than a year, beyond the presidential
election. His lack of action is keeping thousands of union
workers waiting at the shovel. It's ironic that Obama has
shot down this issue because he claims that job creation
is the centerpiece of his campaign.
In contrast to the president's pro-job rhetoric, howev-
er, he has repeatedlyused overblown environmental con-
cerns to stall energy endeavors all over the country. The
American people don't want to wait until it is politically
convenient for the president to make these simple choic-
es. The American people want jobs now, but the president
decided interest groups and lobbyists are more important
than the American worker, at least until 2013. Addition-
ally, in a time when our nation is strugglingto find energy
security, with hostile countries in the Middle East and
LatinAmericathreateningto obstructour oil supply, why
won't the president look to our friendly northern neigh-
bor for a safe, reliable source of energy instead?
After the initial delay of the project, Congressional
Republicans included a provision into the payroll tax
extension passed last year that forced the president to
either approve or deny the project in two months time.
House Republicans, and Speaker of the House John
Boehner in particular, took a major political defeat on the
payroll tax extension to force the president's action on
the Keystone Pipeline, taking the leadership necessary to
create jobs.
Congressional Republicans have done everything in
their power to create a business-friendly environment in
the energy sector, and gave the president another oppor-
tunity to approve the Keystone Pipeline in a timely man-
ner. Unfortunately, the president couldn't put economic
growth and the interests of many job-seeking Americans
over his own political agenda. Obama has consistently
stressed that jobs are priority number one, but when an
easy opportunity to create jobs fell into his lap, he put
special interests ahead of the American worker yet again.
Kyle Smith is an LSA Freslman and a member of
the University's chapter di College Republicans.
0
0