“I swore never to be silent whenever and

wherever
human
beings
endure
suffering

and humiliation. We must always take sides.
Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim.
Silence encourages the tormentor, never the
tormented.”

-Elie Wiesel
This morning, I read of yet another act of

anti-Semitism at one of this country’s absolute
jewels of public education, the University of
California, Los Angeles. During a hearing on
Feb. 10 for a seat on the student Judicial Board,
candidate Rachel Beyda was asked: “Given that
you’re a Jewish student and very active in the
Jewish community, how do you see yourself
being able to maintain an unbiased view?”

As a Jew, the obvious bigotry of this question

offends me deeply. However, my decision to
speak out goes far beyond this not-so-subtle
attack that manifests in a variety of — and
ever increasing — ways against Jews across
campuses throughout the nation. A recent study
by Trinity College and the Louis D. Brandeis
Center for Human Rights under Law found that
54 percent of Jewish college students have been
subject to or witnessed anti-Semitism during
a six-month period. No, today, I am far more
offended as an American and as one who values
what this great country represents.

I am offended for several reasons. For

starters,
these
questions
are
a
brazen

violation of the spirit, if not the very text of
the U.S. Constitution (see: First Amendment’s
guarantee of freedom of religion), a document
that embodies the very principles of our
progressive democracy. To even entertain this
question as one appropriate for a public body,
student or otherwise, demonstrates a deep
ignorance of the civic foundation on which this
country was founded and, more importantly,

a body of laws that have evolved since their
creation to expand the rights of and protections
for other Americans as well.

While the question at hand targeted the

candidate’s Jewish heritage and community
involvement, I am not the only one who
should fear the audacity that the statement
embodies. If asking whether being a Jew
would cloud one’s judgment, what about
asking if they were a Christian, Muslim,
Buddhist, atheist? Heck, why not ask if
other characteristics would influence their
perspective, like being Black, Latino, Asian,
Native American, even white? How about
whether they are poor, rich, Democrat,
Republican, independent? Substitute any of
these classifications for Jew and you can get a
sense of what real bigotry looks like. There is
no justification for the question and no moral
defense for distinguishing a Jew from any
of the other classifications enumerated, no
matter the context.

The pinnacle of the questioner’s ignorance

lies mostly with the arrogance of the
presumption on which the question is based.
To even suggest that one’s life’s experiences
do not influence their perspective or that the
resulting diversity of opinion is deleterious
demonstrates a dangerous position that,
unfortunately, is far too common on campuses
today. To imply that the differences that
shape us as humans contain an unacceptable
bias equates to saying that opinions that vary
at all from the speakers are to be summarily
and justifiably dismissed. As an American,
I cannot and will not accept this shameless
attack on the values that we hold so dear.

Today, I choose not to be silent.

Brian Tauber is a 1992 University alumnus.

Opinion

JENNIFER CALFAS

EDITOR IN CHIEF

AARICA MARSH

and DEREK WOLFE

EDITORIAL PAGE EDITORS

LEV FACHER

MANAGING EDITOR

420 Maynard St.

Ann Arbor, MI 48109

tothedaily@michigandaily.com

Edited and managed by students at

the University of Michigan since 1890.

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.

The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com
4 — Friday, March 13, 2015

I choose not to be silent

Claire Bryan, Regan Detwiler, Ben Keller, Payton

Luokkala, Aarica Marsh, Victoria Noble, Michael Paul,

Allison Raeck, Melissa Scholke, Michael Schramm,

Matthew Seligman, Linh Vu, Mary Kate Winn,

Jenny Wang, Derek Wolfe

EDITORIAL BOARD MEMBERS

BRIAN TAUBER | VIEWPOINT

O

n the Wednesday before Spring Break,
I had just come home from a diffi-
cult midterm, my brain more or less

shriveled up and crusted
along the edges. I was
staring blankly in avoid-
ance of an essay due the
next day. I was also getting
over a cold that was going
around campus, hacking
up a storm as usual. And I
realized then that in the
three years that I’ve been
attending the University,
I’ve only taken one real
semester off: the summer
term of 2013. Every other
term wherein classes were being taught, I
had been studying something. I realized,
too, looking forward into my “week off,” that
I would have very little actual free time, as
projects, exams, problem sets, papers, short
stories and other assignments were going to
be due promptly after the break.

I hope I don’t sound like I’m needlessly

complaining here. I’ve been apprehensive
to write a column about “burning out,” as it
seems petty — I just need to suck it up and
plow through, right? Everybody else is doing
exactly that. I also know asking anything of
my professors is inherently self-centered —
they, too, face institutional pressures and
deadlines, many of which I’m sure are beyond
my knowledge. I know that my EECS profes-
sors must go through the difficult task of
shoving hundreds of students through a stan-
dard and strict curriculum; when projects
are due or exams are coming up, the GSIs and
instructors are right there with us, extending
office hours late into the night.

Still, I’ve heard plenty of anecdotal

accounts about being sick to the point of hos-
pitalization and facing professors who won’t
be more accommodating. I’ve seen a class-
mate pass out due to lack of sleep. I know

of people who have taken exams with high
fevers. I’m aware that, for people who strug-
gle with depression or mood disorders, one of
the most frustrating experiences is not being
able to get work done because you are com-
pletely subjected to something — this feel-
ing — that you should be able to suppress but
always seems out of reach.

To be a successful college student at any

school, one has to have a mental and physi-
cal constancy that, as I’ve come to realize,
is impossible to attain. I’ve sat in lectures
unable to focus on the course material, all the
while knowing that if I’m not keeping up now,
I will be even more behind than I already am.
For the last few weeks, even though I give
myself ample hours to sleep, I am still tossing
and turning and waking up before my alarm
calls me. I end up more tired and groggy than
ever. Every bit of time I spend kicking back
is laden with guilt. I feel that if I’m not doing
something “productive” with my time, I am
going to face some irreversible consequence
in the near future. I’m always anxious about
something, even if I can’t see what it is.

And so, in regards to the Spring Break we

just had, I want to say this: this break was
added to the calendar because we needed it.
In the future, please, if we are expected to
keep plowing through when school is in ses-
sion, then at least let us have this short week
to ourselves, with a more reasonable work-
load: less, not more, than what we are expect-
ed to finish during the rest of the semester.
Give us this time to recover as much as we can
from no sleep, physical illnesses and mental
exhaustion. Allow us to spend this time with
our family and friends, whom we have proba-
bly been neglecting during the semester. This
was why Spring Break was originally added
to our semester calendar. I hope this is not
too much to ask.


—Jenny Wang can be reached

at wjenny@umich.edu.

On burning out

JENNY
WANG

BARACK OBAMA | VIEWPOINT

Announcing the Student Aid Bill of Rights

In an economy increasingly built

on innovation, the most important
skill you can sell is your knowledge.
That’s why higher education is,
more than ever, the surest ticket to
the middle class.

But just when it’s never been

more important, it’s also never
been more expensive. The average
undergrad who borrows to pay for
college ends up graduating with
about $28,000 in student loan debt.

That’s why my Administration has

worked hard to make college more
affordable. We expanded tax credits
and Pell Grants, enacted the largest
reforms to the student loan program
in history and fought to keep interest
rates on student loans low. We’ve
acted to let millions of graduates cap
loan payments at 10 percent of their
incomes, so they don’t have to choose
between paying the rent and paying
back their debt. I’ve sent Congress my
plan to bring the cost of community
college down to zero, because two
years of higher education should be
as free and universal as high school
is today.

And this week, I unveiled another

way that we can help more Americans
afford college. It doesn’t involve any
new spending or bureaucracy. It’s
a simple declaration of values — a
Student Aid Bill of Rights.

It says: Every student deserves

access to a quality, affordable
education. Every student should be
able to access the resources to pay
for college. Every borrower has the
right to an affordable repayment
plan. And every borrower has the
right to quality customer service,
reliable
information
and
fair

treatment, even if they struggle to
repay their loans.

That’s it. Just a few simple

principles. But there’s a lot that
colleges, lenders and the people you
send to Washington can and should
do to live up to them.

Consider the other actions I took

this week. We’re creating a way for
borrowers to ask questions about
their loans or file a complaint and
get a fast response. We’re going
to require businesses that service
loans to provide clear information
about how much students owe and
their options for repaying it, and
help them get back in good standing
if they’re falling behind, with
reasonable fees on a reasonable
timeline. We’re also going to take a
hard look at whether we need new
laws to strengthen protections for
all borrowers, wherever their loans
come from.

If you believe in a Student Aid Bill of

Rights that will help more Americans

pay for a quality education, I’m
asking you to visit WhiteHouse.
gov/CollegeOpportunity.
Sign

your name to this declaration. Tell
your families, friends and fellow
students. I’m going to ask Members
of Congress, and lenders and as
many business leaders as I can find.
Because making sure that students
aren’t saddled with debt before
they even get started in life is in all
our interests.

This issue is personal to me.

My grandfather had a chance to
go to college because this country
decided that veterans returning
from World War II should be able
to afford it. My mother was able
to raise two kids by herself in part
because she got grants that helped
pay for her education. And Michelle
and I are where we are today
because of scholarships and student
loans. We didn’t come from families
of means, but we knew that if we
worked hard, we’d have a shot at a
great education. That’s what this
country gave us.

In America, a higher education

cannot be a privilege reserved only
for the few. It has to be available to
everyone who’s willing to work for it.

Barack Obama is the

President of the United States.

M

y last column generated
a lot of backlash online,
and many of the com-

ments were valid. I admit that the
way I presented my argument was
wrong and uninformed. It was
entirely, unequiv-
ocally and unde-
niably the wrong
way to go about
explaining
my

ideas. I should not
have used irrel-
evant and per-
sonal
anecdotes

about
spending

habits to try and
stereotype socio-
economic classes.
I should not have
used my limited years of experi-
ence to describe an economic prob-
lem that has hundreds of facets and


millions of stories.

When I wrote my last column,

it was obvious that I didn’t
understand the social and economic
juxtapositions of the middle class.
Although I don’t fall into what most
(if not all) people consider “middle
class,” I truly felt middle class. I live
in a 1,700-square-foot, one-story
home my parents bought 30 years
ago, before the dot-com boom made
Palo Alto prime real estate. My dad
drove a beat-up Mazda Protégé.
My brother’s and my Halloween
costumes were hand-sewn by our
mom. Both of my parents worked
every day and alternated waking up
very early to go to work in order to
get home earlier so that we wouldn’t
need expensive after-school care.
We led an economically conscious
lifestyle (with a few splurges) so
that my brother and I could have
the opportunity to attend this


great school.

The way I lived fit all the social

definitions of middle class I had
ever heard. My mistake was that
I believed those definitions and
lifestyles
fully
and
accurately

described middle class. Walking
around Palo Alto, many parts look
similar to Ann Arbor: the sizes of the
houses, the shops, the types of cars
— plus or minus a few Priuses. I had
lumped myself in as middle class
and based my arguments on what I
was familiar with. I thought I was
middle class, regardless of income,
because of my lifestyle. What I
didn’t realize was that where I live
gives me economic options other
middle class families do not have.
I was reminded repeatedly online
that “middle class” is defined by
social and economic factors.

However,
after
doing
the

research I should have done in
the first place, I found I was not
the only one with misconceptions
about what being middle class
meant socially and economically.

In fact, a recent CNN survey

showed that 78 percent of people
said they feel middle class. Only
38 percent actually were middle
class in their respective areas.
That survey is online for anyone
to take and see where they stand
on the economic ladder. The fact
that CNN even has this tool should
indicate that misconceptions on
being middle class are common.
This survey defined middle class as
household incomes in the middle

fifth of each county.

According to the Washington

Post, a survey by the Pew Research
Center “defines the middle class
in the United States as any adult
in a household whose income
sits between 66 percent and 200
percent of the national median.” In
this survey, most respondents also
mislabeled themselves as middle
class when they weren’t. I tried
to find a universally agreed upon
definition and could not.

So why do so many people

identify with the middle class? An
article by The Atlantic focused on
what language we use to describe
middle class. It showed that, in the
past, middle class meant you could
eventually pay off your mortgage,
settle the car loan, have a job with
health care coverage and afford the
occasional vacation. It didn’t matter
where you lived, and if you worked
hard and played your cards right,
you were going to get a slice of that
middle-class American Dream.

Unfortunately, these days the

old American Dream is harder
and harder to relate to for the vast
majority of Americans. In fact,
according to Credit Suisse Global
Wealth Databook, the United States
has the most uneven distribution
of wealth of any advanced nation.
This
stark
inequality
in
the

distribution of wealth has created
pockets of America where the costs
of living are drastically different,
because people are paying for
the privilege of their location. In
certain locations, access to better
education, leisure activities and job
opportunities make that location
more desirable and therefore more
expensive. Thus, the cornerstones
of what used to be a middle-class
lifestyle have much more diverse
price points. In certain places,
a
higher-than-national
average

household income can still struggle
to meet these antiquated definitions
of middle class.

The easiest place to see the

national discrepancy in cost of living
is in real estate.

Because of its expensive real

estate and resources, the price of
housing in the Bay Area can be 164
percent higher than that in Ann
Arbor. A two-bedroom, 1.5-bath,
1,292-square-foot house is listed for
$2.2 million in Palo Alto. In Ann
Arbor, a similar two-bedroom, two-
bath, 1,495-square-foot house is
listed for $269,900. That is a 715.12
percent increase for virtually an
identical house, just in a different
part of the country. But it is not just
housing. The entire cost of living
is more expensive in Palo Alto:
groceries, health care, utilities and
transportation. All in all, according to
the Tax Foundation, $105.93 dollars
in Michigan is only worth $88.57
in California — an approximately
20 percent decrease in purchasing
power. Part of that increase in price
is paying for the privilege of living in
a desired location.

Previously, I thought that sharing

a middle-class lifestyle was enough
to make me middle class. However,
I had forgotten about the intrinsic
value of living in one of those pockets
of wealth. Thirty years ago, my
parents bought a modest house to
start a family; a house they are still

paying off; a house that, through
the creation of Silicon Valley, has
come to be worth nearly $2 million.
I didn’t think about the ability to
liquidate that asset when I cast
myself as middle class. If my family’s
economic situation ever drastically
changed, we have the safety net of
our location. We can sell our house,
move somewhere cheaper with fewer
resources and less prestige, and still
be able to live comfortably. That is an
option most middle-class families do
not have.

All of this points to the obvious

conclusion that dissimilar incomes
are necessary to support similar
standards of living in different
places. From the CNN survey, middle
class in Ann Arbor is defined as a
household income of $45,436 to
$75,020 a year. In my hometown,
Palo Alto, California, it’s $70,529 to
$112,385. By this definition, I am not
middle class. While both Palo Alto
and Ann Arbor are socially similar
towns, they are a good example of
how the economic demographics of
similar cities vary widely. Upper class
living in expensive places resembles
middle-class lifestyles elsewhere.

It takes more than income to

define the middle class. The middle
class is fuzzy; it’s inconsistent.


It’s relative.

There is another definition of

middle class that has little to do with
economics. It is entirely political.
According to the president, I am
middle class. In the 2012 election,
both candidates Mitt Romney and
President Barack Obama denoted a
$250,000 income as the cutoff for
being middle class. Most economists
believe this number is way too high.
But it serves politicians to have a
high cutoff for middle class. It makes
them more popular, because they can
appeal to a wider range of voters.

The middle class has become a

campaign platform for politicians
to quote in order to get our votes.
Every major policy Obama spoke
about in his 59-minute State of
the Union speech this January
focused on helping the “middle
class.” Declaring oneself as middle
class has become a tired platitude
uttered to get the most from our
elected officials.

I still struggle to define myself

because the definition of middle
class
is
so
ambiguous.
There

are so many ideas, viewpoints,
stereotypes
and
generalizations

about the middle class that it is no
surprise many people are puzzled
about
how
they
should
label

themselves. But as humans, we are
hardwired to label everything.

Unfortunately,
I
went
viral.

Although I have no desire to ever go
viral again, it gave me the chance to
delve into what being middle class
really means and start an honest
conversation on the topic. My
mistake allowed me, and hopefully
others, to learn.

Online, my naïve perception of

wealth was called the “Problem
with America.” In the real world,
there are a lot of problems with
America, which, with any luck,
can be fixed by learning from a


few mistakes.


— Jesse Klein can be reached

at jekle@umich.edu.

A fuzzy definition

JESSE
KLEIN

IF YOU FIND YOURSELF LOOKING HERE,

CONGRATULUATIONS! NOW LOOK UP AND TO THE
RIGHT. ARE YOU NOW THINKING, “IS THIS REALLY A
VIEWPOINT FROM THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED
STATES?” IF YOU ARE, YOU’RE CORRECT. THE DAILY
IS THE ONLY NEWSPAPER IN THE STATE TO PRINT IT!