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