4 - Friday, October 19, 2012
The Michigan Daily - michigandaily.cam
4 - Friday, October19, 2012 The Michigan Daily - michigandailycom
4C Micigan 4a1*1
Edited and managed by students at
the University of Michigan since 1890.
420 Maynard St.
Ann Arbor, MI 48109
tothedaily@michigandaily.com
TIMOTHY RABB
JOSEPH LICHTERMAN and ADRIENNE ROBERTS ANDREW WEINER
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.
F R OM T HE D AILY
No need or speed
Prescriptions only for those that need them
dderall and similar prescription drugs have become promi-
nent on college campuses in the past several years - how-
ever, stimulants aren't just used by stressed and overworked
college students, but younger students as well. Recently, doctors have
prescribed children in low-income areas Adderall so they can get
ahead in school - whether they have ADHD or not. Doctors falsely
diagnose children who struggle in school and prescribe them medica-
tion as a coping mechanism. Adderall is a quick but dangerous fix to
the larger problem of underfunded and low-performing school dis-
tricts, and it's not the way to improve low-income districts' test scores.
Haven Hall hate crime
There's been a lot of misin-
formation and confusion
on this campus regarding
the vandalism
in Haven Hall
on Monday, Oct.
8. So let me help
clear the air.
It was a hate
crime.
Don't believe
me? Let's go
straight to the YONAH
source. From LIEBERMAN
the FBI: "A
hate crime, also
known as a bias crime, is a criminal
offense committed against a person,
property, or society that is moti-
vated, in whole or in part, by the
offender's bias against a race, reli-
gion, disability, sexual orientation,
or ethnicity/national origin." Seems
clear enough.
Let's rewind a bit and go over
exactly what happened in Haven
Hall. In the wee hours of the night,
either one person or a group of peo-
ple went through all of the floors of
Haven Hall and intentionally tore
down flyers and personal effects
outside offices of GSIs, profes-
sors and department heads in Arab
American Studies, Native American
Studies, African American Studies
and Women's Studies. The items
torn down had to do primarily with
ethnic and gender studies, as well as
flyers promoting LGBT groups and
other progressive causes. People
don't just wander around the upper
floors of Haven Hall - this was an
intentional act targeted at ethnic
studies departments.
Even more maddening than the
disgusting act itself was the com-
plete lack of response by our com-
munity. There was no DPS crime
alert. It took three days for a cam-
pus-wide e-mail to be sent out by
University Provost Phil Hanlon.
Most people heard about it via
Facebook, a forwarded e-mail or
word of mouth. This is completely
unacceptable for a university that
has the "deepest respect for diver-
sity" according to Hanlon's e-mail.
The University community should be
embarrassed by the delayed response.
More so than even the lack of
response, the type of response infu-
riates me. The first official line from
the University came in an article in
The Michigan Daily about graduate
students who took it upon them-
selves to re-flyer the area in pro-
test. University spokesman Rick
Fitzgerald is quoted as saying, "Our
understanding is that (the DPS)
investigation determined that the
incident was not hate-related ... that
said, we certainly understand that
many people would still be con-
cerned about this type of incident
happening on our campus."
In other words: There was no
intentional discrimination, but
we're sorry if you felt that way.
The tone changed a bit the next
day in Provost Hanlon's e-mail. He
wrote that "Posters, flyers and deco-
rationswere removed from the walls
and tossed to the ground, and some
had push-pins placed on them," but
refused to categorize these items as
related to race, gender or sexuality.
Without that crucial specificity, the
average student has no idea of the
oppressive implications of the act.
He continued, "This act of
destruction and intolerance is not
Michigan." While I appreciate
labeling the hate crime as intoler-
ant, this is clearly not far enough.
The words "hate" or "bias" are not
mentioned once in the e-mail. He
attempts to tie the entire response
back to the idea that Michigan is a
diverse community. By doing so,
Hanlon and the administration are
shoving this hate crime under the
rug by asserting that the perpetra-
tors don't occupy the mainstream
Michigan community.
But this is simply not true -
there's more to the story. Our
campus is not the integrated, open-
minded, magical place the admin-
istration would like to portray it as.
The University
needs to call a
spade a spade.
4
During move-in this fall, some-
one hung a noose in a Mary Markley
Residence Hall where only one black
student lived. The Reflection Room
- located on the first floor of Angell
Hall and intended as a space for Mus-
lim students to pray - was defaced
twice in the pastyear. Our University
grossly underfunds the same eth-
nic studies departments that were
targeted last week. These are just
three examples, but the list is much
longer. To get a glimpse of the issue,
read the Daily personal statement
published last week, "Being Black
in Ann Arbor," which pointed to the
constant pressure that blackstudents
face in our community.
Our administration must change
its tune when it responds to future
incidents of this nature. It must be
proactive instead of reactive to such
incidents. Instead of painting the
perpetrators as "bad apples," our
administration must own up to the
fact that such hate crimes are an
extension of the forms of discrimi-
nation that people across campus
deal with every day.
It can start by admitting that the
vandalism in Haven Hall was a hate
crime.
-Yonah Lieberman can be
reached at yonahl@umich.edu.
In Canton, Ga., Dr. Michael Anderson diag-
noses lower-income children with ADHD and
prescribes them stimulants. But Anderson
places the blame on the economic status of the
students rather than the disease itself; indeed,
he considers the prescriptions he writes an
evening of the scales. According to Anderson,
society hasn'tspentthe time or the money to fix
the real problem, so these stimulants give some
lower-income children a boost they wouldn't
otherwise receive. Parents reportedly don't
object, but rather support the quick fix.
The prescription of Adderall to children
without ADHD creates numerous issues, pri-
marily the negative side effects. Basic side
effects are loss of appetite and insomnia, but
there are other, potentially dangerous, com-
plications. These include irregular heartbeat,
high blood pressure, severe headaches, hal-
lucinations and psychotic episodes - a psy-
chological effect one of Anderson's young
patients experienced. Many who regularly
take Adderall also develop a dependency on
the medication. Any growing child should not
be subjected to this addictive and dangerous
drug during crucial developmental periods.
These false diagnoses also discredit real
cases of ADHD, taking away from students
who actually do have the disorder and
require the medication to keep up in school.
Parents certainly want their kids to succeed,
but that requires hard work to overcome bar-
riers, not a prescription pad. It's true that
many children in low-income areas struggle
with a unique set of circumstances; however,
parents should attempt to wrestle with these
problems to the best of their abilities before
endangering their children with unneces-
sary medication. This "solution" effectively
accommodates under-performing school dis-
tricts instead of dealing with the underlying
administrative issues that cause this dispar-
ity. Giving these children Adderall may help
them in school, but it does nothing to address
the larger issue at hand. We need to treat the
schools' ailments - not the children's.
EDITORIAL BOARD MEMBERS
Kaan Avdan, Shank Bashir, Eli Cahan, Nirbhay Jain, Jesse Klein, Melanie Kruvelis,
Patrick Maillet, Harsha Nahata, Timothy Rabb, Adrienne Roberts,
Vanessa Rychlinski, Sarah Skaluba, Michael Spaeth, Gus Turner
Abolish race-based standards
NOTABLE QUOTABLE
The Supreme Court uses certain factors to decide whether a
new classification qualifies as a quasi-suspect class ... In this
case, all four factors justify heightened scrutiny."
- Chief Judge Dennis Jacobs of Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in New York on
the court finding the Defense of Marraige Act puts unconstitutional burden on LGBT Americans.
DAR-WEI CHEN ( VIEWPOINT
An swer to the jobs dilemma
4
a
think of society as a progressive, evolv-
ing place - a community that cherishes
individual differences, supports every
student and fosters pas-
sionate learning. How-
ever, it takes just a few
minutes of watching the
morning news or scan-
ning the paper to quickly
realize that our nation
isn't emblematic of this
little utopian community
we call Ann Arbor.
As University students,
we're fortunate to attend a
fabulous school that holds
dents into groups based on their ethnicity and
then creating set standards for each ethnic
group is hurting the next generation of lead-
ers and scholars. By implementing race-based
standards, Florida public schools are, in a way,
teaching children that they are only as intelli-
gent as the color of their skin. They're teach-
ing these young students that achievement at
school should vary by ethnicity rather than
work ethic.
SARAH
SKALUBA Reading standards
based on ethnicity are
us to the highest standards and pushes us to
succeed beyond our limits, but many students
across the nation can't say the same. Just last
week, the Florida Board of Education approved
new reading and math standards that vary
according to ethnicity. It's not a system based
on age, grade level or even school district, but
an achievement system based solely on race.
Not only is this demeaning, but it will also
shatter the self-confidence and motivation of
young students all across Florida.
The Florida Board of Education is striving
for 74 percent of black students, 81 percent of
Hispanic students, 88 percent of white stu-
dents and 90 percent of Asian students to be
reading at or above grade level by 2018. No, I
didn't fabricate these numbers, and I most cer-
tainly couldn't tell you what in the world the
board was thinking. Maybe the sunny weather
has altered their minds, but to create a system
that's so backwards and obsolete is incompre-
hensible.
The implications of these race-based goals
will be devastating to young students across
the state - all 2.6 million of them. The Florida
public school system is clearly flawed and in
dire need of change, but creating a system like
this isn't the way to go about fixing it. Instead
of holding children to different standards
based on the color of their skin, we should be
working to reform the educational system as a
whole so that 100 percent of students will be
reading at or above grade level.
All children, regardless of race, should
have the right to a solid education - this idea
should not be controversial. Classifying stu-
detrimental to young
students.
Florida was actually notthe first state to cre-
ate achievement standards based on race: Vir-
ginia implemented a similar program earlier
this year and other states may soon follow suit.
We live in an era that values personal freedom
and equal opportunity. However, concepts like
this one move our society backward in time
and further divide us as a community.
Will separate achievement standards based
on gender be next? Say, 80 percent of boys need
to be reading at or above grade level and only
70 percent of girls? The whole concept is just
ridiculous. If legitimate solutions cannot be
created to fix these flawed school systems, our
society has avery serious problem on its hands.
The education of young Americans needs to be
a top priority, but breaking down standards by
race certainly isn't the answer.
If students are taught at a young age that
they will never be as smart or successful as
their classmates because of any social identity,
then this negative concept is bound to follow
them to college and beyond. Such a dangerous
concept will only hurt our society and hin-
der talented young students from taking full
advantage of their education and striving to be
the best students possible.
- Sarah Skaluba can be reached
at sskaluba@umich.edu.
In politics, very few questions
have "right" answers. Much of
this ambiguity comes from endless
spinning that both major political
parties engage in to win 24-hour
news cycles. Even statistics aren't
useful in clarifying anything
because politicians of conflicting
beliefs can assess the same situ-
ation and deploy data to advance
their own causes. One example
of this phenomenon is the debate
over jobs: GOP presidential hopeful
Mitt Romney says unemployment
has been above eight percent for 43
straight months under the current
administration (until the Septem-
ber jobs report came out), while
President Barack Obama claims
there have been "31 straightmonths
of private-sector job growth."
Same situation, two starkly differ-
ent assessments, neither wrong!
Sometimes, the only right
answers that Democrats and
Republicans seem to agree on are:
A. always praise the troops, and B.
offering prayers to disaster victims.
However, these two ideas are obvi-
ous and not worth discussing.
Therefore, to find some useful
right answers, we must look past
combative words and fluffy rhetoric
to carefully examine what politi-
cians actually do. And although few
answers in politics are definitively
right, you can get pretty close to a
right answer by seeing what Demo-
crats and Republicans agree on when
they're away from the debate lec-
terns. A good case study for across-
the-aisle agreement is President
Obama's stimulus bill, one of his first
major pieces of economic legislation.
The Obama stimulus bill has
been pilloried in public by Repub-
licans for the past few years, and
these attacks are in keeping with a
chief tenet of modern conservatism:
The government is inept at creating
jobs. As Romney said earlier this
year, "Government doesn't create
jobs. It's the private sector that cre-
ates jobs." Most GOP congressmen
would agree with Romney if pub-
licly asked about this statement.
But what happens when those
same GOP congressmen have to
govern? In July 2009, Senate Minor-
ity Leader Mitch McConnell - one
of the GOP's many Obama stimu-
lus critics - applied for up to $235
million from the stimulus to invest
in electric vehicles for Kentucky,
the state he represents. His appli-
cation, which had to be approved
by Energy Secretary Steven Chu, is
a tacit admission that the govern-
ment is able to create jobs through
economic stimulus. McConnell even
states in his memo: "I hope you will
realize the importance of such job
creation to Kentucky."
Current Republican vice-presi-
dential nominee Paul Ryan has also
derided the Obama stimulus over the
years, but he too is guilty of pursu-
ing money from the very stimulus he
condemns. In October 2009, Ryan
asked Chu to approve a geothermal
project for a company in Ryan's home
state of Wisconsin. Apparently, he
believes that government stimulus
can create jobs for his constituents.
And many GOP congressmen actu-
ally agree with him (quite a few of
them have applied for money too) -
just not in public.
Since stimulus money is a finite
resource, congressmen not only
have to apply for it, they have to
make specific and compelling cases
to the White House regarding the
money's job-creation potential.
Therefore, when GOP congress-
men simultaneously rail against
the stimulus and apply for funding,
they must know that they're being
dishonest and hypocritical. Ryan
and McConnell would find more
friends across the aisle if they sim-
ply admitted to the stimulus bill's
virtues. After all, they've lobbied
explicitlytothat end -just ask Chu.
Ofcourse, Republicans have often
championed the government's abil-
ity to create jobs in defense (that's
why they're always against defense
cuts), so government job creation is
not without evidence. But they're
never willing to publicly admit that
government could extend its job-
creating capacity to other economic
sectors. Somehow, FDR's New Deal
isn't a relevant precedent.
Some conservatives might argue
that regardless of rhetoric, the
Obama stimulus was implemented
and hasn't produced adequate jobs. !
I won't contest the notion that the
economic recovery has been some-
what sluggish. However, since we
now know that both Democrats
and Republicans believe in govern-
ment job creation, the public needs
to consider the possibility that
the stimulus wasn't large enough,
instead of the theory that govern-
ment cannot create jobs. Nobel
Prize-winning economist Paul
Krugman has critiqued the Obama
stimulus in this way, stating that
while the president has passed a
"somewhat disappointing economic
plan," at least "a third of a loaf is
better than none." Krugman also
contends that the Obama stimulus
was watered down by unnecessary
tax cuts, and I think we all know
which party pushed for those reck-
less cuts. Imagine what a whole loaf
of stimulus would have done and
imagine how excited (albeit secret-
ly) McConnell and Ryan would be
about more economic stimulation.
My main motive here is not to
demagogue Republican economic
policy, but to assert that Keynesian
economics is alive and well in both
parties. We may never know exact-
ly what the right answers are to
our country's most pressing issues,
but when both sides agree on an
answer, that agreement might be as
close as we get. Let's move forward
from there.
Dar-Wei Chen is a University alum
and a former columnist for the Daily.
WANT THE DAILY ON THE GO?
Now you can access your favorite Daily opinion content on your phone.
Check out the Daily's mobile website at m.michigandaily.com.
A