 The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com
Opinion
 Wednesday, February 23, 2022 — 9

PAIGE HODDER

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.

JASMIN LEE

Editor in Chief

JULIAN BARNARD 

AND SHUBHUM GIROTI

Editorial Page Editors

ficial position of The Daily’s Editorial Board. 

All other signed articles and illustrations represent solely the views of their authors.

EDITORIAL BOARD MEMBERS

Julian Barnard
Zack Blumberg
Emily Considine
Brandon Cowit
Jess D’Agostino

Zoe Phillips

Ben Davis

Andrew Gerace
Shubhum Giroti

Min Soo Kim
Jessie Mitchell

Mary Rolfes

Nikhil Sharma

Jack Tumpowsky

Joel Weiner
Erin White

Anna Tupiano

B

ipartisan 
support 

for 
stock-trading 

bans on members of 

Congress has risen in the last 
year, largely due to the several 
violations of the Stop Trading 
on Congressional Knowledge 
(STOCK) Act just weeks before 
the COVID-19 pandemic hit 
the United States. Insider trad-
ing is illegal, and the STOCK 
Act prohibits members of Con-
gress from utilizing “nonpub-
lic information derived from” 
their position to trade stocks. 

Former Sen. Kelly Loeffler, 

R-Ga., as well as Sens. Richard 
Burr, R-N.C., Dianne Feinstein, 
D-Calif., and James Inhofe, 
R-Okla., were accused of insid-
er trading in early 2020. Even 
before this, an investigation 
by The Wall Street Journal 
yielded hundreds of instances 
in which “(federal judges) or 
their family members owned 
shares of companies that were 
plaintiffs or defendants in the 
litigation” over which they 
presided. 

Public backlash stemming 

from this show of government 
corruption has given rise to 
widespread agreement within 
Congress to restrict legisla-
tors’ trading, particularly with 
individual stocks. Just last 
week, House Speaker Nancy 
Pelosi’s, D-Calif., flippant dis-
missal of any restrictions was 
met with both public and pro-
fessional backlash before she 
reluctantly agreed to further 
action to stronger regulations. 

As we approach congressio-

nal elections this November, 
the incentive for many elected 
officials to address the issue 
of stock trading restrictions is 
becoming apparent. A ban on 
members of Banning lawmak-
ers from trading stocks has 
the support of around three-
quarters of the electorate, 
making it an easy political vic-
tory to support it. Naturally, 
legislators must now address 
how these restrictions will be 
put into place, what they will 
restrict and whom they will 
impact. 

A proposition embraced by 

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cor-
tez, D-N.Y., calls for assets to 
be set aside into blind trusts to 
be managed by a family mem-

ber or friend. Unfortunately, 
blind trusts have not histori-
cally done a great job of pre-
venting conflicts of interest, 
with possible loopholes for 
active trading influenced by 
congressional business. Per-
haps 
the 
most 
prominent 

example of the dangers of 
blind trusts came with Presi-
dent Trump, who repeatedly 
came under fire for the unlike-
lihood 
of 
wholly 
unbiased 

decision making when he gen-
erally knew what the assets in 
his blind trust were composed 
of.

A more tenable framework 

might be found in the Federal 
Reserve regulations released 
following recent trading scan-
dals that led to the resigna-
tion of multiple Fed governors. 
By banning the trading of 
individual stocks, bonds and 
cryptocurrencies, the updat-
ed standards limit governors 
to index funds and diversi-
fied equities. By restricting 
investments to highly diver-
sified positions, even mem-
bers of Congress who take an 
active role in the management 
of their investments will be 
mostly unable to act in ways 
that bolster their portfolio.

By extending this ban to the 

spouses and direct dependents 
of members of Congress, most 
direct conflicts of interest will 
be covered under new legisla-
tion. While by no means com-
prehensive, such regulations 
would be a tremendous step 
towards 
accountability 
and 

restoration of trust in Con-
gress. 

With this framework in 

mind, another major consid-
eration in any new legislation 
is enforcement, which remains 
poorly addressed by existing 
regulations.Although 
public 

backlash can incite change on 
multiple levels in the behav-
ior of individual members of 
Congress, much more must be 
done at the legal level in terms 
of “punishment” for insider 
stock-trading offenses. 

The goal of the 2012 STOCK 

Act was to increase transpar-
ency between the public and 
members of Congress, requir-
ing officials to file disclosures 
concerning their trading activ-
ities. Under this law, members 
of Congress are banned from 
gaining any “nonpublic” infor-
mation when it comes to stock 

trading, as they are public citi-
zens in their roles as elected 
officials. Still, politicians con-
tinue to ignore these rulings, 
rather unashamedly using pri-
vate information to trade and 
keeping their trade maneuvers 
out of the public eye. Change is 
needed in terms of transpar-
ency and efficacy. 

Multiple plans of action have 

been introduced in the Senate 
surrounding punishment for 
insider trading offenses, rang-
ing from economic punishment 
(such as paying a fine similar 
to or more than your salary in 
Congress), to criminal punish-
ment (like jail time). In the 
middle is a proposition intro-
duced by Sen. Sherrod Brown, 
D-Ohio. Brown’s bill, the “Ban 
Conflicted Trading at the Fed 
Act”, would fine offending 
members of Congress at least 
10% of the value of the stock.

This measure, among oth-

ers concerning enforcement of 
said law, seems like an accept-
able 
middle 
ground 
when 

it comes to punitive action 
against insider stock trading. 
It puts a heavier burden on 
those wealthy politicians who 
do not rely solely on the ben-
efits of the stock exchange and 
does not significantly harm 
those middle-class representa-
tives who rely on smaller, less 
frequent investments. In the 
end, no politician is seriously 
fiscally damaged, but they are 
taught a lesson: their insider 
trading is recognized, and a 
fine establishes that this is not 
acceptable to the general U.S. 
population.

The issue of insider stock 

trading by members of Con-
gress is a bipartisan one, both 
in terms of offenders and 
opposition. These investments 
are the antithesis of the role of 
“public servant” these officials 
serve. Offending politicians 
are profiting off of their posi-
tion of political power. In ban-
ning representatives and their 
immediate dependents from 
such investments, and taxing 
direct offenders, there may be 
better financial transparency 
and trust amongst the people 
and their government. Public 
service is what we have elect-
ed them to do, not a private 
smoke-filled-room 
business. 

There need to be consequenc-
es.

From The Daily: Congressional 

stock trading needs reform

C

ollege will be the time of 
your life.” A sentiment 
that 
every 
teenager 

has heard multiple times in 
their life. For high schoolers, 
it serves as a justification for 
a less than satisfactory high 
school 
experience. 
For 
new 

college students, it provides hope 
that the next four years will 
be unforgettable. And for the 
students reaching the end of their 
college years, it can be two things: 
a truth, or a “what could have 
been.”

After 
completing 
my 
first 

semester of college, I stopped to 
consider this expectation. In so 
many ways, college has exceeded 
my expectations. I didn’t have 
a big, close-knit friend group 
in high school, nor did I spend 
my weekend nights at parties 
or on unforgettable adventures. 
Instead, my closest friends and 
I navigated high school in a 
different way; we played sports, 
focused on school, hung out 
at each other’s homes and on 
weekends spent time outdoors, 
whether we were hiking, surfing, 
skateboarding or something else 
(this remains one of the main 
perks of the Bay Area). My first 
relationship was a long, peaceful, 
healthy one with one of my 
best friends. Looking back, this 
lifestyle contained all the aspects 
of true happiness, yet at the time, 
I felt unfulfilled. Where was the 
chaos of the American teenage life 
I had been so conditioned to want? 

College took a sharp 180. 

Within one month, everything 
about my life had completely 
changed. Every second I wasn’t 
studying or sleeping, I was being 
social. Romantically, I had guy 
and girl drama in every corner, 
and for the first time I felt like 
someone that people could truly 
be attracted to. My instagram 
slowly filled up with pictures of 
me and my new friends at football 
games, parties and other events. 
I could finally do what I wanted 
without my parents checking my 

location, being home by curfew or 
constantly having to prioritize my 
safety. It truly was the American 
teenage dream, so I should have 
been the happiest I’ve ever been, 
right?

What wasn’t shown on my 

social media stories or texts home 
to my friends, however, was the 
other side. The endless hours 
spent crying at random places 
around campus, the anxiety of 
wondering if my friends liked 
me, the never ending pressure of 
college classes, the relationship 
drama 
that 
consumed 
my 

thoughts, the feeling of being 
too far away from my family 
and my home, the hate for the 
way I looked and the complete 
overwhelmingness of being in a 
new state, in a new school, with 
new friends and absolutely no 
sense of familiarity. 

When we search for happiness 

in college, we are truly looking 
for distraction. Stress is released 
when we become too intoxicated 
to remember our problems and 
continue the facade we put on 
for the week. We wear clothes 
we hope will make others like us, 
because we yearn for validation 
from them instead of giving it 
to ourselves. When homework 
becomes too much, we go on a 
“5 minute” TikTok break that 
suddenly morphs into hours, then 
we are consumed by the guilt that 
follows. When the world feels 
like it’s ending, we search for our 
friends to help us push that feeling 
off for a bit, until it returns later. So 
much of the idealized large state 
school experience is derived from 
students finding ways to distract 
themselves from the anxiety that 
comes with entering such an 
overwhelming new environment. 

The issue then, is the feeling 

of being alone. When everyone 
around us curates this image 
of having so much fun, and our 
parents or aunts and uncles keep 
reminding us how revolutionary 
their college experience was, 
we feel like failures when it’s 
not perfect. Yet, we are often 
portraying the same image in 
an effort to fit into the puzzle, 

all it takes is one conversation 
with any student to realize that 
this portrayal is not true to life. 
So why don’t we have these 
conversations?

As a society, we are working 

towards a goal of destigmatizing 
mental 
health, 
however, 
one 

important topic often gets left out 
of the mental health conversation: 
struggling without a diagnosis. 
One of the things that has 
consistently held me back from 
truly reaching out to my friends 
and asking for help when I need 
it is the fact that I suffer from no 
mental disorders. A feeling of 
guilt arises when I feel hopeless, 
because I feel that whatever I’m 
feeling must not be as bad as 
those who have diagnosed mental 
illnesses. So I do what many of 
my peers do: push away what I’m 
feeling for as long as possible. 
When 
that 
feeling 
returns, 

however, it feels bigger and more 
dangerous. And so the need 
for a distraction becomes more 
imminent. 

So let’s learn to talk about it. 

Let’s learn to ask our friends 
how they are and reach out in 
moments of crisis. And let’s erase 
this idea of college being the 
most perfect time of your life. 
That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t 
work to find happiness, because 
there is so much happiness to be 
found in college. I’ve met friends 
so far in my first semester that I 
hope will be the friends my kids 
call “auntie” and “uncle” in 30 
years. I’ve made memories I can 
imagine reminiscing over at the 
dinner table years in the future. 
In just one semester, I’ve learned 
so much about my academic 
interests, and I’m excited to 
learn more. But these things 
don’t come from intoxication, 
or letting everyone on my social 
media know I’m having a great 
time. 
They 
come 
from 
the 

moments when I’m not thinking 
about what others think, or if I’m 
doing enough academically and 
extracurricularly. The first step 
to truly being happy is living life, 
instead of distracting ourselves 
from it.

Happy or distracted? 

CLAUDIA FLYNN

Opinion Columnist

THE MICHIGAN DAILY 

EDITORIAL BOARD 

A

s 
someone 
who 

occasionally 
scrounges Yik Yak 

for funny content, there is an 
unending source of “looking-
for-someone” posts. The app 
is anonymous and annoying to 
scroll through, but it’s easy to 
recognize patterns. You find 
things like: “Are there any 
other gay girls on campus? 
Asking for a friend,” or, “how 
do u meet wlw in aa, please 
help,” constantly — especially 
on weekends. It seems the 
queer women on campus need 
rest, too. 

According to “The Statement 

2021 Sex Survey,” more than 
30% of University of Michigan 
students 
surveyed 
did 
not 

identify 
as 
heterosexual. 

That’s a lot of queer people, 
but how do you meet them? 
It’s really not easy. Unless you 
already have an entire network 

of 
gay 
people 
you 
found 

during your freshman year on 
accident or brought from high 
school (like I did), then you 
must resort to Bumble, Tinder, 
Her or maybe even that one 
girl your roommate thinks is 
bisexual. 

And once you have found 

someone, what do you do? 
There are not many helpful 
queer 
dating 
how-tos 
for 

college-aged 
students 
right 

now. There are online articles 
about where to find other 
queer people, and there is Yik 
Yak, where an anonymous 
asker may meet an anonymous 
answer. Dating is already hard 
enough for us teenagers and 
20-somethings. Queer dating 
is even harder, and meeting 
your very own queer network 
is a whole different bag of 
worms. 

Living in Kerrytown, the 

unofficial-official Ann Arbor 
gay-borhood, I have a lot 
of access to queer people. 

While I have never visited the 
Spectrum Center on campus, 
nor any organized queer club, 
I still live in a bubble of Gay. 
I often forget that there are 
people on campus who do not 
have at least five other gay 
friends, and I wonder, are 
these the people on Yik Yak? 
The Spectrum Center and more 
general queer-student clubs 
are not popular with the people 
around me. One of my friends, 
a bisexual man, tried the 
club oSTEM (Out in Science, 
Technology, Engineering, and 
Mathematics), and left after 
freshman year. Being on Zoom 
for an hour once a week was 
not a meaningful way to meet 
new people for him, nor did 
the year before make him any 
new queer friends. 

The people on Yik Yak 

looking 
for 
hookups 
and 

relationship 
advice 
aren’t 

going to these places either. 
They are going on Yik Yak 
and 
@collegefessing 
on 

Instagram. 
These 
places 

hold an anonymity that the 
Spectrum Center does not. I’d 
like to believe that other clubs 
have more successful social 
opportunities for queer people 
when they invite anyone to 
come. For example, I recently 
went to the United Asian 
American 
Organizations’ 

(UAAO) 
“Femme 
+ 
Queer 

Skate” in early November. It 
still did not feel like a place 
to meet people, but it was fun 
to go to with another queer 
friend. There were lots of 
femme queer people, and, while 
some were a part of UAAO, a 
lot were also just interested 
in a non-judgemental skating 
atmosphere. 
One 
of 
the 

organizers told me that there 
were more people signed up 
than she thought there would 
be. I asked her if there would 
be another meeting like this, 
and she said there could be. 
And that was it. 

I don’t know anyone in a 

queer-student club. It often 
seems to me that co-ops are 
more 
queer-friendly 
spaces 

to 
meet 
people 
than 
any 

organized club on campus. 
I wonder if those people on 
Yik Yak simply do not live 
in Kerrytown, or their dorm 
hall during their freshman 
year was not at least half gay. 
Necto’s “Gay Night” for anyone 
18+ seems to be more popular 
with those that are confident 
and outward in their identities 
as queer people. Attending 
Necto’s “Gay Night” myself, it 
did not feel like a place to meet 
friends, especially not friends 
who prefer a Friday night in. 

I know that not every space 

on campus is queer-friendly, 
despite what I may hope is 
true. Not every professor asks 
for your pronouns in your 
introduction, though you can’t 
help but appreciate the ones 
that do. Especially in non-
liberal arts majors, there are 
very few students that you 

may be able to recognize as 
gay in cultural cues or fashion, 
which is why it’s important to 
have places like the Spectrum 
Center and create clubs like 
oSTEM. Unfortunately, I don’t 
think that every lonely queer 
person is going to these places. 
Anonymous 
sites 
like 
Yik 

Yak are more accessible and 
less scary for these people, 
especially during a time of 
such serious health concerns 
with meeting in person. 

For those people on Yik 

Yak who are looking for a 
simple “like” so that they don’t 
feel so alone and are being 
encouraged by other “Yakers” 
commenting 
the 
same 

questions in solidarity: keep 
looking. There are places here 
for you, and there are places to 
find people like you. Whether 
it’s a Co-op, an art class or 
someone with a rainbow pin 
in the library, you can find 
people. Just maybe outside of 
Yik Yak. 

Yik Yak isn’t the place to find queer love on campus

GISELLE MILLS
Opinion Columnist

Ethics 101 with Schlissel

Design by Tamara Turner

