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