VIEWPOINT
Whose party?
The Michigan Daily - Monday, May 16, 2005 - 5
The "U.S. News and World Report" effect
KARL STAMPFL ONSw.
By DAVID RUSSELL
In her book "It's My Party
Too," Christie Todd Whitman,
former New Jersey gover-
nor and Environmental Protection
Agency administrator during Presi-
dent Bush's first term, seeks to draw
moderate Republicans' attention
to the rise of what she calls "social
fundamentalists" - those who
believe that, to be a good Republi-
can, one needs to be strictly pro-life
and support a constitutional amend-
ment against gay marriage - who
are becoming the driving force of
ideas and strategy in the Republican
Party. Unfortunately, the book, while
idealistic, does not do a good job
addressing the political realities of
today. For example, while it explores
the potential of the Republican Party
to win future elections, it does little
to explain the necessity of a move to
center because the current Demo-
cratic Party has become increasingly
marginalized in the past elections.
Furthermore, while encouraging a
move to the center, Whitman offers
no explanation for what those who
might be alienated by such a move
should do electorally.
Continuing on the theme of
"social fundamentalists," Whitman
serves up an array of anecdotes
that document how, in her opinion,
they have harmed Republican can-
didates and strayed from the tra-
ditional values of Lincoln's party.
One of her favorite scapegoats is
the Club for Growth, a group that
has made primary-election targets
of Republicans, such as Pennsylva-
nia Sen. Arlen Specter, who don't
fall in line with the group's fiscal
principles. She spends one chapter
explaining how hard it was for her
to be a pro-choice Republican in
New Jersey, as she faced growing
backlash from within her party. All
these anecdotes serve as evidence
for Whitman's belief that the "social
fundamentalists" drive the Republi-
can Party rightward and away from
moderate American center.
However, one part of her analy-
sis that seems to fall through is
her belief that Democrats will have
learned their lesson from the 2004
election and will move toward the
center in 2008. Considering that the
Democrats have made Howard Dean
their national chairman, Whitman
has given Democrats credit for more
political guile than they actually
possess. The one exception to this
rule is the recent and very noticeable
tilt of Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.)
toward the center of the political
spectrum. In a book-signing Thurs-
day at the Borders store on East
Liberty Street, Whitman noted that
Clinton has been emphasizing more
conservative parts of her agenda
and that, in her 2000 Senate vic-
tory, Clinton even carried the more
conservative upstate regions of New
York. The conclusion was that Clin-
ton will be a formidable opponent in
the 2008 general election and will
move toward the center to attract a
broader audience of voters.
In addition to breaking down Karl
Rove's strategy regarding the reli-
gious right in 2004, Whitman notes
that it was not those people the presi-
dent called upon for support at the
most important points of his cam-
paign. At the Republican National
Convention, for example, primetime
speaking spots were given to mod-
erates like California Gov. Arnold
Schwarznegger, former New York
City Mayor Rudy Giuliani and cur-
rent New York Gov. George Pataki.
She also points out that in the closing
days of the election, Bush was once
again alongside Schwarznegger and
Giuliani in swing states Florida and
Ohio to pick up the support of the
moderates who would end up being
essential to the president's victory.
Looking ahead to 2008, Whit-
man decides that the election will be
a crucial time for moderate Repub-
licans to solidify their importance
in the party; since it will be the first
time in 56 years when neither an
incumbent president nor vice presi-
dent will be running in the election.
Moderate Republican leaders, she
says, "must start now to identify and
unite behind a ... leader who would
be willing to fight for the party's
nomination in 2008." Whitman is
trying to lead this effort and has set
up a website, www.mypartytoo.com,
to serve as a center for moderate
Republicans to develop the resourc-
es they will need for a presidential
run in 2008. Of course, one flaw to
this plan is that if both parties run to
the center, there's the possibility that
voters will not be able distinguish
between the two and will once again
show apathy come election day. With
just under three years until the first
primaries of 2008, it will be some
time before anyone knows whether
Whitman was right or wrong.
Russell is an LSA sophomore and a
member of the Daily's
editorial board.
t's springtime.
Birds are chirp-
ing, butterflies
are fluttering, flow-
ers are budding and
high school seniors
are thumbing through
U.S. News and World
Report's annual list
of college rankings,
trying to decide to which school they will
give their parents' retirement funds. It's a
beautiful thing. The students analyze every
important factor: location, selectivity, cam-
pus safety, extracurriculars, whether the
school is on Thefacebook.com. Then they
rip open the magazine and pick the highest-
ranked school they were admitted to.
Since 1976, consulting the rankings
has been a rite of passage for high school-
ers, fitting into the coming-of-age process
somewhere between bar mitzvahs and los-
ing your virginity. The tradition may or
may not be a flawed practice - google the
rankings for a sample of the debate over
their validity - but criticism of the list's
factuality cannot undermine its foothold in
American culture.
I am among the cult of list-followers.
About a year ago, I had the choice between
the in-state University of Illinois and the
University of Michigan. In an epic battle,
Illinois (rank: 37 among national doctoral
universities, cost to me: $8,000 a year)
wrestled Michigan (rank: 22, cost to me:
$36,000 a year). In the end, the Wolverines
trounced the Illini, despite the cost. MVP:
U.S. News and World Report. Maybe I
would have made the same decision in a
world without the magazine's rankings,
but Michigan's margin of victory certainly
wouldn't have been as gaping. Some-
one more mathematically inclined might
say that each of the 15 spots between the
schools cost me an estimated $7,466.67.
So you can imagine why I was shocked
last week when my high school friend vio-
lated the sanctity of the holy rankings and
picked a lower-ranked school at a higher
price. In the upset of the century, one of the
magazine's second-tier institutions, George
Washington University, trumped Michigan,
the second-best public school in the coun-
try. I am not at all questioning his choice.
In fact, I am as close to supporting it as a
loyal Maize and Blue fan could possibly be.
What's interesting to me is how much it sur-
prises people to learn that he picked number
52 over number 22.
"He picked George Washington?" puz-
zled mutual friends ask me.
I try to explain my friend's reasoning
- Michigan is the superior academic
school, but GW has intangibles, like
its location in Washington, D.C. and its
superior political internship opportuni-
ties. They still don't quite understand.
Their reaction is a result of the U.S. News
and World Report phenomenon.
Even if you have never seen a copy of
the list, you have most likely been influ-
enced by it through word of mouth. The
list has shaped the public's perceptions
over the last 30 years. A good or bad rank-
ing in the magazine can make or break a
university's reputation - if Michigan had
been 30 or 32, I'm not sure I would have
picked it. But that's not the only way it
influences higher education. With each
edition, the rankings measure schools less
and determine their success and the suc-
cess of their graduates more.
Let's say Northwestern University is not
really the 11th best school in the country.
Let's assume that it's only the 60th best
school. The magazine, however, ranks it at
11. Top-notch students who might have gone
elsewhere see that and send in their enroll-
ment deposits. Accomplished faculty and
administrators leave other schools to work
there. Newspapers quote itsprofessors more.
The university's name is posted around
the world, resulting in easy, free publicity.
Employers see that magical number 11 and
hire more Northwestern grads. The alums
make more money than they would have
otherwise and donate some of it to the uni-
versity, which then reports a higher alumni-
giving rate to the magazine, boosting its
ranking. As the years go by, Northwestern
becomes more and more like a number 11
school than a number 60 school.
Maybe the list's critics are correct; maybe
the magazine editors are playing a fool's
game by trying to quantify the best places
to get an education. But each year they
become more accurate, and not because
they keep dreaming up a better formula, but
because the list is steadily shaping reality,
instead of reality shaping the list.
Stampfl is a Dailyfall/winter administra-
tion beat reporter. He can be reached at
kstampfl@umich.edu.
Turning a critical eye on the kitsch factor
ALEXANDRA JONES CIE, 'ST PA\,UN P DREuAM"
As readers of
Weekend
Magazine
should know, I've
wasted a few columns
showering praise on
the UPN show "Amer-
ica's Next Top Model."
My appreciation for
this Wednesday-night
"dramality" that's part beauty contest, part
product placement and 100 percent ridicu-
lous isn't because of its surface qualities
- I don't watch for fashion advice (one tip
I've picked up: anything "fierce!" is good).
I watch to mock idiotic contestants, manu-
factured drama and the lack of anything
"high-fashion" about the show.
I'm not gonna lie to you: Gaping at the
antics of dumbasses is fun. But at the same
time, I feel sort of like I'm cheating.
Not so long ago, the mention of models
or modeling would throw me into a rant
eviscerating the fashion industry (which
presents impractical, nearly unlivable
beauty standards), media outlets and cor-
porations (which perpetuate and profit from
these standards) and the ignorant girls and
women who won't (or can't) wake up to the
fact that they're basing their lifestyles and
self-images around such bullshit. (Okay, so
it wasn't that long ago.)
Lately I've toned down the rhetoric drawn
from my longtime feminism and vegetari-
anism, simply because I don't feel the need
to use those traits to distinguish myself on
a daily basis. That subtle conformity seems
like a pretty normal phase, but over time,
I've noticed that my inner ideological pitbull
doesn't react to hostile outsiders as much as
she used to. Many young feminists, after
feeling a strong initial rapport with the his-
tory of the women's movement and luminar-
ies of the Third Wave, catch on to the more
recent feminist practice of inclusion - that
is, pretty much any act can be "feminist" as
long as you're doing what you want. This
applies to sex, knitting, rearing children,
choosing a career.
While this freedom of choice is defi-
nitely a good thing, I still feel like I should
know better when it comes to a reality show
(ick) that focuses on finding the girl with
the perfect rail-thin body and appropriately
vacant stare (feh) and cheery, acquiescent
attitude to match (eww). In the spirit of
self-criticism - and to ward off the feeling
that I'm going soft - I'm going to dissect
and analyze "Top Model" as a feminist, not
as the jaded, apathetic twentysomething I
sometimes am.
"Top Model" is the demon spawn of Tyra
Banks, erstwhile couture model who shills
for Victoria's Secret. Banks acts as headmis-
tress, big sister, mother and friend - she's
more of a life coach than anything else, an
infallible presence who giveth and taketh
away. Although she once championed plus-
sized contestants like the beautiful Toc-
cara and often criticizes panel judge/former
supermodel Janice Dickinson's preference
for extremely thin girls, she decided not to
choose a plus-sized contestant this season,
conveniently eliminating the problem of
acceptance altogether.
In addition, Banks often encourages Afri-
can-American girls to do well but excoriates
those who don't conform to her starry-eyed,
"praise Tyra" worldview. Banks has cre-
ated a show that's more like "Starting Over"
than "House of Style" - and somehow,
the proscribed roles in which she places the
contestants (the party girl, the "black bitch")
are more damaging than the show would
be if Banks actually focused on creating a
sophisticated, haute-couture winner.
It becomes clearer with each episode
that the show is rigged - by Tyra, UPN's
producers or by sponsor Covergirl - but
it doesn't really matter, anyway. One shal-
low, obedient anatomical freak will tri-
umph over all the others. The only positive
social aspect of the show is its acceptance
of non-heteros; judges and trainers like the
show's art director, Jay Manuel, exist quiet-
ly out. When contestants revealed that they
weren't straight, like Season 4's bisexual
Michelle and Season l's lesbian Ebony, the
other contestants - even the Bible-thump-
ers among them - accepted it and didn't
make sexuality into a big issue.
So "America's Next Top Model" isn't
perfect, and, as you can see by my weak-ass
attempt at a feminist critique, neither am I.
At the same time, if we compromise our
ethics to stick out less in public, shouldn't
we adhere to those standards even more
strongly in our private lives? Maybe I can
make myself a deal: In exchange for watch-
ing "Top Model," I'll engage in some really
serious political discourse in my column.
That, or I'll choke down another chunk of
tofu every week as penance.
Jones is a Dailyfall/winter associate arts
editor. She can be reached at
almajo@umich.edu.
HOW TO BECOME AN EDITORIAL
CARTOONIST IN THREE EASY STEPS:
1. DRAW A CARTOON.
2. INSERT CLEVER POLITICAL
OR SOCIAL COMMENTARY.
3. E-MAIL FRESARD@MICHIGANDAILY.COM.