4 — Tuesday, April 14, 2020
Opinion
The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com
Alanna Berger
Zack Blumberg
Brittany Bowman
Emily Considine
Jess D’Agostino
Jenny Gurung
Cheryn Hong
Krystal Hur
Ethan Kessler
Zoe Phillips
Mary Rolfes
Michael Russo
Timothy Spurlin
Miles Stephenson
Joel Weiner
Erin White
ERIN WHITE
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.
ELIZABETH LAWRENCE
Editor in Chief
EMILY CONSIDINE AND
MILES STEPHENSON
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
MIN SOO KIM | COLUMN
What we can learn from Korea
A
s much as I would love to
find a different topic to
write about, the COVID-
19 pandemic has been the only
relevant
topic
that
has
been
updating itself for the past few
weeks. The University of Michigan
encouraged all students to return
to their permanent residence, so I
left Ann Arbor to fly back to South
Korea last Saturday. When I finally
stepped out of the airplane full of
people sharing the same objective
of reaching their homes after about
14 hours of travel, I could see that
my home country was dealing with
the whole pandemic situation in a
radically different manner.
It usually takes about 10 to 15
minutes to get through the passport
control and pick up your luggage at
the Incheon International Airport.
However, this time it took me an hour
and a half. Several teams of airport
staff members and public health
workers lined up the passengers
where they checked if all incoming
passengers
had
downloaded
a
self-diagnosis tracking application
on their phones. I was given
more than enough information
and
explanation
regarding
the
application and the need for us
to download it to keep track of
our health. Then, when I finally
reached the actual checkpoint,
a public health official checked
my temperature with a simple
electronic thermometer. I recorded
98.6 degrees and was given a piece
of paper that read “quarantine
certificate.” I was then asked to fill
out brief paperwork that asked for
my address and phone number.
When I asked the officer collecting
the paperwork what this was for,
he kindly answered that the Korean
government newly mandated all its
returning citizens to practice self-
quarantine for 14 days and those
pieces of information were needed
for the local government of my
residence to check on my status.
Out of curiosity, I then asked if
there would be legal repercussions
if I broke the self-quarantine and
the answer was, as expected,
yes. Noncompliance to the self-
quarantine order is punishable by
up to a year of imprisonment or a
fine up to 10,000,000 won, which is
equivalent to almost $10,000.
South Korea had two unique
strategies dealing with COVID-19
that the United States did not. The
first was testing. Korea was much
quicker to react to the global health
crisis when compared to many other
countries, partly because of its past
experience with Middle Eastern
Respiratory
Syndrome
(MERS)
in
2015.
As soon as the first confirmed COVID-
19 case from China was announced,
Korean companies jumped in on
developing test kits. Beginning in
late February, soon after the Lunar
New Year holidays, Korea started
to develop the capability of testing
about 20,000 people a day and now
has about 10,000 tests run per one
million people, which is the highest
confirmed data among all affected
countries.
The
second
strategy
was
heightened,
yet
relatively
well-
accepted, surveillance on citizens.
This does not mean that the Korean
government wiretaps phone calls
or collects all private information
to track certain individuals down.
Rather, the government effectively
utilized the recent trend of cashless
transactions and spiked use of
smartphones to track people who
came in contact with a confirmed
patient. Korea has the highest
proportion of cashless transactions
and one of the highest phone
ownership rates in the world. In
addition,
the
government
was
able to successfully trace those in
mandatory 14-day self-quarantine;
the
application
I
was
told
to
download upon arrival was not only
for self-diagnosis reporting but
also for location tracking to notify
the designated local government
official if I leave my self-quarantine
spot.
The
designated
local
government official calls me every
morning to check if I am still in my
self-quarantine spot and asks if I
am showing any symptoms. Korean
citizens, including myself, do not
have much problem with being
possibly traced or receiving phone
calls from the local government
every morning. Except for some
outrageous cases of noncompliance
to
the
self-quarantine
order,
including a South Korean student
traveling to Jeju Island with her
mother a day after arriving in
Korea from the U.S., most citizens
are taking social distancing fairly
seriously.
I am certainly not an expert in
biomedical
industries
of
either
country but I doubt the U.S. lacks
the technology or capital to develop
testing kits. One of the crucial
differences between Korea and the
U.S. was the government’s attitude.
President Trump dismissed the
potential severity of the virus when
it first emerged as a global health
threat while consistently labeling
it the “Chinese Virus.” President
Trump had also poorly reorganized
the
National
Security
Council
(NSC) so that it was not fit to react
to pandemics like COVID-19. The
Obama administration had done the
same but restored the original NSC
structure after going through the
Ebola crisis in 2014. In addition, the
Trump administration was recently
found to have told the federal agency
to classify COVID-19 deliberations,
keeping crucial information like the
scope of infection and quarantine
restrictions from the public. While
Korea learned from MERS in 2015,
it seems as if the U.S. did not learn
much from Ebola in 2014.
I
am
not
saying
the
U.S.
should implement such a strict
enforcement
on
self-quarantine
and
social
distancing
without
much
consideration.
Americans
could certainly react differently
than Koreans if they were legally
obligated to not leave their homes
and local government agents kept
track of them constantly. However,
given the recent trend of ever-
increasing cases, some form of
mandatory social distancing does
not sound too egregious. The disease
is not successfully being contained,
especially in Michigan where the
cases only continue to rise. Maybe
the society as a whole really should
consider a hard-hitting method like
that of Korea to possibly bring the
A
s
Gov.
Gretchen
Whitmer tackles the
COVID-19 crisis, she
has been met with criticism
and attacks from President
Donald Trump. The president
neglects to mention her by
name and instead resorts to
“that woman from Michigan.”
During his phone interview
with Sean Hannity of Fox
News, the president expressed
concerns about our governor’s
knowledge of the situation at
hand. He went on to discount
her efforts by claiming she
was young and had no idea
what was going on. While the
president’s attacks seem out of
place in the midst of a global
pandemic,
Gov.
Whitmer
and women in politics are all
too familiar with persistent
criticism and attacks meant to
undermine their successes.
At the time of publication,
the state of Michigan sits in
fourth place for the number of
confirmed COVID-19 cases in
the United States. In response,
Gov. Whitmer has stepped
up to issue shelter-in-place
orders, the closure of non-
essential businesses and the
suspension of the in-person
school year for public schools.
The federal government has
taken a free-for-all approach
when it comes to the states
and has pushed for governors
to bid on supplies and not rely
on the federal government’s
support. In addition to this
approach,
President
Trump
advised Vice President Mike
Pence not to call “the woman
from Michigan” because she
does not treat him right, again
neglecting to refer to her by
name.
The lack of recognition or
support from colleagues is
nothing new to Gov. Whitmer.
She started her State of the
State speech this year by saying
“This is not the red carpet.
Please, I urge you, focus on the
substance of my speech. It’s
about issues, not appearances.”
This
came
after
countless
articles and posts shaming
Whitmer for her appearance
after
her
first
address
to
the state as governor. Gov.
Whitmer and other women
in the public eye face societal
stigmas as viewers and voters
frequently focus on what they
are wearing rather than what
they are saying or doing. There
is always a need for women in
politics to be one step ahead
and overly prepared in the
face of misogyny. This reality
is
heavily
perpetuated
by
the president as he elects to
attack Gov. Whitmer rather
than uniting a country facing
mass casualties and economic
catastrophe.
The extra hurdle women must
clear in order to be at the same
standing and consideration as
men was personified by the
“electability” argument in the
2020
Democratic
primary.
As many are painfully aware,
the primary field began as the
most diverse in history with a
crowded race of women, racial
minorities and the first major
LGBTQ+ candidate. But, the
flawed electability argument
of how someone’s neighbor
would vote and who could beat
Donald Trump left us with
a duo of white men over 70
years old. This argument for
electability turned out to be
a veil of internalized racism
and misogyny as the party
that represents the broadest
coalition of people of color
and minority groups found
itself
with
two
privileged
candidates.
The electability narrative
allows for a greater level
of criticism as 33 percent
of Americans believe their
neighbors
and
community
members
wouldn’t
support
a
female
candidate.
The
knowledge
that
those
around us are apprehensive
or unsupportive of women
in positions of power has
seemingly excused individuals’
lack of trust and support of
women in politics. While
women like Gov. Whitmer,
a former Democratic Senate
Leader and prosecutor, are
qualified for the offices they
hold, it is all too common to
write them off as aggressive,
young,
inexperienced
and
pushy.
While
President
Trump
has focused on how Gov.
Whitmer’s calls for support are
unappreciative, let us instead
look to what she has done for
our state during this time of
unprecedented
uncertainty.
Within three days of our
first
cases,
Gov.
Whitmer
announced
the
closure
of
our
schools,
banned
large
gatherings
and
announced
restrictions on entry to health
care and juvenile facilities
to reduce the spread of the
virus. Since her early response
and
action,
Gov.
Whitmer
rolled out a long string of
legislation, executive orders
and trailblazing moves to limit
COVID-19 in Michigan. This
leadership by the governor has
been overlooked and undercut
by the president. His inability
to address Gov. Whitmer by
name, along with advice to
withhold support from our
state as we are overwhelmed
by the virus, is reprehensible.
Our
president
frequently
undermines the successes of
public officials and attacks
those at odds with his mission.
While he does this, we must
pay close attention to how
he and those up and down
the political totem poll treat
and speak about women in
positions
of
power.
Many
Americans
assume
those
around them do not have faith
in women in the political
sphere as they write off and
criticize women in relation to
men. It’s past due for us to take
it upon ourselves to look at the
policies rather than the outfits
and not participate in the herd
mentality of electability when
determining
who
is
“best
suited” for the job. And it’s
past due for our president to
refer to the governor strained
for supplies and support by her
name.
In defense of “that woman from Michigan”
OWEN STECCO | COLUMN
Owen Stecco can be reached at
ostecco@umich.edu.
Min Soo Kim can be reached at
kiminsoo@umich.edu.
This leadership by
the governor has
been overlooked
and undercut by
the president.