Opinion
Wednesday, October 12, 2022 — 9
The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com

Kyrsten cinema continues to be astoundinly terrible

T

his week, Sen. Kyrsten 
Sinema, D-Ariz., paid a 
trip to the McConnell 
Center, named after Republican 
Senate Leader Mitch McConnell, 
R-Ky. 
The 
move 
sparked 
righteous anger from many on 
the left, given the Republican 
senator’s legislative history that 
spans decades.
Though 
it’s 
fair 
to 
take 
exception to any visit to the 
center 
from 
Democrats, 
the 
larger problem with this trip 
was the timing of the visit and 
the comments she decided to 
make. Take the fact that now-
President Joe Biden visited the 
center as vice president, or that 
Sen. Amy Klobuchar’s, D-Minn., 
visited just this year. Those 
moves sparked little backlash at 
the time. 
For 
starters, 
Sinema 
took 
the trip in the heart of the 
midterm elections. That sort 
of timing does not look good. 
The upcoming midterms are 
extremely 
competitive, 
and 
Sinema’s Arizona partner in 
the senate, Mark Kelly, is in a 
critical re-election battle. Sinema 

somehow managed to find time 
to visit the man orchestrating 
the Republican takeover of the 
Senate, while at the same time 
failing to appropriately campaign 
for Democratic candidates in her 
home state. Business Insider 
pointed to a tweet by U.S. Rep. 
Ruben Gallego, D-Ariz., who 
is seen as a potential primary 
challenger to Sinema come 2024.
“Now that I think of it. I have 
been traveling the state and 
country. Donating, raising funds 
and encouraging people to come 
out and vote and I have seen you 
nowhere @SenatorSinema,” said 
the Democratic representative 
from Arizona.
When it comes to the comments 
made by Sinema herself, one is 
not hard-pressed to come up 
with a litany of complaints. First, 
she heaped delusional praise on 
the Kentucky senator, outright 
claiming that “we do share the 
same values.” These values could 
be numerous, but perhaps some 
are their mutual support for a 
starvation wage, tax loopholes 
for the richest Americans or 
minority rule.
She 
also 
claimed 
that 
McConnell shared her “pragmatic 
approach to legislating.” It’s 
one thing to say that Sinema 

herself is a pragmatic senator. 
But McConnell? In what ways 
did voting against convicting 
a 
man 
who 
fomented 
an 
insurrection against the United 
States government as president, 
recklessly 
holding 
open 
a 
Supreme Court seat for over a 
year for nothing but partisan 
gain (only to be hypocritical 
about the matter years later 
when a Republican had the 
opportunity to appoint a justice) 
and claiming that “The single 
most important thing we want to 
achieve is for President Obama to 
be a one-term president,” effuse 
sensibility and realism?
Beyond gross miscalculations 
of character, Sinema also made 
sure to roll out an awful legislative 
proposal as well. A staunch 
supporter of the filibuster, an 
arcane Senate rule that enables 
minority 
rule 
and 
Capitol 
gridlock and disproportionately 
benefits Republicans who seek 
the status quo, Sinema made a 
proposal to actually expand the 
60-vote threshold, an idea she 
herself admitted is incredibly 
unpopular. 
Apparently, 
the 
senator is in favor of partisan 
nonsense that would keep crucial 
judicial seats open, starve future 
presidents of cabinets of their 

preference and increase Capitol 
Hill political games and delays. 
Lastly, the senator found it wise 
to opine negatively on Democrats’ 
chances 
in 
the 
upcoming 
midterms, when she suggested 
that Democrats are likely to lose 
control of the House and Senate. 
While losing the House is likely, 
Democrats are actually favored 
to win the Senate, according to 
FiveThirtyEight. Moreover, it 
simply does not make sense to 
be pessimistic on your party’s 
chances as a major political 
figure of that party. There is 
a reason that Rick Scott has 
predicted 52 or more Republican 
senators post-2024 and that he 
was 100% certain they will take 
the Senate. It is the same reason 
that Nancy Pelosi insisted that 
Democrats would gain House 
seats. While both are unlikely, 
projecting confidence is key 
to base enthusiasm and donor 
interest. 
Unfortunately for Democrats, 
Sinema’s fiasco this week is just 
another page in her disappointing 
and confusing recent political 
career. 
She 
sides 
with 
Republicans not only when her 
party takes extreme positions, 
but also when Democrats are on 
the side of public opinion. She 

has, with no moral explanation, 
insisted on awful policies that 
gutted 
progressive 
proposals 
on excise taxes and the carried 
interest 
loophole. 
She 
has 
chopped up Democrats’ plans 
on drug pricing, gone against 
immigrants’ rights in political 
show votes and cozied up to 
dangerous special interests. And 
of course, she has not been willing 
to do what it will take to protect 
women’s reproductive freedom, 
voting rights and democracy 
itself by siding with Mitch 
McConnell and Republicans on 
the filibuster. 
In all of this, Sinema has failed 
to adhere to any sane logic for 
her actions. It certainly can’t 
be that she is catering to her 
constituents. Vote after vote, 
Sinema has gone against what 
the majority of Arizonans have 
wanted. As a result, she has 
also positioned herself as an 
incredibly unpopular politician 
for whom re-election would 
be of great difficulty. She has 
done what is often impossible in 
politics: united a state… against 
her. 
She is 17 points underwater 
among likely voters, 20 points 
underwater among Democrats, 
10 points underwater among 

Independents 
and 
18 
points 
underwater among Republicans. 
In fact, Sinema has double-digit 
unfavorable percentages in every 
single major demographic. 
What 
makes 
Sinema 
problematic is not simply that 
she is a fan of bipartisanship at 
large. The issue with Sinema 
is her insistence on associating 
with bad-faith Republicans over 
the goals of the Democratic 
Party and its base, often doing 
so in a way so overt she seems 
to merely be seeking status as 
an influential kingmaker with 
favorable standing among the 
Republican Party. More often 
than not, her focus on appealing 
to the opposite side of the aisle 
goes beyond crafting effective 
policy, and instead props up 
Republicans who are at fault for 
much of the dysfunction and 
political rhetoric she claims to be 
so concerned about.
Kyrsten Sinema is in office until 
at least January 2025. And while 
her presence in Arizona is infinitely 
better than any Republican who 
may replace her, Democrats can 
expect her dumbfounding and 
infuriating hijinks as we saw at the 
McConnell Center to continue, all 
the way until a primary opponent 
finds success against her. 

DEVON HESANO
Opinion Columnist

New Michigan Medicine contract reveals 
a nursing system in critical condition 

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.

PAIGE HODDER
Editor in Chief
JULIAN BARNARD AND 
SHUBHUM GIROTI
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

Ammar Ahmad

Julian Barnard

Brandon Cowit

Jess D’Agostino

Ben Davis

Shubhum Giroti

Devon Hesano

Sophia Lehrbaum

Olivia Mouradian

Siddharth Parmar

Rushabh Shah

Nikhil Sharma

Lindsey Spencer

Evan Stern

Anna Trupiano

Jack Tumpowsky

Alex Yee

Quin Zapoli

VANESSA KIEFER 
AND KATE WEILAND 
Managing Editors

A

ccess to clean and reliable 
water is something that 
we often take for granted. 
However, for the approximately 
150,000 
residents 
of 
Jackson, 
Mississippi, clean water is not a 
guarantee. This summer, the city’s 
long-struggling water system broke 
down, leaving the city without 
safe running water for even basic 
services to this day. The crisis 
in this overwhelmingly African 
American city serves as a stark 
reminder of the disproportionate 
impact of infrastructure issues 
on communities of Color and 
how governments often fail to 
provide basic services to their most 
vulnerable residents. The situation 
in Jackson also reminds us of 
Michigan’s water issues, where 
communities like Flint and Benton 
Harbor have had to continually 
fight for the fundamental right to 
clean water, a fight they have still 
yet to win.
The current water crisis in 
Jackson started in August when 
torrential 
rains 
caused 
major 
flooding of the Pearl River, which 
runs through the city. The flooding 
decreased the water quality going 
into the city’s main water treatment 
plant, which put a major strain on 
the plant. Soon there were concerns 
about low water pressure and the 
possible growth of harmful bacteria. 
Backup water treatment plants and 
secondary pumps also failed across 
the city. This catastrophic failure 
of the system led to many residents 
having no running water for several 
days, and a warning from the 
governor that they would not have 
water for even basic services like 
fighting fires and plumbing. 
Eventually, water services were 
restored, but the water quality was 
severely diminished. For months, 
residents were told they had to boil 
water before using it, even for basic 
actions like brushing their teeth. 
Long lines formed at National 
Guard water bottle giveaway sites 

as Jackson residents struggled to 
obtain clean water. Eventually, water 
service was restored and the boil 
water notice was lifted, but many 
residents are still understandably 
extremely wary about drinking the 
water. The city still recommends 
that young children and pregnant 
women not drink the water because 
of possible lead exposure, showing 
that the larger issues about water 
quality are ongoing. Many residents 
have also reported water quality 
issues, with images of foul-colored 
water going viral on social media.
The issues plaguing Jackson’s 
water supply are not new. The city’s 
entire municipal water system 
has long been plagued with issues, 
including over 300 boil water 
notices over the past two years 
because of concerns of E. coli and 
other bacteria in the water. The 
water system has been deteriorating 
for years due to mismanagement, 
underinvestment and the shrinking 
of the city’s population. Like many 
other urban cities, such as Detroit 
and Flint, Jackson has faced 
continued population decreases. 
The decreasing population has led 
to a shrinking tax base, making it 
hard to maintain a water system 
that includes pipes that are over 100 
years old. 
It is impossible to look at 
the situation in Jackson and 
not recognize the clear issue of 
racial inequities. Jackson is an 
overwhelmingly majority-minority 
city where 80% of the residents 
are Black. It is also a city that 
experiences poverty at a higher 
rate than the rest of the nation. The 
median household income is about 
$40,000, which is $25,000 less than 
the median income nationwide, and 
25% of the residents of the city live 
in poverty.
Communities 
of 
Color 
are 
often 
most 
impacted 
by 
structural 
inequities 
in 
our 
nation’s infrastructure. A recent 
investigation of Chicago’s tap water 
found that the majority of Black 
and Hispanic neighborhoods had 
higher levels of lead in their water 
than white neighborhoods. In the 

predominantly white suburbs of 
Jackson there are no water access 
issues, as these residents have newer 
water treatment plants.
Jackson 
also 
faces 
the 
unfortunate reality of being in the 
deep red state of Mississippi. For 
years, Republican administrations 
in 
Mississippi 
have 
promoted 
the idea of small government by 
turning down federal dollars and 
voting for low taxes and low public 
investment. In 2022, the state 
legislature did not approve a bill that 
would have authorized $4 million in 
bonds for Jackson water and sewer 
improvements. A separate proposal 
that sought to increase the sales tax 
by 1% in order to fund infrastructure 
improvements also died in the 
state legislature. It is worth noting 
that there have been many issues 
under the Democratic leadership 
of the city for decades with regard 
to the water system; however, the 
problem of infrastructure spending 
is something that is dealt with 
primarily on the state level. 
This situation also demonstrates 
the impact of climate change on 
our nation’s infrastructure. As was 
seen in Jackson, climate change 
caused- issues such as intense 
flooding can have a major impact 
on already struggling infrastructure 
and 
disproportionately 
impact 
communities 
of 
Color. 
With 
more and more “historic and 
unprecedented” 
weather 
events 
happening, we will see more of our 
infrastructure unable to survive 
our changing climate. If we do not 
take meaningful steps to address 
the climate crisis, we will continue 
to have these dangerous and 
disruptive infrastructure issues.
The situation in Jackon hits 
close to home here in Michigan, 
where we have seen major lead 
issues in the water supplies of both 
Flint and Benton Harbor. The story 
of these cities is so similar, where 
communities are left behind and 
denied access to clean water. It is 
critical that people continue to shine 
a light on the situation in Jackson so 
that this vulnerable community is 
not left behind.

The fight for water

ISABEL SCHINDLER
Opinion Columnist

On Oct. 1, with the ratifica-
tion of a new agreement by the 
University of Michigan Profes-
sional Nurses Council, a months-
long period in which nurses at 
Michigan Medicine had been 
working 
without 
a 
contract 
came to an end. The extended 
negotiation period was due to 
hospital 
administration 
and 
Michigan Medicine nurses’s fail-
ure to reach a new contractual 
agreement that would properly 
resolve the workplace problems 
that had permeated throughout 
the hospital.
The new contract was hailed as 
an achievement by both staff and 
administration alike; a major-
ity of nurses voted in favor of 
the new contract, and Michigan 
Medicine spokesperson Mary 
Masson called it “a fair agree-
ment that recognizes the value 
our nurses bring to our patients 
and the organization.” While this 
is a cause for hope, it goes with-
out saying that the current chal-
lenges and hardships that nurses 
face are not few and far between.
The union strike vote was 
spurred by a combination of fac-
tors, including staffing difficul-
ties, wage issues and scheduling 
complications. 
Many 
nurses 
within Michigan Medicine have 
faced unfair labor practices such 
as mandatory overtime, which 
was detrimental to the work-life 
balance of Ann Arbor nurses. 
Also notable are the conditions 
in which nurses and other health 
care professionals work. Many 
health care professionals have 
had to face various pathogens 
running rampant while fight-
ing on the front-lines to keep our 
communities safe.
Despite the importance of 
the work they do, nurses, both 
at the University and nationally, 
still lack the payment and wages 
they deserve. The strike vote 
by Michigan Medicine nurses 
aimed to fight back against these 
unfair practices, and, while many 
of these problems have been 
resolved on a local level with the 
recent contractual agreement 
reached, these issues extend far 
beyond Michigan Medicine.
Additionally, due to the gruel-
ing nature and financial burden 
of nursing school, it is important 
to note the challenges and sacri-
fices many nurses have to make 
to go through the proper educa-
tion and licensing to practice in 
general. 
The discontent nurses have 
had with Michigan Medicine 
is reflected nationally within 
the healthcare industry. Vari-
ous other strikes and protests 
are taking place throughout the 
United States because of this 
national shortage. The effects 
and reverberations of COVID-19 
still resonate within the nursing 
profession, and it has caused a 

shortage of available nurses will-
ing to work under these unfair 
conditions 
and 
insufficient 
wages.
These problems are all indica-
tive of a greater, systemic issue 
within the healthcare industry 
in the U.S. With nursing being a 
predominantly female occupa-
tion, issues of systemic sexism 
and other forms of workplace 
abuse should be considered.
Despite the severity of the sit-
uation, there are still manageable 
action steps toward an improved 
working environment for nurses. 
Certain 
pragmatic 
solutions, 
such as paying nurses more, are 
still Band-Aid solutions over a 
gaping wound. A structural prob-
lem requires structural solutions, 
and, with hospitals at the root of 
this problem, we should look to 
them for the solution.
The first step is to stop treat-
ing nurses as interchangeable. 
Nurses can have very specialized 
roles. It’s commonplace for the 
criticality of the patient to exceed 
the expertise of a nurse in a unit. 
This issue is compounded when 
the nurse has multiple patients. 
Having a non-ICU nurse oversee-
ing the care of ICU patients is an 
example of this kind of misallo-
cation of resources. This leads to 
burnout, which can take a toll on 
their performance at work.
Hospitals must start prioritiz-
ing measures for infection con-
trol. For instance, more money 
should be allocated toward per-
sonal protective equipment, or 
“PPE,” for some of the most front-
line workers: nurses. Employ-
ers also have a responsibility of 
ensuring the proper use of PPE, 
which requires the implementa-
tion of a PPE program.
While 
workplace 
changes 
within hospitals are necessary, 
part of the problem also lies in 
the education system. As older 
and more experienced nurses 
move on to other roles or retire, 
a large educational apparatus is 
necessary to keep a steady flow 
of replacements entering the 
system. Colleges and universi-
ties, however, lack the teaching 
staff and resources to accept all 
of the large number of qualified 
people applying, with nearly 
80,000 prospective nursing stu-
dents being refused admission to 
schools in 2012.
For a field with a turnover rate 

as high as 27.1%, these educa-
tional limitations spell disaster. 
Without new nurses, jobs cannot 
be filled and patients will suffer. 
In 2021, the number of registered 
nurses in the U.S. shrank by 3%.
After the COVID-19 pan-
demic and more recent monkey-
pox scare, we cannot afford to 
be caught this understaffed and 
unprepared. To keep supply in 
line with skyrocketing demand, 
state and federal funding is nec-
essary to shore up our nursing 
education infrastructure. A key 
first step was taken this year in 
Michigan when Gov. Gretchen 
Whitmer and the legislature 
pushed through $56 million of 
funding for nursing education. 
This is an excellent start that 
needs to be built upon in the 
future.
With more than half a million 
nurses projected to leave the field 
by 2024, the problem will only 
get worse the longer we wait. In 
the meantime, while new nurses 
are educated and trained, we 
must focus on retention of the 
current labor force.
As nurse unions here at the 
University 
of 
Michigan 
and 
across the country push for bet-
ter contracts, hospital adminis-
tration must be receptive. Better 
working conditions will help 
relieve much of the burnout and 
stress these health care workers 
often suffer from. But monetary 
compensation and reduced over-
time are not the only changes 
that must be made.
Despite their important role 
in health care, nurses often 
complain they feel disrespected 
at work. A job in nursing must 
also come with the dignity and 
gratitude it deserves. An atmo-
sphere of support and apprecia-
tion would keep nurses on the job 
for longer and boost floundering 
ranks at hospitals nationwide.
Many deep-rooted problems 
must be addressed, both within 
the hospital system and the nurs-
ing education system. However, 
Michigan Medicine’s new con-
tract marks a significant first 
step toward better serving and 
appreciating our valuable nurs-
es. Laying the groundwork for 
future progress, the contract is 
a beacon of hope — not only for 
nurses within Michigan Medi-
cine but for nurses across the 
nation.

MICHIGAN DAILY
EDITORIAL BOARD

TESS CROWLEY/Daily

