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