The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com
Opinion
8 — Wednesday, March 30, 2022
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
Ben Davis
Andrew Gerace
Shubhum Giroti
Min Soo Kim
Jessie Mitchell
Zoe Phillips
Mary Rolfes
Nikhil Sharma
Jack Tumpowsky
Joel Weiner
Erin White
interest, both of the Editorial Page
Editors did not participate in The
Editorial Board’s interviews with
the candidates, the subsequent
deliberation
and
voting
on
candidates or in the writing and
editing of this editorial. Editorials
represent the views of The Editorial
Board, hosted within The Michigan
Daily’s Opinion section.
T
he
Michigan
Daily
Editorial
Board
voted
to
endorse
Noah
Zimmerman and Jackie Hillman
of the EnvisionBlue party for 2022-
2023 Central Student Government
president and vice president in the
election on March 30 and 31. While
both parties running offer valuable
perspectives, the specificity and
breadth of EnvisionBlue’s platform
sets them apart. It is paramount
to have a CSG president and vice
president who come into office
with
tangible
initiatives
that
reflect the extensive scope of issues
the incoming administration will
encounter,
and
EnvisionBlue’s
platform offers these policies.
With an emphasis on instituting
pragmatic policies, EnvisionBlue’s
platform consists of 30 action
items and 15 advocacy initiatives.
Zimmerman and Hillman aim
to serve as a voice of the students
while keeping their promises
realistic and within the realm of
CSG’s capabilities. This platform’s
advocacy priorities emphasize the
importance of both enhancing
current CSG programming and
creating new CSG programming.
The candidates would like to create
partnerships between CSG and
upper-level diversity programs
within the Spectrum Center, the
Trotter Multicultural Center and
advocacy groups to ensure CSG’s
resources are serving all students.
This platform also details the
advancements of several specific
programs designed to increase
accessibility
and
affordability
for students, such as creating a
textbook donation program.
Considering
the
University
of Michigan’s history of sexual
misconduct,
the
candidates
expressed
their
commitment
to rebuilding trust with the
administration and pre-existing
organizations
for
preventing
sexual
assault.
To
do
this,
this platform advocates for an
acceleration
in
SAPAC’s
case
manager–hiring process; as there
are currently two case manager
vacancies, this would allow SAPAC
to more efficiently address the
needs of the student body. Part of
this platform’s sexual misconduct
prevention
initiatives
also
includes requiring any candidate
for
University
president
and
future administrative positions
to undergo extensive background
checks
specifically
related
to
past cases of handling sexual
misconduct. One of this platform’s
30 action items is to install a
“Blue Light” outpost near the
fraternities, a manageable change
that will advance student safety on
campus.
The
Board’s
evaluation
of
the
candidates
was
twofold,
considering
not
only
the
candidates’ stated platform but also
their personal commitment to their
goals. The duo is well prepared
for office and the high-pressure
positions they would be accepting.
Zimmerman’s membership in CSG
as a College of LSA representative
gives him valuable knowledge on
the inner workings of CSG, while
Hillman’s experience with the
California Senate empowers her
with fundamental communication
and
organizational
skills.
In
their presentation, both beamed
while sharing their plans for the
future of CSG and the students it
represents, full of energy and drive
to accomplish what they have set
out to do.
From the Daily: Vote
EnvisionBlue on March 30-31
THE MICHIGAN DAILY
EDITORIAL BOARD
Content note: This article contains
mentions of sexual assault.
A
s
incoming
freshmen
at
the
University
of
Michigan, many students
grumbled about being required
to complete an online course as
a prerequisite for beginning the
school year — namely, AlcoholEdu
and Sexual Assault Prevention for
Undergraduates. A blurb from the
University’s First Year Experience
webpage
explains
that
these
programs are designed “to inform
students about alcohol and sexual
assault issues. The confidential,
research-based
courses
provide
students with accurate information
in a non-judgmental tone and
encourages students to consider
their own decisions and those of
their peers.” Taking the course was
fairly straightforward and seemed
rather educational; the program
explains in great detail what is
required for informed consent to be
given. Likewise, it emphasizes that
the aftereffects of being victimized
by sexual violence are treatable
and that support is available. As a
survivor of sexual assault myself, I
felt an overall satisfaction with the
information that was provided, and
I figured that other students felt
similarly.
However, the effectiveness of the
sexual assault prevention program on
our campus fails to withstand more
intense scrutiny. Despite the fact
this program was required for every
incoming Michigan student and
thoroughly explained the concepts
of sexual assault and consent, the
University still experienced a spike in
sexual misconduct cases from 2017 to
2019, ranging from stalking to rape.
Moreover,
the
Office
of
Institutional Equity reported that
violations, from intimate partner
violence to sexual harassment,
increased almost every year from
2014 to 2020, climbing from 134
violations to an astonishing 322
violations. Though this can be
partially attributed to a culture
shift on campus that has made it
more comfortable for survivors to
report instances of sexual violence,
these
numbers
still
stand
as
evidence that our required sexual
violence
prevention
program
is not functioning to the extent
that it should. Had the program
successfully deterred sexual violence
from happening in the first place,
there would be far fewer reports
for instances of sexual violence on
campus.
These numbers are estimated
to
be
even
more
alarming
among women of marginalized
identities,
and
cases
involving
non-white women are frequently
underreported, especially on college
campuses. Moreover, though Black
women, Indigenous women, disabled
women and LGBTQ+ women are
disproportionately
affected
by
sexual violence, our school’s required
prevention program still centers
white, straight, able-bodied women
in discussions about sexual assault.
The institutional barriers that exist
for
marginalized
communities
within our country’s education and
criminal justice systems evidently
bleed into the supposed equitable
reporting
opportunities
—
and
support systems — for survivors of
color.
An example of students of color
disproportionately suffering from
sexual
exploitation
on
college
campuses can be observed at our very
own university. Serial sexual abuser
Dr. Robert Anderson, who assaulted
over 950 students during his time
at the University, is said to have
targeted Black male athletes more
than any other identity group. Jamie
White, a lawyer for approximately
40 of Anderson’s survivors, cited
the students’ first-generation and
lower socioeconomic statuses as
factors that made them increasingly
vulnerable to Anderson’s abuse.
Many of these Black athletes risked
losing their athletic scholarships that
enabled them to attend the University
if they came forward with abuse
claims. This horrific pattern alone
proves the necessity of transforming
our sexual violence prevention
program to better serve students
from a variety of backgrounds and
social identities.
Aside from how our current
sexual violence prevention program
is oriented around white, straight,
able-bodied identities, these sorts of
programs are ineffective at actually
preventing assault from occurring.
A study focused on the difficulty
of analyzing the effectiveness of
these programs describes how
there is a “lack of outcome studies
that evaluate the event to which
interventions have been effective
at decreasing the actual rates of
sexual assault.” In other words,
little to no studies surrounding
sexual assault prevention programs
on college campuses can present
empirical data that evaluate the
effectiveness of these programs
or measure learning directly after
these programs are taught.
College sexual assault primary prevention
programs are failing us. Why?
SOPHIA LEHRBAUM
Opinion Columnist
Read more at
MichiganDaily.com
Building a more diverse, equitable,
and inclusive U-M community
takes the will and work of all of us.
Learn about our transition from
DEI 1.0 to DEI 2.0.
2021-22
Evaluation
2022-23
Planning
2023-24
2.0 Launch
LEARN MORE:
diversity.umich.edu/dei-2
Back to backpacking
Design by Tamara Turner, Opinion Cartoonistw
Read more at
MichiganDaily.com
A
ndrew
Yang
rose
to
prominence
on
the
back of a very peculiar
idea: universal basic income. This
proposal that every American should
receive a no-strings-attached $1,000
check from the federal government
every month propelled Yang to the
presidential debate stage. Though
it was impressive that he shared the
stage with experienced politicians
like (then Vice) President Biden
and several senators, his lack of
experience and a stable base were
ultimately his downfall.
Leaning into meme culture and
popular podcasts like The Joe Rogan
Experience, Yang often touted his
approval rating with Independents
and Trump supporters, but he was
sorely unable to transform that
general likability into cold hard votes.
After this impressive — but
nonetheless
disappointing
—
campaign for a relative newcomer to
electoral politics, Yang transitioned
to running for mayor of New York
City. I won’t delve too deeply into
Yang’s journey from leading the
mayoral primary to a disappointing
fourth-place finish, but rest assured
that his subsequent failure hinged on
the same issues: an inability to form a
coherent base from merely a friendly
smile and some unique ideas.
After his defeat to current New
York City Mayor, Eric Adams, Yang
made a public announcement.
He
had
formally
left
the
Democratic Party and formed the
Forward Party. He announced this
new party in his book of the same
name. “Forward” — which I read
— laid out the platform of “ranked-
choice voting,” “open primaries,”
“fact-based governance,” “human-
centered capitalism,” “modern and
effective government,” “universal
basic income” and “grace and
tolerance.”
Yang’s core claim was that this
party, with its hodgepodge of
reasonable-sounding policy ideas,
would be able to fill a gap in the
American party repertoire that both
Democrats and Republicans were
neglecting. Through an assortment
of commonsense policies aimed at
reforming government, Yang believes
this party could inspire action in a
diverse coalition of discouraged and
infrequent voters.
In some sense the polls are on
Yang’s side: many of his ideas are
certainly popular. Seventy-seven
percent of Americans agree that
campaign spending needs to be
curtailed. Eighty-two percent side
with his call for Congressional
term limits. Nine in 10 Americans
share his stance against partisan
gerrymandering.
With
42%
of
Americans
identifying
as
independents, this should be great
news for a party that aims to capture
the politically homeless middle.
Unfortunately, even though a
plurality of Americans identify
as Independents, as many as 91%
of Americans have a significant
preference for one party or the
other, with the leftover 9% of “true”
Independents varying significantly
in race, occupation and economic
interests. This makes forming a base
from voters with common interests
— like how Democrats captured
the union vote and Republicans
successfully courted evangelicals —
very difficult.
Currently, the Democrats’ base
is largely young people, urbanites,
ethnic minorities, LGBTQ+ people
and those with college degrees. The
Republican base is largely white
evangelicals, business owners, those
living in rural areas and voters older
than 65. These bases are sustainable,
based on groups with shared interests
and are able to mobilize effectively to
achieve concrete outcomes.
Andrew Yang’s a loser: The
future of third parties
JULIAN BARNARD
Editorial Page Editor
Read more at
MichiganDaily.com