4A - Monday, April 7, 2014 The Michigan Daily - michigandaily.com 4A - Monday, April 7, 2014 The Michigan Daily - michigandailycom SMdgan BIly Edited and managed by students at the University of Michigan since 1890. 420 Maynard St. Ann Arbor, MI 48109 tothedaily@michigandaily.com MEGAN MCDONALD PETER SHAHIN and DANIEL WANG KATIE BURKE 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. Credit where credit is due University policy on transfer credit will help students economically The Newnan Academic Advising Center sent out an e-mail Wednesday informing LSA students of a new transfer credit policy that allows all students, regardless of class standing, to transfer credits earned at a community college starting this Spring Term. This policy eliminates a previous rule that only permitted students with fewer than 60 credits to transfer community college credit. In light of this new policy, students with more than 60 credits, who are of junior or senior standing, can now transfer credits from a community college. The change is a positive move because it helps lower economic barriers to higher education and allows for greater schedule flexibility without diminishing the quality of a degree earned at the University. Modeled off of the essay "Interstellar" by Rebecca McClanahan. To be the daughter of a beautiful, older woman is to sit down in the memory of your childhood attic, your hands running fin- SOPHIA gered question USOW marks around the edges of an old photograph. The lady in the picture stretches her arms into third position, neck arched with a grace you've never experienced (you with your stout soccer thighs and your penchant for the hunch). Not that you've ever tried to stand any differently, really. When she signs you up for ballet class in kindergarten you beg to be relieved of the aching pain of toe touches and pas de bourrles. You hate her for forcing you to leave the quiet wonder of the backyard, where you have been painstakingly construct- ing homes for ice fairies out of ici- cles and snowy thumbprints. You'll call her fat and ugly when you fight, tell her that you don't love her, but let her fold you into her arms when you cry. Her softness, the very thing that makes you embarrassed when she picks you up from school, is what comforts you, what lulls your shaking body into a slumber, head like a warm stone against the skin-smooth cradle of her breast. Your mom struggles to draw an audience to her shows. This isn't a town for modern dance. You are dragged to all her suitcase full of boo much attention to the pride in her fac her work fall into t young - recent c and talented immig wan, the Philippine never imagine that one on the stage; and collapsing likea released on a breath The pictures in, that story, though i decade to believe it young and beautifu a news anchor, ant star. Sometimes sh and wonderfulc nails and a flowere blue veil and leota picture of her smo lips half-parted and fixed on a phantoi (another man? It couldn't be your father.). She never smokes now, just a Corona or glass of wine with dinner. When did she become so bor- ing? you wonder to yourself. You never pause to consider that your the reason, that itu the hole in your and let the smallc the wrinkles spreac You tell her you thi weird. You don't bri to her shows, don flyers she gives you settle at the botts Ian rehearsals like a heavier than the guilt you brush ks, never paying off when she asks you about them the worry and later. Yeah, a couple people said they e when she sees might go. *he bodies of the Her talent survives your betrayal. ollege graduates More than 15 years later, you watch grants from Tai- her smile and wave to the audience s and Cuba. You from under the blinding lights of the she once was the stage, thanking you and your father spinning, rising for always being there, always sup- a dandelion floret porting her. She has taken her com- of Chicago wind. pany across the country and beyond the attic hint at its borders: Mexico, Cubaand maybe t will take you a Germany in the next couple years. In them she's as Her body of work is larger and older Il as a babysitter, than you, her achievements greater old-timey movie and begotten with more sacrifice e wears strange than you can ever imagine, may even costumes: long ever accomplish yourself. At the age d headdress or a of 62 she still radiates an almost rd. You find one childish beauty - eyes the blue of king on a train, Superior and cheekbones high and I eyes unsmiling, cut from the ore of Iron River. She m photographer is bottle blonde, but it could be natu- ral, she could be much younger, how did you not Her softness, the see it until now? Thewoman in very thing that you're the pictures still embarrassed ofis dances in time 1 with an unheard what comforts you. music, still one- two-three's and plucks the hearts right out of the chests of might have been whoever dares watch. You want to ras you who tore drag the whole world to her shows, mother's beauty want to sit the President down and dignities escape, pop in a VHS tape of her spinning, d, the air deflate. spinning, spinning - all the nk her dancing is while holding you, protecting you ing many friends from yourself. The previous policy was initially implemented with the logic that upperclassmen shouldn't be able to receive credit from community colleges because they teach first- and second-year courses. However, Tim Dodd, director of the Newnan Academic Advising Center, contended that juniors and seniors aren't prevented from taking and receiving credit for 100- and 200-level courses here at the University - so allowing more transfer credit flexibility was essentially harmless. This new policy helps level the playing field for students of upper-level standing that need to take courses off campus but can't afford to pay for the more expensive credit costs of a four-year university. This spring, in-state credits for part-time students cost $690 for the first credit and $510 for every additional credit while out-of-state credits cost $1,825 for the first credit and $1,645 for every additional credit at the University according to the Office of the Registrar. The typical community college credit is much cheaper. For example, in-district students at Oakland Community College pay $76.40 per credit and resident students at Schoolcraft College pay $90 per credit. Furthermore, itallows students to stay at home over the summer and take classes, rather than paying for housing in Ann Arbor. Accordingto a U.S. Department ofEducation profile of 2007-08 first-time bachelor's degree recipients, which included full-time as well as part-time students, it took an average of six years and four months to obtain a bachelor's degree. For any number of reasons, it can be hard for students to graduate in four years. This can lead to an increase in education costs and delays in career plans. Many students have to work their way through school and others are working toward dual degrees. Managing their time and credits can be hard without taking classes over the summer. The greater flexibility this policy provides can help students earn their degree ina more timely manner and start paying offtheir student loans. Transferred community college credits are still subject to approval by the University, so the quality of a University degree will not decline as aresultofthis policy; the onlything that really changes is how long a student can take advantage of community college classes. Allowing upperclassmen to transfer community college credits doesn't change what counts toward a University degree; 60 of the 120 credits needed to graduate still can't be transferred from other institutions, and the University can still deem credits unfit for transfer. This policy comes with essentially no costs and has the benefits of saving students money and helping them graduate in four years. It is now easier and more cost-efficient for students to fulfill requirements and graduate in a timely manner. 't hand out the at school. They om of trashcans - Sophia Usow can be reached at sophiaus@umich.edu. EDITORIAL BOARD MEMBERS Barry Belmont, Edvinas Berzanskis, David Harris, Rachel John, Nivedita Karki, Jacob Karafa, Jordyn Kay, Aarica Marsh, Megan McDonald, Victoria Noble, Melissa Scholke, Michael Schramm, Matthew Seligman, Paul Sherman, Allison Raeck, Linh Vu, Daniel Wang, Derek Wolfe LAW STUDENTS FOR RESPONSIBLE DIVESTMENT FROM FOSSIL FUELS| Fuelinig the, future MELISSA SCHOLKE I An unnecessary hurdle The reverberations of an opening gunshot startled ears throughout the public sphere years ago. While other states made mad dashes across untread territory toward new ideas about equality, Michigan slept on the sidelines. March 21st, however, Michigan pinned the number 18 onto its shirt and sprinted to catch up in this race to provide the marriage rights homosexual couples lawfully deserve. Initiated by District Judge Bernard Friedman's momentous decision to revoke a ban created in 2004, Michigan became the 18th state in the country to abolish restrictions on same-sex marriage. Same-sex couples and their supporters rejoiced throughout the state. Hundreds of couples flocked to county clerk offices on Saturday morning to be legally united and recognized as both spouses and parents. In fact, 300 couples proclaimed their vows to one another during the weekend when the initial declaration was made. As a fervent advocate for the LGBTQ community and a genuinely concerned human being, I realize flawed notions like "normality" don't exist in real life. Any politician or any voter concerned about the dismantling of "traditional family values" honestly needs to pull their minds out of the world of'50s sitcoms. Reading the news about the court decision excited me and reinstalled a shard of my broken faith in Michigan's government. Sure, the state wasexceedinglysluggishin acknowledgingthis breach of constitutional freedom. Yes, 10 years is a ridiculously and obscenely longtime to deny individuals the rights to marry whoever they love and to provide stability for their children. I'll admit I sometimes am overly enthusiastic and far too emotionally invested in my opinions about LGBTQ rights. Yet, I know progress is still worthwhile regardless of an unreasonably long delay. Earlier in the month, I set aside my usual annoyance with Michigan's government. Despite my mental image of a state panting and choking upon the dust of its 17 teammates as it slowly jogged along the path they left behind, I was satisfied to finally see Michigan running in this race for equality. My pride and zeal quickly toppled over. Within the same Saturday when about 322 marriages occurred in the state, Michigan Attorney General Bill Schuette placed an entirely unnecessary hurdle in the way. Michigan was finally gaining momentum and pushing itself to achieve equality. Within a moment, however, the same metaphorical 18th runner crashed into Schuette's appeal with arms and legs flailing, and collapsed onto the ground. Due to the unjust action of the state's appeals court, a bruised and bloody Michigan remained unconscious in the pathway - covered in the homophobic dirt other states kicked off their sneakers. Michigan's members of the LGBTQ community were at a similar impasse. Last week, Gov. Rick Snyder told happy newlyweds that their marriages wouldn't be recognized by the state. Thankfully, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder intervened on the matter and prevented the frustrated couples from waiting to hear whether state government officials would strip them of their constitutional rights. The rationale used to justify this egregious breach of human rights in my mind is far worse than the request for an appeal of Friedman's decision, and the state's reinstitution of the ban is too inexcusable to remain unnoticed. This entire situation oflegaluncertainty and irresponsibility is based upon concerns about the sanctity of marriage, providing the best home environment for children, and decisions made by voters 10 years ago. Lawmakers were instantly prepared to hash out the cliched argument that same-sex marriage is immoral and has negative effects upon children, but the studies are contradictory. If Michigan's leaders truly had the well-being of citizens and children in mind, they would realize removing the stigma associated with same-sex marriage would lessen the stress, harassment and insecurity couples and families regularly face. Abandoning the defense of archaic voting decisions is in the best interest of Michigan's citizens. It's 2014! Times and opinions have changed, and there's a whole new crop of voters who disagree with this ancient ruling. In this scenario, the federal government shouldn't have needed to clean up Schuette and Snyder's mess. By issuing the appeal and dangling the possibility of marriage rights in front of both married and unmarried LGBTQ members, Michigan officials are sending the message our brothers, sisters, parents, friends, roommates and classmates don't deserve the full extent of their constitutional rights because they refuse to be stuffed into this nice, restricting imaginary box of normalcy and creating these hurdles is the only way to keep them from escaping. Melissa Scholke is an LSA sophomore. The debate on climate change is over. Last month, scientists from the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the world's largestgeneralscientificsociety, said evidence of human-caused climate change is as conclusive as evidence linking smoking and lung cancer. In a report titled "What We Know: The Reality, Risks and Response to Cli- mate Change" AAAS explained that, like the consensus among the health community regarding the risks of smoking, "a similar consensus now exists among climate scientists, a consensus that maintains climate change is happening, and human activity is the cause." The debate now shifts to what can be done. March 20, our law student organi- zation - Law Students for Respon- sible Divestment from Fossil Fuels 9 - presented in front of the Universi- ty's Board of Regents, and proposed a step in the right direction. In a 20-page detail-filled proposal, we argued that the University should divest its endowment from coal and oil equities and bonds. These invest- ments represent the companies that are the primary drivers of climate change - both because of their emissions and because of their mis- information campaigns. While there have been other divestment efforts regarding fossil fuels, LSRD's approach sets us apart. First, we focus on a much smaller subset of investments: just coal and oil equities and bonds. These make up only about 1 percent of the University's endowment. In contrast, the student-run Divest and. Invest campaign (with whom we've worked closely and who is co-sponsoring this proposal) is asking the regents for a complete divestment from fossil fuels. This touches on near 10 percent of the endowment. Further, they are asking the University to re-invest that money in "socially, environmentally and economically responsible companies." While we support its efforts, our proposal is different. We're talking about substantially less money, taken only from the two primary drivers of climate change, and we are not requesting that the University re-invest their money in any particular way. Our request is also different from divestment proposals on other cam- puses. Probablythemost public cam- paign is the one at Harvard. They're asking for divestment from direct and indirect holdings from the top 200 publicly traded fossil fuel com- panies. We, on the other hand, are only discussing direct investments, and we're only discussing coal and oil, not natural gas. But most importantly, our proposal is unique from other divestment campaigns because it is based on the precedents established from past successful divestment efforts at the University, which was outlined in a directive by the University's Chief Financial Officer. That, in large part, is why our "ask" is so narrowly tailored - to ensure that we meet this precedent. Of note, the only times the University has chosen to divest from specific companies were in 1978 when it divested from companies supporting apartheid, and, perhaps not coincidentally, in 2000 when it divested from tobacco companies. In our proposal, we explain that there is a clear, three-step approach for divestment efforts: 1) The con- cern tobe explored (climate change) must express the broadly and con- sistently held position of the cam- pus community over time; 2) There must be reason to believe that the behavior or action in question may be antithetical to the core mission and values of the University; and 3) There must be reason to believe that the organization, industry or entity to be singled out (coal and oil indus- tries) may be uniquely responsible for the problems identified. We're confident that the investments in coal and oil meet these standards. First, there is a clear consensus on campus that climate change exists and that it poses real threats. Some examples are the administration's commitment to reducing Univer- sity carbon emissions 25 percent by 2025, the educational pursuits of the University's professors and students andthe literallyhundreds of student initiatives dedicated to sustainabil- ity and combating climate change. Second, the actions of the coal and oil industries are antithetical to the University's core mission and values. As University President Mary Sue Coleman said in a 2011 address, "Sustainability defines the University of Michigan." A perpetual reliance on coal and oil does not align with this definition. Beyond being antithetical to the University's core value of sustain- ability, the coal and oil industries' actions mock the University's com- mitment to academic integrity. These two industries have spent hundreds of millions of dollars on lobbying efforts to thwart meaning- ful legislative solutions on climate change, and to create dubiously named organizations such as the Global Climate Coalition to under- mine the scientific consensus on this topic. LSRD believes, as the tobacco divestment committee did, that "the brazen dishonesty of (these indus- tries) for so many years about a mat- ter of such enormous public-health significance is ... unquestionably antithetical to the core missions of the University." Investment in these industries simply cannot be squared with a University's commitment to higher education. Lastly, the actions of the coal and oil industries make them uniquely responsible for climate change. First, of all the CO2 ever emitted by burningfossil fuels, a full 83 percent comes from just coal and oil. While that is in part because of a long- standing dependence on these prod- ucts, coal and oil also emit far more CO2 per unit of energy created than other available fossil fuels, such as natural gas (82 percent and 40 per- cent more, respectively), and infi- nitely more than renewable energy resources. In short, coal and oil have been, and will continue to be, the primary drivers of climate change. LSRD recognizes that the endowment should not be used primarily as a political tool. But, as the University itself has recognized, sometimes a set of investments involves "such significant social or moral implications ... that normal investment practices should be altered." The coal and oil industries - as the primary drivers of climate change and the misinformation campaigns that have paralyzed steps to counteract it - are investments that meet this standard. LSRD realizes that divestment is just one step in the much larger fight to combat climate change. That being said, regardless of how large an effect divestment may have, we believe there is a value in being true to your values, and currently, the University is not living up to its own. This article was written by members of the Law Studentsfor Responsible Divestment from Fossil Fuels.