Forced arbitration: It’s a 

tactic used by corporations to 
avoid being held accountable in 
a court of law for detrimental, 
and possibly illegal, activities 
against consumers.

Over the past several years, 

it has become increasingly 
difficult to apply for necessities 
such as an auto loan, a cell 
phone contract or even cable 
and internet service without 
being subjected to a hidden 
arbitration 
clause. 
Time 

Warner Cable, Comcast, Wells 
Fargo and many others use 
this scheme to circumvent 
courts and prevent consumers 
from joining together in class-
action lawsuits, undermining 
the consumer’s ability to seek 
justice in the wake of corporate 
wrongdoing.

These insidious clauses bind 

consumers 
to 
unknowingly 

sign away their access to a 
court, leaving them to deal 
with disputes through private, 
secretive tribunals that favor 
the company over the consumer, 
instead of undergoing a fair 
judicial process. The typical 
consumer never glances at 
the mountain of text in the 
terms and conditions, but a 
surprising number of contracts 
hide these clauses in the fine 
print, 
preventing 
everyday 

consumers from challenging 
predatory practices such as 
hidden fees, fraud and other 
illegal behavior.

For-profit 
colleges 
such 

as ITT Technical Insitute, 
University 
of 
Phoenix 
and 

Everest College are some of 
the largest household names 

that include forced arbitration 
clauses. The ads and jingles hide 
the fact that attending these 
schools 
means 
unwittingly 

signing 
away 
rights. 
For-

profit colleges are run by 
corporations and shareholders 
solely interested in profits, so 
as students shell out tens of 
thousands of dollars for school, 
prospective 
employers 
turn 

them down upon graduation, 
as many employers do not see 
their degrees from for-profit 
colleges as credible.

Thus, 
when 
students 

attempt to sue these colleges, 
many of them discover their 
options are limited by forced 
arbitration clauses. Arbitration 
proceedings are shrouded in 
secrecy, do not use a jury and 
offer few grounds for court 
review. Even clear legal and 
factual errors by arbitrators 
may be an insufficient basis 
for overruling an arbitrator’s 
decision. 
Unable 
to 
take 

for-profit colleges to court, 
students may lose thousands of 
dollars and wind up in crippling 
debt. Yet students are not the 
only ones being thrown to the 
curb because of arbitration 
clauses. 
Obstetric 
patients, 

American Express cardholders 
and even cruise ship employees 
have had their rights stripped 
away for filing class-action 
lawsuits because of what has 
been hidden in fine print. In 
one not-uncommon case, a 
Wells Fargo employee opened 
up a fraudulent account without 
the customer’s knowledge in 
order to boost sales figures. Yet 
even then, the account holder 

would be prevented from suing 
and taking it up to court and 
instead be forced to deal with 
an arbitrator behind closed 
doors.

To combat these dangerous 

and illegitimate clauses, Public 
Citizen, a nonprofit consumer 
advocacy 
organization, 

petitioned the U.S. Department 
of Education and the U.S. 
Consumer Financial Protection 
Bureau to restrict pre-dispute 
arbitration 
clauses. 
Both 

agencies have proposed rules 
to limit arbitration clauses. 
While the proposed rules fall 
short of banning arbitration 
clauses outright — and both 
still need to be strengthened 
— they represent a critical step 
forward in the fight against 
these dangerous clauses and 
are expected to be finalized 
before the current president 
leaves office. If you are looking 
to 
become 
involved, 
get 

involved at Public Citizen and 
fight forced arbitration clauses 
on the floor by telling your 
members of Congress today.

Forced 
arbitration 
is 
a 

scam that forces individuals 
into giving up their rights 
in exchange for the ability 
to participate in the modern 
American marketplace. Law-
breaking corporations should 
not simply be able to say “no 
thanks” to our system of justice 
by sneaking arbitration clauses 
into the fine print of everyday 
terms of service.

Opinion
The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com
4A — Wednesday, September 21, 2016

The fine print of for-profit schools

BRENT KIM | OP-ED

Who is Trump’s team, really?

CJ MAYER | COLUMN

“A

nd you have to be 
smarter than they 
are. I hear so many 

times, ‘Oh, I want my people to 
be smarter than I am.’ It’s a lot 
of crap. You want to be smarter 
than your people, if possible.” 
— Donald Trump (2007)

Throughout 
the 
election, 

you’ve 
heard 
the 
same 

argument 
when 
discussing 

Trump, his policy and how 
he’ll 
improve 
the 
country: 

He’s got the best guys and 
he’ll listen. Not only is this 
argument incredibly flawed, 
it’s just plain wrong. If this 
is the default response in 
policy debates from Trump 
supporters, there’s no point 
in having in-depth debates 
without first dissecting this 
logic.

First, what if Trump did 

have the best advisers? Is that 
enough to make him a good 
world leader? Unfortunately, 
that’s 
not 
how 
the 
world 

works. Contrary to what you’ll 
hear from either side, many 
policy issues are outstandingly 
complicated with no single 
clear-cut decision to be made. 
Experts in everything from 
economics to education, even 
though they know their topic 
more than anyone else in the 
world, still disagree with one 
another. It’s up to the president 

to take their factual arguments 
and disseminate them. Sitting 
in the dark residential office 
‘til the sun rises, pouring over 
endless pages, wrestling with 
arguments that could lead to 
death of American soldiers or 
lead to poverty for millions 
and deciding what is best for 
the American people — that 
is the president’s job. It’s 
why a president’s judgments 
and policy opinions matter 
and why simply listening to 
advisers is not enough to lead 
the free world.

Now let’s bring attention 

to his advisers, and let’s start 
with Roger Ailes, the man 
preparing 
Trump 
for 
his 

debates. He spent his past 
two decades creating, leading 
and turning Fox News into 
the right-wing bastion that 
it is now. Why’d he leave his 
successful time at Fox? More 
than 20 people, ranging from 
hosts like Gretchen Carlson 
and stars like Megyn Kelly to 
employees like booker Laurie 
Luhn, have all come forward 
and accused Ailes of sexual 
harassment. 
Ailes 
started 

advising Trump after these 
accusations.

Take Corey Lewandowski, 

Trump’s first (and now fired) 
campaign manager who has 
re-emerged as one of his closest 
confidants. 
Lewandowski 

was the force behind the “let 
Trump be Trump” movement 
and encouraged him to never 

apologize 
and 
to 
attack 

the Gold Star Khan family. 
Trump 
initially 
defended 

Lewandowski after he faced 
charges for battery of a female 
reporter.

That’s not where the story 

ends. There’s so much division 
in the campaign that following 
Lewandowski’s firing, adviser 
Michael Caputo tweeted out 
“Ding dong the witch is dead!” 
(for which Caputo resigned 
the same day) and former state 
director 
Jim 
Baker 
texted 

Lewandowski, mocking him. 
Still think Trump hires the 
best guys and can run the 
United States, even though his 
campaign looks like a disaster?

Campaign 
chair 
Paul 

Manafort became the No. 1 
guy following Lewandowski. 
We’ll skip his controversial 
comments and go straight to 
his deal with Russia. Viktor 
Yanukovych, a Putin puppet 
running for prime minister 
in Ukraine in 2005, hired 
Manafort 
to 
help 
repair 

his image after the Orange 
Revolution, a mass protest 
in Ukraine after it became 
known that Yanukovych had 
rigged the election. Then The 
New 
York 
Times 
revealed 

that hidden in a secret ledger 
in Ukraine was $12.7 million 
listed for Manafort. Experts 
are unclear as to whether he 
still advises in Ukraine. To 
recap: The man in charge of 
Trump’s 
campaign 
helped 

a 
Russian 
puppet 
dictator 

after 
rigging 
a 
democratic 

election and was paid secretly 
upward of $12 million to do 
so. Manafort was finally fired 
after The Times’ story.

Can we top that? Trump’s 

newest leader, campaign CEO 
Steve Bannon, is the former 
head of far-right (and I mean 
far-right) 
Breitbart 
News. 

Under 
Bannon, 
Breitbart 

News authored articles such 
as 
“Birth 
Control 
Makes 

Women 
Unattractive 
and 

Crazy” to “There’s No Hiring 
Bias Against Women in Tech, 
They Just Suck at Interviews.” 
Former Breitbart spokesman 
Kurt Bardella said of Bannon: 
“He 
made 
more 
off-color 

comments 
about 
minorities 

and homosexuals than I can 
recount,” and that if you were 
on 
their 
Brietbart 
News’s 

conference calls, it sounded 
“like 
a 
white 
supremacist 

rally.”

This is all to contrast with 

Clinton, who has had a stable 
inner-circle since 2015, led by 
young, Democratic superstar 
campaign 
manager 
Robby 

Mook, who is known for “an 
aversion to the spotlight and 
an interest in data.” She has 
a team filled with veterans, 
including her chief strategist 
and pollster, and one of Obama’s 
closest allies, Joel Benenson. 
One of the four corner offices 
in her headquarters belongs 
to 
Elan 
Kriegel, 
Clinton’s 

“invisible guiding hand,” an 
analytic genius who has stayed 
completely out of the spotlight 
— his full name had not been 
tweeted since October 2015 
when 
a 
Politico 
Magazine 

profile was published about 
him in early September.

Republicans, as noted in the 

Politico piece, are terrified 
that Trump’s campaign team 
is so lacking of talent that the 
next generation of Republican 
campaign 
operatives 
is 

nonexistent. 
Clinton’s 

campaign is very far from 
perfect, but her advisers are 
of the highest caliber and she 
trusts them enough to keep 
them through difficult times. 
Her campaign is competent.

And then there’s Trump 

— 
Lewandowski, 
Manafort 

and now Bannon at the helm. 
Firings left and right. Disaster 
and division within the ranks, 
from cheering a firing to 
calling for a literal firing squad. 
A head spokeswoman, Katrina 
Pierson, whose penchant for 
lying and ignoring facts can 
stack up pound to pound with 
anyone on TV. A campaign in 
such constant disarray that the 
only people he truly listens to 
are his own children.

His closest ally in the Senate, 

Jeff Sessions, is most famous 
for joking about the KKK. 
According to a testimony by 
Thomas Figures, an assistant 
U.S. attorney in Alabama at the 
time, “Sessions was heard by 

several colleagues commenting 
that he ‘used to think they 
(the Klan) were OK’ until he 
found out some of them were 
‘pot smokers.’ ” His team of 
economic advisers just happen 
to be some of his biggest 
donors. When asked about 
who he consults concerning 
foreign policy on MSNBC’s 
“Morning Joe,” Trump said, 
“I’m speaking with myself, 
number one, because I have a 
very good brain and I’ve said a 
lot of things.” 

What about his campaign 

screams this guy can govern? 
The 
Republican 
National 

Convention, 
completely 

controllable 
by 
Trump’s 

campaign, is a free, four-day, 
nationally covered commercial. 
How’d he do in running that 
great 
opportunity? 
It 
was 

arguably the worst convention 
in political history. For the 
first time ever, people were less 
likely to vote for the candidate 
following the convention.

This is the worst campaign 

in 
American 
history. 
This 

was Trump’s test, and he 
failed. Politics isn’t business, 
and his talents clearly do not 
translate. 
He 
doesn’t 
have 

the skills or the people to 
competently operate in the 
political arena, and he would 
make a disastrous president of 
unknown proportions.

LAURA SCHINAGLE

Managing Editor

420 Maynard St. 

Ann Arbor, MI 48109

 tothedaily@michigandaily.com

Edited and managed by students at the University of Michigan since 1890.

SHOHAM GEVA

Editor in Chief

CLAIRE BRYAN 

and REGAN DETWILER 

Editorial Page Editors

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.

Carolyn Ayaub
Claire Bryan

Regan Detwiler
Caitlin Heenan
Jeremy Kaplan

Ben Keller

Minsoo Kim

Payton Luokkala

Kit Maher

Madeline Nowicki
Anna Polumbo-Levy 

Jason Rowland

Lauren Schandevel

Kevin Sweitzer

Rebecca Tarnopol

Ashley Tjhung

Stephanie Trierweiler

EDITORIAL BOARD MEMBERS

CJ Mayer can be reached at 

mayercj@umich.edu.

MELISSA STRAUSS | COLUMN

We can’t leave refugees behind

I

n light of the recent 
ceasefire 
agreement 

brokered 
between 

Secretary of State John Kerry 
and his Russian counterpart 
Sergey Lavrov in Syria, I 
began thinking again about 
an 
issue 
that 
is 

close to my heart: 
the Syrian refugee 
crisis. During my 
internship with the 
Truman 
National 

Security 
Project 

this 
summer, 

I 
conducted 
a 

research 
project 

focusing 
on 

U.S. 
policy 

toward 
refugee 

resettlement. 
Throughout 

my research, I found myself 
alarmed by the global response 
to the largest humanitarian 
crisis the world has faced since 
World War II and extremely 
worried for the United States’s 
future 
response 
following 

this 
important 
presidential 

election.

The Syrian refugee crisis 

is something we hear about 
almost daily — and often 
through the lens of highly 
political rhetoric. We’ve all 
heard of Donald Trump’s call 
to ban Muslims from entering 
our country, the fact that 
31 governors have sworn to 
stop admitting refugees into 
their states and numerous 
politicians claim the refugee 
crisis is a window for ISIS 
and other extremist groups 
to 
enter 
our 
country 
in 

“Trojan horse” fashion. In a 
nation built on the premise of 
freedom and security for all, 
this growing trend of fear and 
hate is alarming. While the 
U.S. election in November will 
clearly affect our own lives at 
home, it will also be incredibly 
important for the 4.8 million 
Syrians who have fled their 
homes in search of safety.

The United States has a 

long 
history 
of 
admitting 

refugees from all over the 
world. Providing a safe haven 
for vulnerable populations is 
in our DNA. Since World War 
II, the United States has been 
a global leader on refugee 
resettlement, providing homes 
for 3 million refugees since 
1975. 
This 
year, 
President 

Barack Obama and Secretary 
Kerry have pledged to admit at 
least 10,000 Syrian refugees in 
2016, and 100,000 total world 
refugees by 2017. While these 
are important and meaningful 
steps in the right direction, the 
election this fall has enormous 
implications for our future 
policies regarding refugees. If 

we get it wrong, then we risk 
turning our backs on refugees, 
and thus turning our backs 
on deeply rooted American 
values.

Experts 
argue 
that 

admitting Syrian refugees into 

our country will not 
only maintain and 
restore 
American 

credibility 
abroad, 

but is also essential 
in advancing our own 
national 
security 

interests. 
Ryan 

Crocker, 
former 

U.S. 
ambassador 

to Syria, Iraq and 
Lebanon, 
stated 

that 
“increased 

resettlement and aid helps 
protect the stability of a region 
that is home to U.S. allies.” 
Additionally, 
a 
bipartisan 

group of former U.S. national 
security 
advisers, 
CIA 

directors 
and 
department 

secretaries 
sent 
a 
letter 

to 
Congress 
in 
December 

stating 
that 
“resettlement 

initiatives help advance U.S. 
national 
security 
interests 

by supporting the stability of 
our allies and partners that 
are struggling to host large 
numbers of refugees.” If we 
don’t help ensure the stability 
of our allies, we risk these 
states 
breaking 
down 
and 

giving rise to more extremist 
and hostile groups.

Demagogues 
would 
have 

you believe that terrorists 
will easily slip across our 
borders posing as refugees, 
but 
these 
statements 
are 

highly 
debatable. 
In 
our 

nation’s 
long 
history 
of 

refugee 
resettlement, 
a 

refugee has never successfully 
committed a single terrorist 
attack against us. Since 9/11, 
only 
three 
refugees 
have 

been convicted for terror-
related activities — and none 
of them had any viable plans 
for an attack within the U.S. 
Unlike European countries, 
where refugees often show 
up on their borders without 
the luxury of screening first, 
the U.S. refugee screening 
process constitutes possibly 
the most difficult manner of 
entering the country. Refugees 
must endure a lengthy 18- 
to 
24-month-long 
process, 

involving the UNHCR and 
multiple 
U.S. 
government 

departments. Of the 4.8 million 
registered 
Syrian 
refugees, 

only about 18,000 have been 
referred by the UNHCR to be 
resettled in the U.S.

Once 
refugees 
arrive 

in the United States, they 
are 
connected 
with 
nine 

voluntary 
resettlement 

agencies that help them settle 
into their new communities 
and 
become 
economically 

self-sufficient. A great new 
student 
organization, 
the 

Michigan Refugee Assistance 
Program, 
has 
partnered 

with Jewish Family Services 
to help resettle refugees in 
the Ann Arbor area. The 
group is dedicated to raising 
awareness about the current 
refugee crisis, particularly by 
adding a student voice to this 
crisis while also humanizing 
refugees.

LSA senior Nicole Khamis 

says she decided to start 
MRAP this semester because 
it is a time when local refugee 
resettlement 
agencies 
need 

assistance 
the 
most 
and 

students often feel helpless 
in the face of this incredible 
crisis. “I have little patience 
for any arguments against 
settling refugees in the United 
States for numerous reasons, 
but mainly because they are 
based in xenophobic fears and 
also reproduce the rhetoric of 
Arabs/Muslims as terrorists 
and violent in nature,” Khamis 
says. Additionally, if Donald 
Trump is elected in November, 
Khamis 
believes 
refugees 

will no longer be able to seek 
protection 
in 
the 
United 

States.

Refugee policy is not a 

partisan issue. It is a moral 
one. As the situation in the 
Middle 
East 
worsens, 
the 

United States has an obligation 
to provide assistance to this 
vulnerable population and to 
our allies on the frontlines. If 
xenophobic rhetoric continues 
to 
flourish 
in 
American 

political discourse, we risk 
alienating our Muslim and 
Arab-American 
populations 

— 
possibly 
leading 
some 

vulnerable 
people 
to 
seek 

support and community in 
overseas terror organizations. 
Electing the right person in 
November 
will 
determine 

whether or not we hold true to 
American values or succumb 
to fear and bigotry.

A 1939 poll showed that 

three out of five Americans 
opposed 
the 
resettlement 

of 10,000 Jewish refugees 
fleeing from Nazi Germany. 
Imagine the devastation and 
imagine our nation’s current 
cultural 
fabric 
had 
these 

voices prevailed during that 
time of crisis. We cannot allow 
these same voices to triumph 
today’s context.

Brent Kim is an LSA junior and was 

a communications intern for Public 

Citizen in summer 2016. 

Melissa Strauss can be reached at 

melistrau@umich.edu. 

MELISSA
 STRAUSS

CJ MAYER

