O
n July 4, as people celebrated
the United States’ Indepen-
dence Day and I watched
the smoke settling
from the fireworks
of the night sky,
I could not stop
thinking
about
the fog that looms
over the nation.
Nine
members
of
the
Emanuel
African Methodist
Episcopal Church
in South Carolina
were
shot
and
killed on June 17 by Dylann Roof. In
the aftermath, many were unsure of
what to make of the situation. Many
people were quick to blame guns in
order to spark another debate over
gun laws. Media
outlets
called
for
a
greater
awareness
of
mental
health
awareness.
Many sigh and
claim, “We may
never know why
he did it.” Others
question wheth-
er labeling it is
important or not
because it will
have no effect on
the severity of Dylann Roof’s punish-
ment. But, in order to properly con-
demn such acts and keep them from
happening again, we must not hesi-
tate to call it by its name.
This was an act of domestic
terrorism.
The FBI defines domestic ter-
rorism as “primarily occurring on
American soil and involving acts
dangerous to human life that violate
federal or state law; Appear intended
(i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian
population; (ii) to influence the poli-
cy of a government by intimidation or
coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct
of a government by mass destruction,
assassination or kidnapping.”
Though it’s clear that this act was
dangerous to human life, the question
seems to be whether or not it appears
intended to intimidate or coerce a
civilian population, and ongoing
investigations suggest that others
may have known about his plans.
“I have no choice,” Roof wrote.
“I am not in the position to, alone,
go into the ghetto and fight. I chose
Charleston because it is most historic
city in my state, and at one time had
the highest ratio of blacks to Whites
in the country. We have no skinheads,
no real KKK, no one doing anything
but talking on the internet. Well
someone has to have the bravery to
take it to the real world, and I guess
that has to be me.”
This attack was symbolic. It was
political. The church that Roof
attacked has historical significance
to the Black community, as it has
been attacked multiple times in the
past. Witnesses claim he said he came
to the church “to shoot Black people.”
Roof is a white supremacist. He
is a racist. There is a picture of him
wearing badges linked to apartheid
Africa and another picture of him
burning an American flag. Based on
his Internet postings and his drunken
comwments to one of his friends, he
wanted to start a “race war.”
He
wore
a
badge
linked
to
apartheid Africa.
He
burned
the
American
flag.
He wanted to
start a race war.
And yet, we
still
question
whether
he
should be called
a terrorist.
There should
be
the
same
outrage
and
response
from
over this attack
as there would over any attack against
Americans incited by such hate. Too
often we are stuck in this idea that
only foreign terrorism or Islamic
terrorism are what Americans should
be afraid of, but the rise of this racial
climate starting in our own backyards
is completely ignored. If this had been
a person of color, they would have
been called a thug or a terrorist in a
second. Instead, former FBI agent
Jonathan Gilliam told CNN he most
likely had a mental illness and Sen.
Lindsey Graham said he was “one of
those wacked out kids.”
We, as a nation, are going down
a very dangerous path if we fail to
realize these disparities and how far
this has gone. If Donald Trump, a
U.S. presidential candidate, can stand
on national television and claim that
Mexican immigrants are rapists and
bump up to second in the Republican
candidacy, there’s a problem much
greater than one lone wolf. Racism is
still deeply rooted in this nation.
We put in pen that all men were
created equal 228 years ago.
It’s about time we start acting
like it.
— Rabab Jafri can be reached
at rfjafri@umich.edu.
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.
EMMA KERR
EDITOR IN CHIEF
MELISSA SCHOLKE
EDITORIAL PAGE EDITOR
DEREK WOLFE
MANAGING EDITOR
420 Maynard St.
Ann Arbor, MI 48109
tothedaily@umich.edu
Edited and managed by students at
the University of Michigan since 1890.
4
Thursday, July 9, 2015
The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com
OPINION
Gov. Rick Snyder intro-
duced the performance-based
education
funding
system
when he first took office in
2011. The budgetary system is
popular throughout the Unit-
ed States, with 34 states utiliz-
ing it in some form because it
aims for schools to graduate
as many students as possible,
as efficiently as possible. In
Michigan, higher education
appropriations makes up 1.7
percent of the School Aid
Fund and performance-based
funding makes up about 5 per-
cent of the aid schools receive
from the School Aid Fund.
The model was introduced by
supporters who believe per-
formance-based funding will
motivate schools to adhere to
state standards and practices
in higher education.
However, according to stu-
dents and faculty at OU, WSU
and EMU, the current perfor-
mance-based aid isn’t always
beneficial to the higher edu-
cation cause. WSU President
M. Roy Wilson criticized the
performance funding system,
claiming that it penalizes the
university for having a more
inclusive enrollment policy
and doing a large amount of
research. Furthermore, stu-
dents from EMU are worried
about how they will be able to
pay for the increased cost their
colleges now require from
their students.
Performance-based
funding clearly isn’t working
if universities are willing to
forgo the funding to obtain
enough money to provide
the necessary resources to
maintain
operations.
This
“all-or-nothing” mentality of
this funding system has forced
universities’ hands to burden
their students unnecessarily.
If a performance-based model
is going to continue, colleges
must be rated against similar
institutions; WSU caters to a
different type of student than
OU or the University. There
needs to be understanding
and accommodations when
it comes to funding. If the
state of Michigan wants to
reward based on performance,
it
should
look
at
the
bigger picture.
The time has come
RABAB
JAFRI
FROM THE DAILY
Fair funding
The state legislature must review its higher education funding
O
n Tuesday, Oakland University announced it would increase
tuition by 8 percent starting in the fall semester. The drastic
tuition increase is well above the state-imposed cap of 3.2
percent that colleges must meet in order to receive their performance-
based aid from the state. OU joins Eastern Michigan University —
which increased its tuition 7.8 percent in mid-June — in being the
only colleges in Michigan to forfeit their performance-based aid by
increasing tuition well above the cap. In 2013, Wayne State University
similarly increased its tuition by 8.9 percent. These exuberant increases
help to highlight inefficiencies in the current higher education funding
system. The state legislature must alter the performance-based aid in
order to ensure students are able to access the education they deserve.
We put in pen that
all men were created
equal 223 years ago.
It’s about time we
start acting like it.
WANT THE DAILY ON THE GO?
Now you can access your favorite Daily opinion content on your phone. Keep up with
columnists, read Daily editorials and join in the debate. Check out the Daily’s
website at www.michigandaily.com.