I

n October 2015, I attended a
talk featuring Piper Kerman,
author
of
the
memoir

“Orange Is The New
Black: My Year in a
Women’s
Prison,”

which
inspired
the

award-winning Netflix
television
show.

Kerman devoted much
of her time to talking
about the importance
of criminal justice
reform,
and
the

auditorium was full
of people receptive to
her message.

At the time, thanks to the work

of advocates like Kerman, there
was bipartisan acknowledgment
that the criminal justice system
was
unfair,
ineffective
and

inefficient. It was one of President
Obama’s key objectives and one of
his few agendas that didn’t receive
pushback from Republicans in
Congress. As such, it seemed
like criminal justice reform was
inevitable. In Trump’s America,
though, it seems unimaginable.

It’s quite easy to see why the

system needs to be reformed. The
United States accounts for 4.4
percent of the world’s population
but accounts for 22 percent of the
world’s prison population. With
716 prisoners per 100,000 people,
the United States has the highest
prison population rate in the world.
However, there is no evidence
to suggest that this high rate of
incarceration is due to high rates
of crime. In fact, the International
Crime Victims Survey shows
that the United States has similar
rates of criminal victimization as
Western European countries.

Furthermore,
the
United

States’
staggeringly
high

rates
of
incarceration
have

disproportionately
affected

young Black men with low levels
of education. As of 2008, one
in 10 young African-American
men with high school diplomas
were in jail or prison. For Black
male high school drop-outs, the
incarceration rate was 37 percent.
Given how difficult it is for
ex-offenders to gain employment
and the disenfranchisement of
ex-felons in many states, these
high incarceration rates can have
lasting negative impacts on the
African-American
community.

Thus,
mass
incarceration

perpetuates cycles of economic
and racial inequality.

There are also very high fiscal

costs to the criminal justice
system. In the fiscal year of 2013
alone, the budget request for the
Federal Bureau of Prisons was $6.9
billion and accounted for more
than 25 percent of the Department
of Justice’s budget.

This
is
hardly
surprising

given the United States’ abysmal
recidivism rates. One study found

that within five years
of release, about 76
percent
of
released

prisoners
were

rearrested. Therefore,
it’s hard to ignore
that the U.S. criminal
justice
system
has

failed to reform the
prisoners
whom
it

incarcerates, allowed
for unequal and unjust
outcomes and, in the

process, racked up a huge

bill for U.S. taxpayers.

Due to increasing awareness

of these concerns, the pendulum
of public opinion has swayed
toward
supporting
criminal

justice reform. This push for reform
was clear in October 2015, when
bipartisan legislation was proposed
in the Senate to reduce the length
of mandatory minimum sentences
and ban solitary confinement for
juveniles, among many other reforms.

Unfortunately,
and
despite

diverse and powerful support,
the bill languished in the Senate.
Though it was crafted by senators
on both sides of party lines,
Trump’s law-and-order campaign
brought
back
the
“tough-on-

crime” rhetoric that altered the
conversation and the political
dynamics. This change in tone
permitted (and likely motivated)
several prominent Republicans to
vocally oppose the once-popular bill.
Ultimately, Senate Majority Leader
Mitch McConnell did not allow a
vote on the proposal, deeming it too
controversial and divisive.

If the failure of Congress to pass

a bipartisan bill addressing mass
incarceration dealt a blow to the
goal of criminal justice reform,
Trump’s appointment for attorney
general delivered the knockout
punch. The new attorney general,
Jeff Sessions, was one of the
Republican senators who opposed
the bill and prevented its success.
A look at his history on criminal
justice paints a complicated picture
that leans toward favoring harsh
punishment over rehabilitation,
which calls into question his
commitment to promoting racial
equality broadly and criminal
justice reform specifically.

During Sessions’ confirmation

hearing, Rep. Cedric Richmond
(D–Calif.) said, “Sen. Sessions has
advanced an agenda that will do
great harm to African-American
citizens
and
communities.”

Additionally, civil rights leader
Sen. John Lewis (D–Ga.) said,
“Those who are committed to
equal justice in our society wonder
whether Sen. Sessions’ calls for
law and order will mean today

what it meant in Alabama when I
was coming up back then.”

How valid are those fears, and

can we really assume that criminal
justice reform will be prevented
at a national level for the next
four to eight years? That’s a hard
question to answer at this point
in the administration, but a look
at the new White House website
might be the best indication we
have right now. The website does
not show criminal justice reform
as one of the top issues but does
cite “Standing Up For Our Law
Enforcement Community” as a
pressing concern.

Though this is surely a noble

goal, it is simply not a sufficient
response to the problems plaguing
the criminal justice system. In fact,
unquestioning and unconditional
support of law enforcement can be
dangerous when police are abusing
their power. Federal investigations
have been essential in exposing
the systemic violation of the law
and racial discrimination by police
departments, such as in Ferguson
and Chicago.

Under the heading of “Standing

Up For Our Law Enforcement
Community,” the White House
website states, “Our country needs
more law enforcement, more
community engagement, and more
effective policing.” If correctly
implemented,
these
changes

could certainly help improve
our criminal justice system. But
they won’t mean anything in the
absence of comprehensive reform.
This means that there must be
substantial changes to sentencing
laws and reentry programming.
It also means that police and
prisons need to continue to be held
accountable for discrimination
and unjustified use of force.

These
goals
may
seem

impossible, or at least impractical,
in the new administration, but
it’s important to remember that
change does not need to happen at
a federal level to make a difference.
State legislation has, can and will
make a huge difference in the
battle for criminal justice reform.
In Michigan, for example, a 19-bill
package was re-introduced that
would reform the state’s parole
and probation systems.

It’s time for us to push our state

legislators to pick up where our
national legislators left off. Our
administration may have changed
since last October when I went
to see Piper Kerman talk and
criminal justice reform was all but
certain. However, we as a nation
have not changed, and we can
work to enact change ourselves.

A

fter the election, like
many
of
my
fellow

students, I had mixed

feelings. However, unlike many
of my friends, I felt a small
sense of relief. I knew that
this was going to be a time of
incredible upheaval and chaos
in our country; however, I was
to be exempt from that chaos as I
was planning on studying abroad
for the first five months of the
Donald Trump administration.
For weeks, I bragged that I
wasn’t going to have to deal
with the “peaceful exchange
of power” because I would be
nearly 4,000 miles away.

For my first few weeks in

Paris, I tried my best not to
think about Trump. Every
time my host mother brought
up something he had said on
TV I would quickly change the
subject. I would casually scroll
through my Facebook feed,
stopping on the occasional cat
video and not much else. I was
under the impression that I had
escaped (for the time being)
and attempted to focus on my
life abroad.

What I didn’t realize was

just how small this world
has become. With the advent
of nearly ubiquitous access
to social media, there is no
such thing as “escaping to
another country” anymore. I
thought back to all the people
who threatened to move to
Canada after Trump’s election,

hoping they had realized by
now that running away is the
opposite of a solution. While
his policies may not directly
affect me while I’m a resident
of France, that doesn’t mean I
don’t hear about them or feel
the emotional blowback from
knowing that his policies are
affecting many people I love.

My
attitude
completely

changed the day of the Women’s
March on Paris. I woke up late
the day after the inauguration
and lazily checked my Facebook
feed. I saw that one of my new
friends from my program in
Paris had posted that he would
be
attending
the
Women’s

March. I checked out the
Facebook event and after about
30 seconds of deliberating if
I would rather stay in bed, I
decided to go. I quickly found
out that nearly every student
from my study abroad program
was also going.

A
group
of
my
fellow

students and I met up and
watched as thousands upon
thousands of people slowly
gathered in Human Rights
Square
in
the
shadow
of

the Eiffel Tower. Being the
unorganized
international

students that we are, none of us
remembered to bring signs, but
we spent a great deal of time
admiring the signs around us
in both French and English.
We quickly realized that many
of the people around us were
American, not French. I had no
idea there were this many of us
in Paris.

The march finally began

and, as I’m sure many others
who
participated
in
the

marches around the world did,
I felt an overwhelming sense of
solidarity — a feeling that I’m not
sure I had felt in my time abroad
thus far. While our program
requires that we speak French
at all times, we all slowly slipped
into English, feeling that this
protest constituted a reasonable
exception to the rule. All around
us, bands played, people danced
and crowds shouted chants in
both French and English.

What the march made me

realize is that politics is a
global issue, not just a national
one. It is now estimated that
the march reached millions
of women in the United States
and across the globe, making it
the biggest peaceful protest in
American history. Personally,
I have never been a part of
an event that massive in my
entire life. Before the march,
I didn’t want anything to do
with American politics; they
had exhausted me while I was
back home and all I wanted was
an escape. After the march, I
was so incredibly grateful to
have the chance to stand up for
what I believe in while abroad.
It gave me hope, it made me
feel like I still have a place in
the debate, it made me want
to get involved again. Most
importantly, it woke me up.

Opinion
The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com
4— Thursday, January 26, 2017

Thinking, not doing

AUSTIN XU | OP-ED

I

’m an engineer. You know,
one of those elitist hermits
who resides on North

Campus and only occasionally
takes
the
Bursley-Baits

bus down to chastise those
unfortunate
non-engineers

on
Central
Campus?
Yep.

Even worse, I’m an electrical
engineer. You know … from the
EECS department? I’m one of
those snobs.

I believe that being an

engineer is just as difficult as
any major in “LS and Play.”
There may be differences in
workload,
scheduling
and

campuses, but at the end of the
day, a college education is about
learning. Yet I feel “learning”
has become somewhat lost
in the day-to-day clutter of
college lives. For me to fully
encompass college, I strive to
understand the how and why
behind concepts, not just how
to solve problems. After all,
learning is just the beginning of
my journey; an in-depth grasp
of the underlying ideas enables
me to innovate with a full
comprehension of the problem
at hand. With club meetings,
research, work, term papers
and weekly homework sets,
“learning” has been overtaken
by what I call “doing.”

My
mother
has
always

told me that education is
the one thing that cannot be
taken from me. Wherever I
go, whatever I do, a higher
education is invaluable. And
it’s not because I can memorize
an entire chart of Laplace
transformations,
recite

Maxwell’s equations or tell the
difference between dynamic
and static polymorphism. No,
these explicit things — or any
of the numerous equations and
facts I’ve crammed into my
head — are not going to land
me a job or even advance my
academic career.

You may stop me here and

ask, “Don’t you need to know
those things to do well?” We’ve
arrived at my point. How I

define academic success isn’t
through a number out of four
or even 4.4 (I’m looking at you,
Ross), but rather by how much
I have thought, am thinking
and will think. Because at
the end of the day, education
comes down to teaching a set of
critical thinking skills.

It’s easy to get caught up in

“doing things.” But what does
this mean? Time and time
again, I have heard people
say, “Oh, it won’t be bad after
I memorize these equations,”
or “I’ll just pack my cheat
sheet with these equations.”
Number crunching. Plug and
chug. Is that the point of our
education? When we step into
the workforce, we have all
the resources available to us.
There’s no need to memorize
the formulas off the top of
your head. In the real world,
job performance is ultimately
measured by how much you
think. Once again: thinking.
I’m
a
firm
believer
that

understanding course material,
making sure you know how the
equations are derived, how the
certain relationships are formed
or why a certain concept is the
way it is serves a far greater
purpose than memorizing.

And it’s not just me who

thinks that way. Eric Mazur,
a
professor
at
Harvard

University, felt the same way
after testing his introductory-
level
students
conceptually.

In his article on assumptions
in education, Mazur describes
the outcomes from traditional
lecture and from an alternative
approach where students are
required to read the material
before coming to a discussion-
based
class
facilitated
by

iClickers. He found in the
alternative approach students
were able to better internalize
the material, which led to
improved performance on both
conceptual
and
traditional

problems. While this article
was
published
more
than

eight years ago, the message
is timeless: A fundamental
understanding
of
concepts

enables students to generalize
their approach to any given

problem while honing their
critical thinking skills.

Rote
memorization
will

only get you so far. It might
get you a college degree, but
it doesn’t advance you as a
person. It doesn’t develop the
critical analysis skills that are
necessary to do any job, let alone
an engineering job. It robs you
of your time at an institution
of higher learning. Having an
in-depth understanding of the
material presented in class
certainly helps. Sure, you may
never use 90 percent of the
class material, but having that
baseline knowledge to build
off of serves as the foundation
of
comprehending
high-level

problems in the “real world.”
By
knowing
the
underlying

theory and relationships of the
final product or solution, as an
engineer I can easily identify
problems I may encounter,
outline
different
routes
to

take and then decide between
trade-offs.

As someone who used the

brute force of memorization
to get through high school, it
is probably hypocritical of me
to comment on learning. But
the more time I spend here at
the University of Michigan, the
more success I find in diving
deeply into the course material,
picking the brains of professors
and exploring the world through
research. I’ll only be in such an
academic environment once, an
environment where people are
obsessed with learning. It makes
me want to learn. Think. Question.
Examine. This translates not only
in class but also to projects where
I can “get my hands dirty” and
build something.

My mother was right, but her

words need a bit of tweaking.
The critical thinking gained
through higher education is
the one thing that cannot be
taken from me. From today to
the day I take my last steps on
campus, to the day I take my
last steps at my workplace, I
hope to be learning, exploring
and, of course, thinking.

REBECCA LERNER

Managing Editor

420 Maynard St.

Ann Arbor, MI 48109

tothedaily@michigandaily.com

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

EMMA KINERY

Editor in Chief

ANNA POLUMBO-LEVY

and REBECCA TARNOPOL

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
Megan Burns

Samantha Goldstein

Caitlin Heenan
Jeremy Kaplan

Max Lubell

Alexis Megdanoff
Madeline Nowicki
Anna Polumbo-Levy

Jason Rowland

Ali Safawi

Kevin Sweitzer

Rebecca Tarnopol

Ashley Tjhung

Stephanie Trierweiler

EDITORIAL BOARD MEMBERS

Austin Xu is a sophomore in the

College of Engineering.

Women’s march abroad

TYREE COWELL | STUDY ABROAD SERIES

Criminal injustice

MARY KATE WINN | COLUMN

Mary Kate Winn can be reached at

winnm@umich.edu.

Tyree Cowell is a junior in LSA

studying abroad in Paris, France.

MARY KATE

WINN

TYREE COWELL

AUSTIN XU

CONTRIBUTE TO THE CONVERSATION

Readers are encouraged to submit letters to the editor and op-eds.
Letters should be fewer than 300 words while op-eds should be 550
to 850 words. Send the writer’s full name and University affiliation to

tothedaily@michigandaily.com.

—Women’s march on Washington national co -chair, Linda

Sarsourin an op-ed for Women’s Media Center.

“

NOTABLE QUOTABLE

Women are intersectional human beings

who live multi-issued lives. When we
are protected, when we are respected,
when we are able to thrive and given
the same opportunities as our male
counterparts... — our nation will rise.”