4 - Tuesday, March 12, 2013 The Michigan Daily - michigandaily.com 4 - Tuesday, March 12, 2013 The Michigan Daily - michigandailycom Iie it cdigan & atl MAGGIE MILLER E-MAIL MAGGIE AT MAGATHOR@UMICH.EDU MAGGIE MILLER E-MAiL MACClEAT MAGATHOR@UMICH.EDU Edited and managed by students at the University of Michigan since 1890. 420 Maynard St. Ann Arbor, MI 48109 tothedaily@michigandaily.com MELANIE KRUVELIS and ADRIENNE ROBERTS MATT SLOVIN EDITORIAL PAGE EDITORS MANAGING EDITOR Ha9ve I4ovw WA' ...... 1 r ~ lUfe 1 " ter, r t,. w ANDREW WEINER EDITOR IN CHIEF 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. Scoring the scorecard White House tool is a good step, but incomplete and misleading On Feb. 13 the Obama administration unveiled the College Scorecard, an online program aimed at assisting prospec- tive college students by reviewing the financial aspects of a college education. This online tool compares net prices, graduation rates, loan default rates and median borrowing. Though the College Scorecard is a step in the right direction in that it serves to make colleges more transparent and accountable by publicizing student debt load and financial difficulties post-graduation, it fails to con- sider in-state and out-of-state tuition differences, as well as long- term student success. Femnaysayers no more The Scorecard calculates the net price of a college education as what an undergraduate student pays for tuition after grants and schol- arships have been subtracted from the cost of attendance. Also included in the online tool is the graduation rate of the university, which is the percentage of first-time, full-time students who graduate within six years - leaving trans- fer students and adults completely out of the picture. Additionally, there's a tab for employ- ment that is supposed to give information on average earnings post-graduation, though this is a work in progress. The College Scorecard in its entirety is a centralized place where students and parents can compare colleges financially, establishing a platform for the ultimate college search. Uni- versities can be sorted by interest, major, loca- tion orscholarship. Costs and default rates can be compared to the national average, as well as across colleges. It is ultimately building a "shopping sheet" that also provides a link to each college's individual price calculator for a more in-depth estimate. The tool highlights financial data but fails to present it in a way that allows for a healthy comparison. The average net price of atten-. dance and median borrowing is misleading - there's simply not enough statistical infor- mation, such as standard deviation or the cost of living, that would form a more exhaustive report. The median and average values don't account for the high and low numbers that may have accumulated at any end of a range and vary college to college. Furthermore, the data used to put this online tool together is a few years old, and it's still uncertain how often this information will be updated. While the financial information is a prior- ity for many prospective college students, it puts too much emphasis on finances and not enough emphasis toward other crucial aspects of a university education. Important deter- minants like learning outcomes, student sat- isfaction and quality of education are left out of the equation. The numbers may dismiss a student from attending a college that may be an excellent fit. Moreover, it incentivizes stu- dents to regard attending college only as an investment that will increase future income and deter them from focusing on intellectual development. This effort by the Department of Education is praiseworthy, but can be made even better. Picture a feminist. Sounds easy, but it shouldn't be. Some of them have hairy legs. Some of them shave. Some of them are female. Some of them are male. Some of them march around cam- pus in a parade chanting, "Take KATIE back the night." STEEN Some of them mention the word "feminist" only when shrouded in the online company of Tumblr users. Some of them don't even know how to define the word "feminism." Some of them don't even know they're a feminist at all. Feminism is tricky. Its definition is elusive and varies for everyone. But tell people you're a feminist, and more often than not they'll start to get nervous or defensive. A lot of people avoid feminism, without even knowing what it is. The what-is-a-feminist debate was sparked anew by Marissa Mayer, the chief atYahoo!. Recently she has gar- nered a lot of attention from her ban on working from home. This is after, of course, she built her own private nursery in her office after having a baby and taking a two-week mater- nity leave. But before she sent a mes- sage that essentially said maternity leaves are for chumps - just bring your nursery to work - she offered this message, which actually came from her mouth: "I don't, I think, have sort of the militant drive and the sort of, the chip on the shoulder that sometimes comes with (feminism). And I think it's too bad, but I do think feminism has become, in many ways, a more negative word." Here's the deal: "Feminism" hasn't become a negative word; it has been made that way by the peo- ple who, to put it simply, don't want equality for women. Taking away the credibility and significance of the label has actively worked to take away the credibility and sig- nificance of feminism itself for gen- erations. And the reason feminism continues tobe a "negative" word is because people like Mayer - people with power and capital - are rein- forcingits bad reputation. If she thinks it's too bad that feminism has such a piss-status, why doesn't she try to change that instead of just joining the ranks of femi-naysayers who have been ridi- culing the cause for years in order to maintain their own privilege and derail the fight for equal rights? The thing about feminism is that it doesn't use privilege as an excuse. "Well, if I made it to CEO status, and I can take a two-week mater- nity leave, and I have enough money to build a nursery in my office, then I don't see what the problem is for you. See - women have the abil- ity and rights to do this!" Nope, not everyone can say the same. Yes, many of the "battles have been won" for women like Mayer. But that doesn't mean everyone is on the same playing field as she is. Women around the world have nowhere near the amount of free- dom and rights that people like Mayer have. This isn't a "chip on the shoulder" after years of hearing bullshit jokes like "you throw like a girl" or "go make me a sandwich." It's rape, domestic abuse, under- payment, harassment and voter suppression. It's all the fear, shame and humiliation that can come with being born a female, as well as all of the failure to be taken seriously with the label of"feminist." Some people might need femi- nism more than others, and it's a shame that such a powerful woman like Mayer doesn't realize this. People who question the label of "feminist" tend to argue that femi- nism is losing its place in our society, that we have made enough advance- ments as is. To me, this is the same mentality that once allowed women to attend the University but refused to let them enter through the front door of the Union. Instead, women had to use the back door of the building. Did it make a huge dif- ference that women couldn't enter through the front door? Probably not. But it said something about who is granting what freedom to whom, and how much freedom is being granted. It's minor stipula- tions like this that say, "Well, jeez, we've given you these rights - don't push it. Just be thankful for what you've got." People will avoid feminism without even knowing what it is. Feminists don't want to take away men's rights, just like women who wanted to enter through the front door of the Union didn't want to prevent men from going through the damn door. They weren't concerned about limiting men's access - they wanted equal access themselves. And still today in our society, not everyone has equal access. When potential role models like Mayer send a message that feminism is no longer necessary, that it's become just a "chip on the shoulder," they are falling into a complacency marked by self-privilege while also actively working to not increase the rights and freedom of women who do not benefit from the same access that Mayer has. Being a feminist means solidar- ity with all women, not just the ones who can afford private nurseries. - Katie Steen can be reached at katheliz@umich.edu. 0 0 EDITORIAL BOARD MEMBERS Kaan Avdan, Sharik Bashir, Barry Belmont, James Brennan, Eli Cahan, Jesse Klein, Melanie Kruvelis, Maura Levine, Patrick Maillet, Aarica Marsh, Megan McDonald, Jasmine McNenny, Harsha Nahata, Adrienne Roberts, Paul Sherman, Sarah Skaluba, Michael Spaeth, Luchen Wang, Derek Wolfe ELIZABETH DENGATE | Cultivating our sustainability Last Friday, I walked through a green- house. It was full of students laughing and talking as they buried seeds into rich soil and watered tiny green seedlings. I heard stu- dents introducing themselves to fellow class- mates they would have otherwise never met as they learned what tiny pepper plants look like and how many different kinds of lettuce there are. Until very recently, this scene would have only been found.at Yale University, at Michi- gan State University, at Duke University, but not at the University of Michigan. Here at Michigan, there was no large university-wide option for students to come together over growing food, to bond over pepper plants, or to learn what produce looks like before it's bound up under the lights at the supermarket or on the buffet line in their dining hall. If students learned about food at all - food, the stuff we enjoy and talk over and depend on for our survival every day, the topic that creates a common thread between all peoples, com- munities and our environment - it was in a theoretical sense, such as in a classroom or outside of school entirely in a student group. Those student groups, I hasten to add, such as Cultivating Community, Outdoor Adventures Garden Project and many others are doing outstanding and inspiring work. But this is changing. Until last year, we were one of very few of our peer schools with- out a campus farm. That scene I described took place in the greenhouse that is here on University property on a workday for the new campus farm. This is a new era, and there is real potential for the University to become a victor in the field of sustainable food. So many things are pushing us in that direction, such as the clear goals for food sustainability set out in the University's Integrated Assess- ment, the new Food Systems faculty cluster hire in progress, the nearly-a-dozen gradu- ate and undergraduate student groups work- ing on issues related to food and agriculture and the new courses with food components springing up every semester. Created lastyear, the UM Sustainable Food Program seeks to harness and organize that energy and the campus farm to create a place where theory and talk can find physical out- let in the hands-on and community-building work of actually growing food. These pro- grams have come far in the past year. Our goals of creating a community around food, of providing a new kind of experiential edu- cation for students and of providing fresh, healthy, local produce are already being real- ized in many ways. But momentum is lost when it's not sup- ported. The ball stops rolling when it has no clear path. And programs falter when there is no clear leadership. Until now, this initiative has been student-led, with advice and support from faculty and staff. In order for the UM Sustainable Food Program and campus farm to endure, to bring real food, true sustainabil- ity, fresh community and creative education to the University, we need to institutionalize this program. The University can prove itself in the field of sustainability, but it needs to do so by putting its money where its mouth is and devoting a full-time staff member to the management of this program and farm. Let's meet the challenge of our peer schools. Let's go beyond talk. Let's bringsustainable food to campus and create a future where our dining halls boast sourcing from our own campus farm, where students make new friends over harvesting their own lunch, and where stu- dents, faculty, staff and members of the com- munity can come together over one thing we all love to talk about: food. The time is now. If we wait to act, the momentum dies. Let's do what it takes to make this future a reality. Elizabeth Dengate is a Rackham student. An obstructive move can't imagine standing up at a podium for 13 hours, par- ticularly on a national stage like the Senate floor. In such cases, one might think of "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington." I'm curious to know what was going through Sen. Rand Paul's PAUL (R-Ky.) mind as SHERMAN he conducted an actual talk- ing filibuster for not one, but 13 hours, during which he questioned whether or not the president has the power to kill a U.S. citizen on U.S. soil. It wasn't enough to break Sen. Strom Thurmond's record of more than 24 hours, but it was impressive nonetheless. It was refreshing to hear his rea- soning behind the filibuster. In an op-ed in The Washington Post ear- lier this week, he said he "wanted to sound an alarm bell from coast to coast. I wanted everybody to know that our Constitution is precious and that no American should be killed by a drone without first being charged with a crime." It appears, for once, that a senator was trying to push an issue that he really cares about. Today, the filibuster has rarely been used in this manner, as it has been used solely as a tool for obstruct- ing the political process. The Sen- ate must reform the filibuster, since it blocks the passage of meaningful legislation ina timely manner. Before World War I, the use of the filibuster was quite rare. Today, fili- busters have been used much more regularly. Until 1971, the number of cloture motions - the vote to end a filibuster - that were filed remained below 10. However, between 1971 and 1972, that number increased to 24. From 2009 to 2010, 137 cloture motions were filed. Throughout this period, both Democrats and Repub- licans have invoked the filibuster, increasing its use during both the Bush and Obama administrations. Since the filibuster can only be ended by a supermajority vote, the procedure allows minorities to stall legislation without even having to speak. This has made it easier for the lowest ranking members of the Senate to hold up a bill even if it has majority support. As Sen. Jeff Merk- ley (D-Ore.) has said in a resolution, the silent filibuster has become "an instrument of partisan politics." In recent years, the filibuster has been used solely as a roadblock instead of as a tool to raise important questions about legislation or nomi- nations.The destructive nature ofthe filibuster has been furthered mainly by the creation of the dual-track sys- tem. This system allows the majority leader, with unanimous consent or approval of the minority leader, to set aside the filibustered legislation and move on to another issug. There are no consequences for senators, so they can continue to use it as an obstacle without any concerns. In terms of solutions, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has been working to pass filibuster reform with Minority Leader Mitch McConnell. Senators Tom Udall (D-N.M.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) and Tom Harkin (I-Iowa) have also been working on another plan. How- ever, neither of these proposals will be adequate. The Senate, first of all, needs to provide the parties with incentives to not filibuster. To do this, they should replace the silent filibuster with the talking filibuster and eliminate the dual-track system. Invoking the fili- buster should have consequences to the senator initiatingthe process. Filibusters are a destructive roadblock. In addition, there are two other ideas that have received less atten- tion but could each have a dramatic positive impact. A cap on the num- ber of filibusters that can be used by each party during a session of Con- gress would provide discipline to the process, ensuring that only key issues are blocked. Eliminating the supermajority vote to end a filibus- ter would also be productive solu- tion. Democratic Sen. Al Franken, for example, has suggested that the minority should be forced to get 40 votes to continue a filibuster. Until the Senate passes a solution, the filibuster will continue to act as a stopgap for vital legislation. What once was intended to give a voice to minorities has become a major tool for policy gridlock. According to Ezra Klein of The Washington Post, Paul's filibuster was an example of a "rare and unusual effort to ... draw attention to a senator's very real concerns on a very serious issue." Hopefully, that can become more of a reality in the future. - Paul Sherman can be reached at pausherm@umich.edu. CHECK US OUT ONLINE Keep up with columnists, read Daily editorials, view cartoons and join in the debate. Check out.@michdailyoped and Facebook.com/Michigan Daily to get updates on Daily opinion content throughout the day. A