Opinion The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com 4A — Wednesday, November 20, 2019 Alanna Berger Zack Blumberg Emily Considine Emma Chang Joel Danilewitz Emily Huhman Krystal Hur Ethan Kessler Magdalena Mihaylova Michael Russo Timothy Spurlin Miles Stephenson Nicholas Tomaino Joel Weiner Erin White FINNTAN STORER Managing Editor Stanford Lipsey Student Publications Building 420 Maynard St. Ann Arbor, MI 48109 tothedaily@michigandaily.com Edited and managed by students at the University of Michigan since 1890. MAYA GOLDMAN Editor in Chief MAGDALENA MIHAYLOVA AND JOEL DANILEWITZ 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. EDITORIAL BOARD MEMBERS MAX STEINBAUM | COLUMN Populism’s popularity ISABELLE SCHINDLER | COLUMN Information leads to tolerance W hat started as a custody battle in Texas over seven-year-old twins has transformed into a cultural debate that underscores the damaging effects of intolerance and misinformation about health care for transgender people. The custody battle between Jeffrey Younger and Anne Georgulas made national headlines in late October due to the couple’s disagreement over the gender identity of their child. One of their twins, who chooses to go by Luna, was assigned male at birth but identifies as female. Luna first began expressing a desire to be a girl at around age three. Since then, her mother has taken Luna to doctors who have recommended certain gender-affirming actions, such as allowing Luna to dress as a girl and identify as a girl in public. These so-called gender-affirming actions follow the American Academy of Pediatrics’ guidelines on how best to support children like Luna. Luna’s father, however, refused to follow these recommended steps and would not recognize his daughter as a girl. He continued to use male pronouns for the child, called Luna by her birth name and refused to allow her to dress in female clothes. As he and his wife entered into a custody case, Younger also began publicizing the court battles, using a website created to raise donations for himself. He claimed that Georgulas was forcing Luna to identify as a girl and was going to push a medical sex change on Luna. Younger also used his website and subsequent media coverage for personal monetary gain. He is said to have made over $139,000 as a result of his actions. It did not take long for right- wing media to pick up on this story and add further false information, including claiming that Georgulas was going to “chemically castrate” Luna. Soon, the case became fodder for conservative politicians. Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, claimed Luna was being used as a “pawn in a left-wing political agenda,” and Gov. Greg Abbott, R-Texas, said he had referred the case to the Texas Department of Family Services. These comments by politicians only serve to misinform people about transgender health care. For young children such as Luna, it is recommended to use gender- affirming actions such as allowing them to choose a new name, choose their pronouns and wear what they want. If children continue to identify with the gender they choose, they can begin undergoing treatment to block the onset of puberty in early adolescence. These hormonal treatments are reversible. Only later are the decisions made about undergoing surgeries. On Oct. 24, Judge Kim Cooks decided to award the couple joint custody without compelling Younger to recognize Luna as a female. This unfortunate ruling will undoubtedly have a negative effect on Luna. Upon reading about this court case, I brought it up in conversation and was shocked to find many people whom I interact with in my daily life incorrectly believed that young children would receive irreversible medical treatments to change their gender. Most of these individuals are very tolerant of the LGBTQ community but are unfamiliar with the process of how gender affirmation works in regards to young children. For these people, it was simply a lack of information or even worse, the spread of misinformation. One of the most shocking things about this whole story is the role of fake news and hyperbole. Not only were websites pushing Younger’s claims, but so were elected officials such as governors and members of Congress. These are people who at face value we believe we can trust, but in reality, we cannot. Though it may be tedious, it is more important than ever for us to be cautious and to question the media we consume. We will all be better off if we read critically and ensure that what we are reading is actually rooted in fact. If people ensured they read credible articles on this case, they would likely be able to find out about the benefits of gender- affirming actions and would, therefore, be more accepting of parents and children who are using these actions. If we want to build a more tolerant and accepting world for children like Luna, it is up to all of us to embrace information that is based in truth. Isabelle Schindler can be reached at ischind@umich.edu. O ne hundred and ninety- five years ago, the Democratic-Republican Party tapped a hot-tempered Tennessean nicknamed “Old Hickory” to headline its presidential ticket. Andrew Johnson, the hero of the Battle of New Orleans — an entirely self-made man who grew up impoverished and orphaned in the Waxhaws region of South Carolina region of the Carolinas — received more than 45,000 more popular votes and 15 more electoral votes than his nearest competitor, National Republican John Quincy Adams, but fell short of the electoral vote majority necessary to secure the Oval Office. In accordance with the Twelfth Amendment, the election was therefore to be decided by the House of Representatives. Through congressional maneuvering — nefarious or adroit, depending on perspective — Adams, the son of Founding Father John Adams, won the House vote in February 1825. Supporters felt that Jackson, who had received a clear plurality, had been snubbed by Adams and his congressional allies. Four years later, the 1828 election featured a second showdown between Jackson and the incumbent Adams, offering an opportunity to rectify the outcome of 1824. Much of Jackson’s base, rooted in the rural South and western frontier, disdained Adams as a pampered New England aristocrat. In Jackson, a man of the humblest origins, they had found a champion and protector of the common man against the blue-blooded Washington establishment. The populist’s resounding victory, therefore, was the first electoral triumph of the everyday American against the elite class to which the first six occupants of the White House belonged. The electoral outcome, Jackson beamed, was a “triumph of the great principle of self-government over the intrigues of aristocracy.” The forgotten man, engaged in a perpetual struggle for recognition in a world dominated by elite interests, now had a champion at the highest seat in American government. Like an ocean tide that advances and recedes, the resurgence of a populist animus against “the elites” to the forefront of American politics is inevitable. The 2016 election witnessed a rebirth of this perennial struggle. With the clinching of Wisconsin’s 10 electoral votes, Donald Trump became president-elect at 2:30 a.m. November 9, 2016. An hour later, the brash New Yorker took to Twitter and acknowledged the populist wave that carried him to victory. “The forgotten man and woman,” Trump promised, “will never be forgotten again.” The national populism that came to define Trump’s brand resonated with Americans who, like Jackson’s supporters, felt disaffected and disconnected with the world around them. Hillary Clinton, cast by her opponent as a self- serving elitist, was an iteration of John Quincy Adams; Trump, an energetic disrupter, promised due consideration of the common man. In what was evidently perceived as a bold stand against the establishment machine, Trump framed himself as the brusque Jacksonian champion of blue-jeans America. Feelings of alienation — legitimacy aside — is what makes populist rhetoric so attractive. The fact that right-wing dimensions of populism have surged in the United States in recent years is no accident, because it was conservative populations who felt alienated in the lead up to the 2016 election. Take immigration, a spotlight issue in the last election cycle. Trump’s antipathies toward illegal immigrants were a rhetorical centerpiece of his presidential campaign; he has even since characterized illegal immigration as an “invasion” that has “violently overrun” America’s southern border. In promising a border wall, Trump seemed to reassure Americans that under his administration, unwelcome outsiders would not overtake Americans in their own country. The populist, anti- establishment character of Trump’s campaign rhetoric is evident in these statements too. “The fundamental problem with the immigration system in our country,” Trump said at an August 2016 campaign rally in Arizona, “is that it serves the needs of wealthy donors, political activists and powerful politicians. Let me tell you who it doesn’t serve: it doesn’t serve you, the American people.” Conservatives, however, by no means have a corner on populism. A political narrative that juxtaposes the “common man” with the “elite,” the cornerstone of all populist ideologies, has found refuge in left-leaning rhetoric, too. While conservative populism has devoted much of its energy to immigration, Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt. — the left’s most prominent populist — has railed against big business, corporate interests and the top one percent. The progressive emphasis on tackling inequality has found increasing support: 29 percent of Democrats were self-described “progressives” in 2016, a figure that rocketed to 44 percent by last year’s midterms. While none of the presidential candidates are as left-wing as Sanders, several of the presidential hopefuls have championed populist policies, such as sweeping health care reform and antitrust measures. What has become clear from all this is that populism is in fashion because the theme of the common man against the elites is resonating with Americans of all political stripes. Four years ago, a New York developer observed this reality, built a campaign around it and took the White House through a populist wave. Three of the most important states in the 2020 election are Michigan, Wisconsin and Ohio, which together command a potentially decisive 44 electoral votes. With their Midwestern, old- school idealism, voters in these states could very well buy into a liberal brand of populism. While most Democratic candidates fare well in head- to-head polling against Trump, they would still do well to consider why Trump was able to turn these states red in 2016 — a question whose answer is rooted, of course, in populism’s popularity. Max Steinbaum can be reached at maxst@umich.edu. SUBMIT TO SURVIVORS SPEAK The Opinion section has created a space in The Michigan Daily for first-person accounts of sexual assault and its corresponding personal, academic and legal implications. Submission information can be found at https://tinyurl.com/survivespeak. 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. FROM THE DAILY Building on CAPS A s the winter months quickly approach, many University students may begin to feel their moods darken as the weather gets drearier and schoolwork becomes more intense. During such times, mental health support services are in high demand. For many students, the first line of defense against mental health struggles is the University of Michigan’s Counseling and Psychological Services. However, as wait times for appointments reach upward of two weeks, it is clear CAPS may not be accessible to all students seeking assistance. Many University students frequently criticize CAPS as ineffective, largely because of the long wait times. Services such as CAPS are deeply important to the University, and we encourage all students to seriously seek help if they need it. However, as students at the University, we feel there are fundamental and structural changes that CAPS must make in order to ensure that students are able to obtain the proper care. For many students, the actual purpose of CAPS is unclear. They do not prescribe medications for mental illness, but rather serve as a resource for short-term talk therapy and can act as a pipeline to other services on campus. They mainly act as a treatment center for acute issues and not for long-term, specialized care. However, the often prohibitively-long wait times do not reflect this aspect of providing care for short-term issues. Additionally, for many students on campus who may not have diagnosable mental disorders but regardless struggle with the demands of college life, talk therapy should certainly be prioritized over other treatment options such as medication. For this reason, they are an excellent resource for many University students. Yet the inability of CAPS to meet with students over a longer period of time is a hindrance to such individuals. The fact that they are unable to provide for such services with its current budget is understandable. However, CAPS should serve as a pipeline to other options for students in need of longer-term care. This can include services such as local therapists holding “office hours” to speak with students in need a few times a week, referrals to therapists in Michigan Medicine and access to professional therapists covered by insurance or with need-based aid. With that in mind, it would be helpful to students if CAPS took action to amplify their outreach and expand their resources. Certain steps have been taken, including North Campus recently opening their own Wellness Zone, but there needs to be more available to students living on North beyond the sun lamps in this space. CAPS has also taken steps to create school- specific therapists for students on North Campus and beyond. This includes the implementation of “embedded” psychologists and social workers: At least one specialized and full- time counselor in each University school, including those on North Campus. CAPS now even has two counselors conveniently available for all students in the College of Engineering. While these school-specific counselors do help to increase the therapist- student ratio, there are more areas that need funding and resources. While we acknowledge the work of CAPS with school- specific therapists and counselors for non-binary and trans individuals, CAPS should continue to expand resources so more students are more comfortable readily accessing them. Implementation of the CAPS Trans Care Team, a group of mental health care providers specifically trained in providing affirming care to trans and non-binary students, is a great step in the right direction. Unfortunately, long wait times and limited professional resources can still compel students feel as if they cannot or should not seek adequate help. After all, knowing that there is scarce availability can make students hesitant to take those resources away from a fellow student who might “need it more.” We acknowledge that CAPS on their own cannot simply revolutionize the current plan and implement new, radical programs. For that reason, the University should consider allocating more funding to CAPS so new ideas can be seen through and more staff can be hired. U-M’s budget for Counseling Services this year is nearly $3 million, a nearly $800,000-dollar decrease from that of the previous year. The University does not seem to have a lack of disposable income — the Michigan Union renovation, just one of many major campus construction projects, had a budget of $85.2 million. A new medical building is purported to cost U-M more than $900 million. It seems deeply illogical to cut funding to CAPS. There is an outstanding and chronic issue with mental health among students on campus, and U-M should recognize and respond to this demand for more mental health resources. It is arguably more important to have healthy, happy and treated students than a new, shiny building. CAPS does a lot for our campus, but they could do a lot more and reach a much broader range of students if increased funding was poured into the program. While we do not want to negate the help they currently provide for thousands of students, we do challenge that this help is often temporary, and resources for long-term care often fall short. With the winter season steadily approaching, and as daylight continues to decline, we encourage better and more expansive mental health options and programming for students on campus. MAX STEINBAUM It is more important than ever for us to be cautious and to question the media If you or someone you know is in need of counseling and psychological services, CAPS can be reached at (734)-764-8312.