4A — Friday, September 23, 2016
Opinion
The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com
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
FROM THE DAILY
Create a student regent
This request is not a new one.
Over the years, CSG candidates’
platforms
have
stressed
the
importance of increasing student
involvement in the higher-up
workings
of
the
University.
Both
former
CSG
President
Cooper Charlton and current
CSG President David Schafer
advocate for the board’s bylaws
to include a student regent. The
board’s primary responsibility is
to supervise the University and
control expenditures from the
University’s funds, meaning their
decisions directly impact students.
This request is also not an
outlandish
idea:
70
percent
of public universities in the
United States have a student in
such a position. The University
of
Wisconsin,
University
of
Washington,
University
of
Maryland
and
University
of
California system all have a student
regent. Universities nationwide
recognize
the
importance
of
having a student perspective not
only in board meetings, but also in
regent decisions, as the outcomes
do have tangible impacts on
students. At the University, for
example, the board votes every
year on the upcoming academic
calendars. For fall semester 2015,
the board voted to have the last
exams two days before Christmas,
leading students to petition to
change the calendar. Though the
calendars are set in advance, a
student on the board could have
provided input on the ways in
which ending fall semester so late
does a disservice to students (and
even faculty members). Other
important
decisions
directly
affecting students that are left
to the board’s authority include
approving the University’s annual
budget, approving construction
projects and determining yearly
tuition rates.
While it is true that our student-
elected CSG president has the
opportunity to speak and present
at the board’s meetings, the alloted
speaking time is just five minutes.
A student on the board would have
the ability to discuss issues with
regents for an extended period
of time and be involved in the
decision-making process. Though
the board meetings include a small
discussion before voting on an
issue, oftentimes both discussions
and decisions have been made
prior to the meeting. In July
2014, the Detroit Free Press sued
the University over violations of
the Open Meetings Act based on
how the regents conducted their
monthly meetings. The lawsuit
held that based on the Free Press’
year-long analysis, the regents
routinely make decisions about
the
University’s
governance
behind closed doors, without
public
accountability.
Having
a student regent would ensure
students are directly involved in
these discussions and decision-
making both prior to and at the
board meetings.
Additionally,
unlike
CSG
executives,
who
have
many
other
duties
that
are
more
related to everyday student life,
a student regent would be able
to dedicate their time entirely
to becoming an expert regent.
Though sometimes issues regents
vote upon are similar to CSG
initiatives, we feel decisions made
at the regent level are specifically
different
from
CSG’s
work:
appropriating funds, approving
building renovation plans and
authorizing
transactional
partnerships, to name a few. A
student regent would be able to
dedicate his or her time entirely
to researching, discussing and
proposing solutions to the types of
issues that fall under the board’s
responsibility.
Furthermore,
opponents to adding a nonvoting
student member to the board
argue that a student could not
possibly have the expertise to hold
such a position. But there are many
other high-level positions filled by
students at this University, such
as CSG president, athletic team
captains, presidents of nationwide
student organizations, the editor
in chief of The Michigan Daily and
countless others that are arguably
also very difficult positions.
It’s important to note that
adding even a nonvoting student
member to the board challenge
Article VIII, Section 5 of the
Michigan
state
constitution.
The constitution states, “The
board of each institution shall
consist of eight members who
shall hold office for terms of eight
years and who shall be elected
as provided by law,” and only
mentions one nonvoting member
— the university president. It does
not, however, specify whether
the president can be the only
nonvoting member. Having more
than one nonvoting member on
the board is not addressed in the
constitution, so adding a student to
the board seems neither explicitly
legal nor illegal. Though if the
process moves forward, this issue
will have to be resolved. Even so,
changing the constitution is not
out of reach, as amendments and
referendums are not infrequent
in Michigan.
This
being
said,
we
acknowledge it may be very
difficult to achieve this goal,
given that a change to the
Michigan
Constitution
may
be necessary. We advocate
to the highest degree for this
constitutional change; however,
if implementing a student regent
is not feasible, it is still vital that
student input within the board’s
decisions is increased. Firstly,
creating a group of students
who are dedicated to discussing
regent-related
issues
and
allowing representatives from
that group time before and during
the board meetings to voice
their concerns would increase
student
input.
Secondly,
scheduling regular meetings
between the board and student
groups would also increase
students’ abilities to participate
and have a voice in issues.
So while we applaud the steps
the board took by adding back in
the bylaw that states they will
consider more student input,
much more concrete action
needs to be taken. Implementing
a nonvoting student regent and
creating more places for students
to have clear dialogue with regents
are important next steps to take.
T
hough
Dr.
Denis
Mukwege
was
here
at the University of
Michigan just yesterday, he
won’t be staying long. He has
to get back to Panzi Hospital, a
tall, tan stucco building in the
eastern hills of the Democratic
Republic
of
Congo.
There,
he will treat rape victims —
women
and
children
who
come to the hospital following
attacks by militia groups that
roam the DRC. Mukwege has
been working in the region for
many years. When he returns
from this latest trip to the
United States, he may treat
not only new women who have
been attacked, but also women
coming back after a second
or third rape. Sometimes he
treats the children of women he
helped years before.
For attendees at Mukwege’s
talk yesterday, this was a rare
opportunity to meet a key
human rights leader. Mukwege
has received countless awards,
including
our
own
Raoul
Wallenberg Medal in 2010 and a
nomination for the Nobel Peace
Prize in 2013. The New York
Times called him a “steadying
presence among the turmoil” of
his region.
All too often, these events on
campus with such influential
people are used as a “get out of
jail free card” when it comes
to addressing human rights:
Invite
a
few
humanitarian
heroes, applaud loudly, get a
selfie, go home. What starts
as an earnest resolution to do
better and be inspired ends
in a self-congratulatory pat
on the back of the University
community. For us to feel
worthy of handing out human
rights awards and looking up
to true humanitarians like
Mukwege, a closer look at our
own humanitarian record, and
ongoing complicity in abuses
around the world, is crucial.
It’s far too easy for us to feel
both guiltless and powerless
in conflicts far from our leafy
campus. But the fact of the
matter is, as remote, exotic and
inhumane as events in the DRC
seem to us, our lives are bound
to theirs by a thin, fragile slice
of metal: our electronics, which
are drenched with Congolese
blood and heaped with U.S.
dollars. When I examine my own
life, a series of strange parallels
illustrates our complicity. It’s all
in the numbers.
On May 1, 1996, I am born;
I drool and sleep a lot. In the
DRC, the first Congo War
starts. U.S. forces and other
Western governments installed
a dictator decades before, then
let him fall when they no longer
needed him. In his place came
a new leader, an assassination
and chaos. And something new
— mass rape as an explicit tool
of war.
On May 1, 2008, I receive
my first cell phone for my 12th
birthday; it has a tiny screen
and can send and receive
texts (that’s about all it can
do).
It
contains
tantalum,
tungsten and other minerals
found in the DRC. Companies
like AngloGold Ashanti and
Century
make
deals
with
violent, abusive militia groups
and receive highly favorable
mining concessions in return
for hard cash.
And then there are numbers,
larger
and
darker:
50,000
victims treated at Mukwege’s
hospital.
Five
hundred
thousand women raped since
the Congolese conflict began,
according to Human Rights
Watch. According to Mukwege,
five million Congolese were
killed by Belgium during its
colonial expansion in the 1800s
— half the country’s population.
We cannot rely on our own
government to address these
problems. That’s what we’ve
been doing in the past, and it
hasn’t worked. So many of the
tenets of “American values,”
enshrined in the Declaration
of Independence, have been
thrown out the window when
American money was at stake.
This is not a hot topic issue, a
flash in the American pan. Our
connection to these resources
makes
us
responsible,
as
consumers and as citizens, for
this violation of core American
beliefs.
There is something we can
do. Mining companies’ deals
are currently as opaque as a
pile of shale, that being, they
are most definitely not. But they
could be transparent, which
would mean they would not
be able to make concessions or
deals with warlords and rebel
militias. They’d have to pay a
living wage to their workers in
the DRC. They’d have to pay a
fair amount for the privilege of
getting stinking rich — putting
money into Congolese education,
hospitals like Dr. Mukwege’s,
power lines and roads in the areas
they are currently exploiting.
We, as American citizens, buying
these
companies’
products,
would know whether the people
who built our high-speed, high-
tech world were doing the same
in Central Africa, or simply
breaking the countries down for
parts that we deem valuable.
Your voice may seem small,
but the University’s isn’t. Speak
up, and someone just might
listen. Problems do not become
intractable until they are met
with apathy. Do not let the work
of true humanitarians like Dr.
Mukwege become compromised
by our inaction.
The chip on our shoulders
MERIN MCDIVITT | OP-ED
Merin McDivitt is an LSA junior and
a Daily Arts writer.
L
ast Thursday, the University of Michigan Board of Regents voted to
reinstate a bylaw that encourages student participation in University
decision-making removed in 2011. Both former and current Central
Student Government presidents have also made efforts since March to
allow for more student input during board meetings. While reinstating the
bylaw is a good step forward — it clearly communicates to students that
the board values student input — the University ultimately needs to make
more concrete changes to incorporate student voice. To effectively achieve
this goal, the regents should amend their bylaws and create a position for a
nonvoting student member on the board.
ANNIE TURPIN | CARTOON
EMAIL ANNIE AT ASTURPIN@UMICH.EDU
“Elevated Surfaces!!”
SUBMIT TO OUR SURVIVORS SPEAK SERIES
The Opinion section is creating a space in The Michigan Daily for
first-person accounts of campus sexual assault and its corresponding
personal, academic and legal implications. Submissions will be
published as a series of personal accounts that show an essential
perspective: that of the survivor.
Please submit pieces to Editorial Page Editors Claire Bryan (claireab@michigandaily.com) and
Regan Detwiler (regandet@michigandaily.com) to be considered for publication in this series.
— United States Representative Dan Kildee (MI-05) on the House floor
Thursday afternoon, advocating for Flint funding.
“
NOTABLE QUOTABLE
”
A year later, here we stand. This
Congress has not yet acted to provide
any relief to a community that is
facing the greatest crisis — the
greatest disaster — of its history.
All too often,
these events on
campus with
such influential
people are used
as a “get out of
jail free card”
when it comes to
addressing human
rights.
MERIN MCDIVITT