100%

Scanned image of the page. Keyboard directions: use + to zoom in, - to zoom out, arrow keys to pan inside the viewer.

Page Options

Download this Issue

Share

Something wrong?

Something wrong with this page? Report problem.

Rights / Permissions

This collection, digitized in collaboration with the Michigan Daily and the Board for Student Publications, contains materials that are protected by copyright law. Access to these materials is provided for non-profit educational and research purposes. If you use an item from this collection, it is your responsibility to consider the work's copyright status and obtain any required permission.

December 06, 2016 - Image 4

Resource type:
Text
Publication:
The Michigan Daily

Disclaimer: Computer generated plain text may have errors. Read more about this.

W

ith
the
election

over, there is finally
a
moment
when

both major political parties can
examine their current standings
and future paths. What is so
fascinating about the
2016 election is that
the Republican Party
was not expected to
win the presidency
nor retain the Senate;
some even speculated
the
House
of

Representatives was
in jeopardy. Yet in
a shocking manner,
the Republican Party
kept
both
houses

of
Congress
and

recaptured the presidency.

When the new administration

and a new Congress are sworn
in this January, Republicans
will control the White House,
Congress, 33 governorships and
have full legislative control in 32
states. That is a remarkable gain
in a time when the Republican
Party was said to be in deep
trouble
with
the
American

electorate. Just a few months ago,
many questioned the relevancy
of the party — often predicting
a complete reform of the right
side of the political aisle. Yet the
opposite happened; momentum
since the 2010 midterms has
carried the Republican Party to
historic levels of power.

Despite
these
victories,

the GOP still needs to remain
focused.
By
keeping
their

eye on both future electoral
strategies and upcoming policy
opportunities,
the
party
is

poised to solidify its control on
the nation’s institutions for the
next decade.

In terms of electoral strategy,

Republicans
certainly
have

much to be optimistic about.
Trump was able to win over 300
electoral votes; he outperformed
with Latinos and women and
unexpectedly mobilized turnout
in Rust Belt states. However, the
party cannot take these gains for
granted. In future elections, the
GOP needs to remain focused
on continually expanding our
party. While we made inroads
with minorities, we still have
plenty of room to grow. We need
to prove to the Midwestern
working class, many of whom
were Democrats who voted for
Trump, that the GOP is the party
that truly represents them. This
election gives us the opportunity

to shed the wrongly applied labels
of corporatist elites and gives
us a path to prove that we have
the policies that actually help
American lives.

In
addition
to
successful

outreach to different
groups
of
people,

the party’s bench is
also
strong.
While

many ridiculed the
nomination processes
for having so many
candidates, it proves
that we have youth
in
the
party
that

will
eventually
be

able to lead. Look
at
Congress,
for

example.
Members

like Florida Sen. Marco Rubio,
Speaker of the House Paul
Ryan, Utah Rep. Mia Love
and Iowa Sen. Joni Ernst are
stars within the party and they
have the power to continue the
party’s momentum in upcoming
elections.

But
in
order
to
remain

electorally successful, we need
to succeed on policy. If the GOP
doesn’t follow through on many
of its promises, this will be a
wasted opportunity. Whether
it be repealing and replacing
Obamacare, securing the border,
reforming
the
tax
code
or

appointing
very
conservative

Supreme
Court
justices,
the

party will match the left’s course
of achieving little if it doesn’t
implement significant changes
to current policy, if not replace
policies entirely.

In
my
opinion,
as
a

conservative
Republican,
we

cannot miss out on the chance to
implement new policies. Every
dollar taken out of my small
paycheck makes a difference.
A simpler, reformed tax system
would go a long way to help out
students across the country.
Repealing
and
replacing

Obamacare
would
jumpstart

the hiring market, as many
businesses have cut hours to
get around certain Obamacare
requirements. As a millennial
who
has
experienced
this

phenomenon personally — a cut
in my hours and pay because
of new Obamacare regulations
— I believe the GOP has so
much potential to both help the
country through its policies and
solidify a moderate portion of
the electorate.

The Republican Party also has

a rare opportunity to reshape
the political debate. Hopefully,
the party will be able to shift
the nation’s attention toward
economic
and
international

issues. Moving away from many
social issues will allow the
party to put forth solutions on
the issues that matter more to
those on the right. The party, by
maintaining a commitment to
promised policy changes, can
potentially solidify a voting bloc
by restructuring the importance
of different political issues with
many different groups, especially
students and younger people
who are fiscally conservative and
socially moderate.

This said, one major question

that remains is that of which
path the party should take in
the coming years. Does the
party become more moderate
on social issues in hopes of
solidifying a large proportion
of the youth that considers
itself Libertarian? Do Trump’s
nationalist
views
take
over

and remain a constant driver
of policy for the foreseeable
future? Or does Reagan’s party
return to his principles and
move farther to the right?

It’s impossible to predict

which path we will take. It will
become clearer, however, as
Trump implements his policies.
Without clear proposals, it’s
anyone’s guess as to what type of
Republican he chooses to be, and
if the party as a whole chooses
to follow him. Nevertheless, it
is obvious that the Republican
Party is not as weak as many
predicted before the election.
With dominant control over
America’s institutions and the
potential for the implementation
of solid policies, the Republican
Party seems poised to be the
party of the future.

Opinion
The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com
4 — Tuesday, December 6, 2016

DAPL— what you can do

CHASE STONE | OP-ED

E

arly
Sunday,
the

U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers
announced

that the easement permit for
construction of the Dakota
Access
Pipeline
would
be

denied,
temporarily
halting

construction
by
Energy

Transfer
Partners.
The

corps
will
now
perform

an
environmental
impact

statement
in
the
coming

months,
though
President-

elect
Donald
Trump’s

administration
will
present

inevitable
challenges
to

environmental
protection,

specifically for the DAPL. In
the wake of the permit denial,
many of us will ask: Is this the
end of the DAPL? And, frankly,
how can we doing anything
about it, 1,000 miles away in
Ann Arbor?

I’m
a
graduate
student

at
the
School
of
Natural

Resources and Environment
and
a
graduate
student

instructor
for
the
Honors

Program.
Since
September,

I’ve
been
co-producing
a

feature
documentary
film

called “Standing Ground” on
the DAPL with director Raviv
Ullman and producers Martin
Spanjers and Jordan Harkins.
Each of us are unaffiliated
with the Standing Rock Sioux;
however, we gained support
from more than 800 individuals
on Kickstarter to help us cover
the DAPL protest on film.
My
responsibilities
include

managing research projects,
summarizing
environmental

policies, sourcing interviews

and
relaying
newsworthy

updates. But, despite all the time
I’ve spent devoted to the DAPL
documentary this semester, I
freely admit: I’ve never even
been to Standing Rock or set foot
in North Dakota.

At Michigan, many of us

are informed by the books we
read, people we talk to and the
geographic location we live in.
Some of us spend our days in
lab mixing solvents and others
pore over Excel spreadsheets;
but no matter what we’re
doing, the time we have on
our hands right now can be
just as impactful outside the
classroom as inside it.

We have no shortage of

students
devoted
to
their

studies,
well
deserving
of

the “Leaders and the Best”
moniker.
Similar
to
my

peers, the time I’ve spent on
the documentary has been
productive, but has incurred
costs: I’ve gotten more Bs and
Cs this semester than ever,
I average five to six hours of
sleep most nights, and lately,
I’ve forgone most solid food
in favor of Soylent because I’m
too busy to cook.

However, I’ve also been

one of the first people outside
Standing Rock to see the footage
of water cannons being sprayed
at protesters and share it with
the world. I’ve connected with
artists,
Congress
members

and
activists;
I’ve
written

fact-checks to the Los Angeles
Times, learned how to treat
mace in the eyes (use milk) and
inquired at least once about
purchasing “drone insurance”
(yes, it exists). So, when the
Army
Corps
released
its

statement on Sunday, despite
being
cautiously
optimistic,

for the first time, I got to share
the taste of a small victory
along with many others, but
more specifically, a victory
belonging to the tribes.

Over the next six to 18

months, the predicted time
period for the Army Corps’
Enivornmental
Impact

Statement to take place on the
DAPL, consider your potential
role — not just on this issue,
necessarily, but in the context
of the world. Dropping out of
school is reserved for geniuses
beginning their tech startup.
Maybe
instead,
consider

dropping
your
six-week

internship to do something
you’re actually called to do.
My roommate’s father — a
Michigan alum — once built a
sailboat in the 1970s to travel
around the world over summer
break.
He
later
became

successful
as
a
financial

adviser. My point is that one’s
“professional” identity is not
one’s main identity — and that’s
the reason why I am doing what
I’m doing now. It is increasingly
apparent that students feel
pressure to find a job and a set
of skills, or else they will lose
out on something, when in fact,
it might be the opposite. The
Army Corps’ Enivornmental
Impact Statement may or may
not be favorable to the Standing
Rock Sioux, and whether you
are for the pipeline or against
it, what is important is that no
one stands complacent.

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
Brett Graham
Caitlin Heenan
Jeremy Kaplan

Ben Keller
Minsoo Kim

Madeline Nowicki
Anna Polumbo-Levy

Jason Rowland

Ali Safawi

Kevin Sweitzer

Rebecca Tarnopol

Ashley Tjhung

Stephanie Trierweiler

EDITORIAL BOARD MEMBERS

Chase Stone is a second year

graduate student at the School of

Natural Resources and Enviornment.

Max Rysztak can be reached at

mrysztak@umich.edu

The future of the GOP

MAX RYSZTAK | COLUMN

MAX

RYSZTAK

FROM THE DAILY

Block DeVos’ appointment

O

n Nov. 23, President-elect Donald Trump officially announced
his nomination for secretary of education, Betsy DeVos,
sparking fierce criticisms from proponents of public education

— including residents of Michigan, where the issue of public education
is in need of so much attention. During her time as chairwoman of the
Michigan Republican Party, DeVos fiercely championed the notion
of schools of choice and student voucher programs, which funnel
government funds initially set aside for public schools toward private
and charter schools. DeVos seems to be blind to the fact that in her
home state of Michigan, privatization programs have historically failed
to reform education systems in cities such as Detroit and Flint. Despite
clear evidence of the charter school sytem’s failures to provide equal
education opportunities for all students, she and her family donated to
the GOP after the Republican-led State Senate approved pro-charter
school legislation. Considering this, as well as her lack of experience,
The Michigan Daily’s Editorial Board opposes her appointment as
secretary of education. But should she be voted in, we believe DeVos
must take a critical look at the reality of Michigan school systems,
consider the role and purpose public schools serve in the United States
and reexamine the effectiveness of her proposals in Michigan before
implementing similar programs nationwide.

The
Department
of

Education’s mission statement
to
“promote
student

achievement and preparation
for
global
competitiveness

by
fostering
educational

excellence and ensuring equal
access” must apply to all U.S.
citizens, not just those who
already have access to quality
education.
Currently,
while

a schools of choice system
in which families can have
the option to send their child
to charter schools in theory
provides
more
opportunity,

oftentimes
it
benefits

wealthier
families
because

they
can
afford
to
drive

their child to a better school
option. In turn, this leaves
public
schools
and
poorer

families in a worse financial
state. If DeVos becomes head
of this department, she must
uphold the mission statement
and
consciously
design
an

educational
system
that

provides resources for every
student’s success.

Additionally, though charter

schools
have
had
success

in Michigan, according to a
Detroit
Free
Press
report,

charter
schools
are
only

marginally better than public
schools.
It’s
alarming
that

despite the large failures of
schools of choice in Michigan,
DeVos has championed these
initiatives as some of the best.
DeVos
should
consider
the

implications
her
proposed

policies will have on areas of
lower socioeconomic status.

In particular, DeVos staunchly

supports
expanding
the

student voucher system that
currently exists in 13 states
and
Washington
D.C.
On

the campaign trail, Trump
proposed delegating $20 billion
in federal funds to school choice
vouchers
for
K-12
students.

As
secretary
of
education,

DeVos
would
spearhead
the

implementation of this flawed
solution to failing public schools.
Despite the good intentions of
voucher programs giving students
opportunities to attend better
schools, programs like these are
risky because they channel money
away from public schools, leading
to a lack of quality education.
For some families, transporting
their children to a school outside
their immediate district is an
onerous task. For other families,
charter schools don’t align with
their values: Private and charter
schools can be privately funded,
and therefore are sometimes
religiously affiliated. Students
from low socioeconomic status
families already face significant
disadvantages
in
quality
of

available
public
education,

because communities with lower
socioeconomic
status
cannot

always provide adequate funding
for
educational
resources.

By
implementing
schools
of

choice and an expansive private
education system, DeVos could
not guarantee students from
underprivileged
backgrounds

would receive a better education
with her plan than from their
local public schools.

While
the
effort
to

transition students from public
schools
to
charter
schools

embodies a needed spirit of
reform in education policy,
DeVos’s
current
plans
for

the proliferation of charter
schools would fail to produce
the quality education that is
desperately needed. Private-
sector
schools
are
largely

unregulated by or accountable
to the U.S. government, and
create their own educational
and teaching standards. The
sheer lack of transparency
in the standards being set
is
problematic,
and
poses

significant
challenges
to

reforming the U.S. education
system. These scenarios are not
theoretical; this is the reality
for the Detroit area.

The
Michigan
Daily

Editorial
Board
opposes

DeVos’s appointment and urges
voters and Michigan senators
Debbie
Stabenow
(D)
and

Gary Peters (D) to get involved
and take action. As voters,
we must call our senators —
whether we are in-state or
out-of-state students — and
voice our opposition to DeVos’s
confirmation.
Michigan

senators should take a close
look at DeVos’s plans and how
they are operating already
and vote for the people. And if
DeVos does become secretary
of education, we implore her
as well as ask others to ask her
to take a better look at charter
schools and privatization of
education in Michigan.

ANNIE TURPIN | CONTACT ANNIE AT ASTURPIN@UMICH.EDU

CHASE STONE

In my opinion,
as a conserative
Republican, we
cannot miss out
on the chance to
implement new

policies.

“Holiday spending”

Back to Top

© 2025 Regents of the University of Michigan