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.