“
Have you registered to vote?”
is an impossible question
to escape. I’ve found that I
can’t walk through the Diag, scroll
through Instagram or even order
a pizza without encountering
some iteration of this question.
Dominating nearly every space,
it certainly is a pertinent question
given our current environment.
Assuming the answer to this
question is yes, as we transition
into this election and prepare for
electoral outcomes, we need to
ask ourselves a different question:
What is our role in making this
nation a functioning and healthy
democracy?
A healthy democracy requires
far more than just electoral
participation,
including
the
ongoing intellectual and physical
engagement
of
an
informed
citizenry. Think of it this way
— as students, we need to do
more than just register for the
semester and pick our preferred
classes; participation like staying
informed, having discussions and
completing other course tasks
are essential to succeed both in a
course and in democratic society.
While voting is essential, using
our voices through other means of
engagement can further progress
our country toward justice and
equality — the highest ideals of
democracy.
Simply put, voting is a civic
duty: something we should see as
a first step or baseline of political
participation if we have the
privilege to vote. In particular, as
a white, cisgender man, I believe
it is my duty to vote, as voting
is one of many tools to amplify
and represent the voices of those
who are otherwise silenced in
government and the electoral
process
by
gerrymandering,
iterations
of
poll
taxes
for
the
formerly
incarcerated,
racially targeted polling station
closures, other forms of voter
suppression and more. I can use
my privilege to support and vote
for candidates who commit to
expanding the franchise. I can
have conversations with those
who can’t vote and consider
their perspective on ballot issues
and candidates. I can vote for
candidates who I believe will
enact systemic change.
Voting
has
the
potential
to make change through the
electoral process. At the very least,
it can publicly signal approval
or disapproval of a candidate or
set of ideas. While a candidate or
party may not satisfy all or even
most of my policy preferences,
I don’t believe it’s fair to let my
ideals blind me from the reality
others may face as a consequence
of my non-voting.
That being said, voter shaming,
or bullying people into voting,
does little to motivate non-
voters, often fails to recognize
the
difficulties
and
barriers
that exist for many and can turn
off people, even usual voters,
from voting in the future. Voter
shaming has taken many forms
over the years, from callout posts
on Instagram to postcards with
voting records attached. This
unproductive behavior should
be modified. Recognizing any
inherent privilege we may have
and
refocusing
on
positive
motivations
for
voting
will
bring more people into the
fold of electoral politics and
democratic society.
While voting in national
elections is a necessary civic
duty, a functional democracy
needs
more
than
people
showing up to vote once every
four years. In our democratic
republic,
we
elect
officials
who
theoretically
represent
us in federal politics. After an
election, we are left to consider
members of Congress relatively
unaccountable until their next
election cycle. While we can’t
recall members of Congress
via election, contacting them
about issues you care about by
calling or writing their offices,
sending emails or using services
like ResistBot can actually have
a significant effect on the way
elected officials vote. I urge
everyone to find issues they
care about —whether they be
racial justice in the United
States, solidarity with Armenia,
the environmental crisis or
practically anything else —
and call your congressional
representatives daily or weekly.
An action as simple as leaving
a message for a staffer to pass
along or having a conversation
with a college intern, while
both fun and frustrating, can
ultimately push our Congress
and democracy to listen more
closely to the people it claims
to represent. If we all took
the four to six minutes of our
day to make these calls, public
officials would have no choice
but to rethink some of their
less favorable positions and be
more representative of their
constituents.
In addition to conventional
politics,
activist
work
is
imperative to steer our country
and government to be one that
is truly functional, healthy and
just. Silence on issues that do
not affect us directly is what
created our current situation: a
system that only supports those
already in privileged groups.
While I am not suggesting people
spend the entirety of their free
time taking to the streets to
protest in person, it is crucial
to consider the reality of those
who have no choice but to do so
to survive, like those targeted for
their race or gender identity or
those evicted from housing.
A multitude of options exist
besides
protesting:
providing
mutual aid, writing awareness
pieces,
having
difficult
discussions with friends and
family, standing up for classmates
and many other methods. I
urge everyone to find ways
to get involved in protesting,
organizing
or
supporting
the work of others. Work we
do
outside
the
conventional
electoral norms, especially in
terms of independent impact, is
equally if not more important
than what happens at the polls.
Looking for ways to get
involved?
There
are
plenty
of
brilliant
initiatives
and
organizations at the University
of Michigan and beyond that are
working to create a more just
and functional democracy, both
through electoral politics and
other means. The Prison Birth
Project, a student organization
that “aims to inspire students
and community members to
advocate
for
incarcerated
mothers and birthing people,”
is an example of a student
organization
working
to
better the community through
participation. The PBP uses tools
like pressuring elected officials
into action and providing direct
aid to help make the justice
system actually judicial and
aid incarcerated mothers and
birthing people. Other advocacy
groups like Students Demand
Action and Students Demand
Representation
use
similar
methods to make their voices
heard. These groups and efforts
are what make democracy work
beyond the use of the ballot.
Overall,
participation
in
electoral processes and other
avenues of engagement is vital
to the health of our democracy.
When we use our voice to help
our peers in whatever capacity
we can, we take another step
toward creating a government
by the people and for the people,
and a society that truly values
and respects all of its members.
Like with our education, our
democratic society will reap
the benefits we sow. We need
a student mindset of growth,
change and constant learning
to put our society on the right
track. Get ready to vote, and get
ready for what comes next.
The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com
Opinion
Wednesday, October 21, 2020 — 10
Banana Republicans
MAX STEINBAUM | COLUMN
Respect American institutions
LYDIA STORELLA | COLUMN
Andrew Gerace can be reached at
agerace@umich.edu.
Vote if you can, use your voice for those who can’t
ANDREW GERACE | COLUMN
D
uring the 12 years that
followed the adoption
of the Constitution, the
two men who served as president
were the nominally independent
but Federalist-inclined George
Washington, followed by his
vice
president,
Federalist
John
Adams.
During
these
administrations,
an
opposing
party
—
the
Democratic-
Republicans — solidified under
the
leadership
of
Thomas
Jefferson and James Madison.
In
1800,
the
Democratic-
Republicans fielded Jefferson
as
their
standard-bearer
to
oppose President Adams. The
1800 presidential campaign was
a notorious mudsling — perhaps
one of the dirtiest presidential
elections our republic has seen —
and resulted in Jefferson’s victory
over the incumbent Adams. The
eyes of Americans, and the world,
fell upon the capital. Would
Adams and his Federalist allies
cede their power?
Adams
and
Jefferson,
at
this time, had a bitter personal
rivalry, and it was matched by
the political chasm between the
Federalists
and
Democratic-
Republicans. But on March 4,
1801, Jefferson was inaugurated
as the third president of the
United States without delay.
The 1800 presidential election
is sometimes referred to as
the “Revolution of 1800.” It is
called this because it was the
first time that power exchanged
hands between parties at the
national level, and crucially, it
exchanged
hands
peacefully.
The Federalists knew they had
lost, and they respected the
democratic process. It proved
that the American Revolution’s
republican drive — to this point
untested — was realizable. The
American
experiment
could
work.
220
years
and
20
such
exchanges later, it appears that
tradition could be in danger.
President Trump has, on many
occasions now, insinuated that
the presidential election will be
fraught with voter fraud from
mail-in ballots. He has repeatedly
claimed “the ballots are out of
control,” called the ballots a
“scam” and accused Democrats
of harboring this knowledge.
The president has even flirted
with
rejecting
the
electoral
outcome should Joe Biden win
on Nov. 3. When asked point
blank during a White House
press briefing in late September
whether
he’d
commit
to
a
peaceful transition of power,
Trump
gave
an
astounding
answer: “Well, we’re going to
have to see what happens.”
There is a right way, and
only one right way, for a sitting
U.S. president to respond to
that question. “Of course, I
am committed to a peaceful
transition of power, just as every
president before me. That’s the
bedrock of American democracy.
What a ridiculous question.”
Unfortunately for our nation’s
proud republican legacy, that
an American president may not
concede defeat and voluntarily
give up his power is a legitimate
concern in 2020. Since 1800,
with
the
exception
of
the
outbreak of the Civil War, our
government has always accepted
election results and willingly
transferred power when defeated
by an opposing party. Trump’s
repeated failure to respect this
legacy ought to shock and disgust
every American.
The vast majority of what
comes out of Trump’s mouth is
bluster and nonsense. There is a
real and frightening possibility,
however, that he truly means
what he’s saying here. But how
would Trump’s rejection of a
Biden victory theoretically work?
And more importantly, could he
actually pull it off?
Trump is already laying the
groundwork for this sort of power
grab. He’s started by discrediting
mail-in voting, suggesting that it
will lead to voter fraud of massive
proportions (even though mail-in
voting is one of the safest ways
to vote right now.) We know
that Biden voters are more likely
than Trump voters to use mail-in
voting for the upcoming general
election. Trump knows this too,
and should he lose, will likely use
it to fuel the narrative that many
mail-in votes were fraudulent.
As such, Trump’s pre-planned
narrative appears to be that a
hypothetical Biden victory, the
product of mail-in fraud, will be
illegitimate.
So, how exactly would Trump
go about stealing the election?
The answer is tied to our terribly
flawed mechanism of electing
presidents: the electoral college.
According to the Constitution,
individual
state
legislatures
are charged with appointing
electors to the electoral college.
Historically,
the
winner
of
the popular vote in each state
receives that state’s electoral
votes. But — and this is the big
but — state legislatures still
reserve the right to select their
own electors, regardless of the
popular vote outcome.
So, if Trump screams on Nov.
4 that rampant voter fraud cost
him the popular vote in key
battleground states, it could
potentially be followed by a
recommendation
that
state
legislatures appoint pro-Trump
electors, so as to deliver the
“correct” electoral result. In
Michigan,
Pennsylvania
and
Wisconsin
—
blue-leaning
states that could deliver the
decisive
electoral
votes
for
a Biden victory — both the
State Houses and Senates are
controlled by Republicans. If
they “determine” that Biden
won through fraudulent mail-
in votes and decide to “correct”
the situation themselves, there’s
a real scenario where they try to
bypass election day results and
deliver their electors to Donald
Trump.
What is most disturbing about
all of this is that massive voter
fraud is absolute fiction. The
apocalyptic
scenario
(already
being peddled by Republican
soothsayers) of rampant mail-
in fraud tainting the election
in Biden’s favor is a design to
mar a fair Trump loss. Don’t
take my word for it. Take Ellen
Weintraub’s word for it: As the
commissioner of the Federal
Election
Commission
said,
“There’s simply no basis for the
conspiracy theory that voting by
mail causes fraud.”
That’s all this is. A conspiracy
theory, peddled by Trump and
promoted by Republicans, aimed
at preemptively discrediting a
legitimate Biden victory and
stealing the election. At the
end of the day, Trump and his
minions don’t give a damn about
our democracy. These folks are
willing to lie — and in doing so,
soil the democratic tradition
America has had since 1800 — if
it means keeping power. There’s a
word for that: treason.
A
fter news broke that an
anti-government militia
had plotted to kidnap
Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, I was
sent a clip of an interview with
Barry County Sheriff Dar Leaf
regarding the news of the arrest
of Michael and William Null, two
of the suspects in this case. Leaf
knows William Null through a
rally protesting Whitmer’s stay-
at-home order, which became a
topic of conversation when Leaf
was interviewed by Fox 17.
When
asked
whether
he
regrets sharing a stage with
someone charged in a plot to
kidnap
Whitmer,
Leaf
said,
“It’s just a charge, and they say
a ‘plot to kidnap’ and you got to
remember that. Are they trying
to kidnap … Because you can still
in Michigan if it’s a felony, make a
felony arrest.”
Leaf
diminished
the
kidnapping attempt on Whitmer
as an attempt of arrest. In
the same interview, he uses
a Michigan law that states
that private persons can make
arrests in certain situations to
make this case. Leaf believes
this kidnapping plot could be
reasonable,
and
even
legal,
because of the anger towards
Whitmer
and
her
executive
orders concerning COVID-19.
This mindset in excusing a
kidnapping attempt as a citizen’s
arrest is the same mindset that led
to the plot in the first place. There
is a lack of faith in institutions
that has led to a lack of trust in
government. This distrust of
American
institutions
comes
from the severe polarization
that exists in the United States
today. People see the actions of
members of the opposite party
as illegitimate, which leads to
suspicion of the institutions that
allowed those actions to occur.
Whitmer is a Democrat, while the
people involved in the attempt to
kidnap her are linked to a right-
wing militia group.
The plot to kidnap Whitmer
stems from a belief that the
actions she took to prevent
the spread of COVID-19 made
her a tyrant and in violation
of the Constitution. Because
Whitmer was committing a
crime, the men accused in
this kidnapping plot believe
they were taking legal action
to arrest and try her for
the crimes she committed.
The
view
certain
citizens
have — that the institutions
allowing Whitmer to make
these executive orders are
illegitimate — have created
backlash
against
these
institutions as we know them
to exist.
On May 6, the Michigan
Legislature filed suit against
Whitmer
challenging
her
emergency orders regarding
COVID-19 as “improper and
invalid”; the plot to kidnap
Whitmer began to take shape
June 20, about a month and
a half after. People who have
faith in institutions do not
subvert legal processes with
illegal action.
Not
everyone
defines
legality the same way. The
U.S. government and I do not
believe that this attempt to
kidnap the governor is legal.
But others, such as Leaf,
believe that rather than kidnap
Whitmer, the accused might
have been trying to arrest
her for felony charges. This
is not to say that Leaf’s views
are valid, but because he is a
sheriff and therefore someone
in a position of authority, they
cannot be dismissed. As law
enforcement, sheriffs must be
accountable to the law as it is
interpreted by legal systems,
not personal definition.
This is why a lack of faith
in
our
institutions
is
so
dangerous. If people are not
in agreement that we must
respect our basic institutions,
we live in a state of ambiguity
about our laws. The role of the
citizen is not to interpret the
laws, but to change the laws
they find unjust through other
democratic functions. But what
do we do when people disagree
about
what
democratic
functions are?
The suspects in the plot
to
kidnap
Whitmer
had
previously expressed dissent in
a constitutional and democratic
way; the Null brothers were
involved in protests in Lansing
against Whitmer’s executive
orders. Unfortunately for the
Null brothers, concrete plans
to kidnap a U.S. governor, or
anyone, are not included in the
right to protest.
Our country will not be able
to withstand a citizenry that
does not respect its institutions.
Intolerance
encourages
and
enables people to engage in
whatever activity they see fit
because they do not believe
in the legitimacy of American
institutions. The motivation
to behave in accordance with
what our institutions mandate
disappears when respect for
them disappears.
Belief that the government is
illegitimate leads to dangerous
ways of thinking. It allows
people to think that illegal
action they take is acceptable
because the law itself is wrong.
In the case of Whitmer, the
suspects believe they could
enforce the law, and define
what terms in the law mean,
because they disagree with the
actions Whitmer took.
In
order
for
American
society to remain stable, both
citizens
and
government
officials
must
respect
our
institutions and express our
grievances through accepted
means of dissent.
Lydia Storella can be reached at
storella@umich.edu.
ANNA GETZINGER | CONTACT CARTOONIST AT GETZINGA@UMICH.EDU
Silence on issues
that do not affect
us directly is
what created our
current situation.
Max Steinbaum can be reached at
maxst@umich.edu.