Opinion
Wednesday, November 2, 2022 — 13
The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com
Spooky spooky Halloween
Midterms Matter
O
n Sept. 22, the Young
Americans
for
Freedom
chapter
at
the University of Michigan
announced they were inviting
Ben
Shapiro
to
speak
at
the University of Michigan
Rackham Graduate School on
Nov. 15th. Shapiro, a divisive
political
commentator,
has
based his entire career on
promoting
extremely
anti-
abortion,
transphobic,
Islamophobic,
homophobic,
racist and misogynistic views,
which are commonly surface-
level understandings of race
and sociology. His opinions,
which include blaming critical
race theory and the Black Lives
Matter movement for America’s
demise, have furthered division
and hate across the nation.
We, the Ethical Investment
Front,
are
a
coalition
of
student leaders, organizers and
community members brought
together as an offshoot of the
Students of Color Liberation
Front, and we are concerned
about Shapiro’s presence on
campus. We urge the University’s
Board of Regents and President
Santa Ono to recognize the threat
to safety that Shapiro’s presence
holds and stop him from speaking
at the University. His presence
will only cause harm to our
campus and communities in Ann
Arbor and poses particular risk to
students of Color, members of the
LGBTQIA+ community, as well
as those of other marginalized
backgrounds.
This situation is regrettably
reminiscent
of
when
white
supremacist
and
neo-Nazi
Richard Spencer planned to
speak
at
the
University
of
Michigan and Michigan State
University in 2018. Thanks to
community organizing and the
pressure the U-M Stop Spencer
Campaign put on administrators,
the University prevented Spencer
from speaking. Similarly, the
MSU Stop Spencer Campaign
was able to get Spencer to speak
off campus and to a smaller
audience,
but
violence
and
arrests still persisted. However,
with a new administration comes
inexperience, and any gaps in our
commitment to justice and equity
will allow bigoted speakers to
come to campus.
While
some
argue
that
universities cannot deny free
speech,
the
University
of
Michigan,
along
with
other
institutions,
has
historically
exercised its right to turn away
speakers due to high costs and
an inability to ensure public
safety. The costs associated with
protecting
speakers,
students
and
community
members
at these types of events can
approach six figures: When Milo
Yiannopolous, another alt-right
pundit, was invited to speak at
the University of Washington in
2017, the cost of security totaled
about $73,000.
It is incredibly fiscally and
socially irresponsible to support
a single speaker that has such a
high capacity to cause harm to
the campus community.
In the case of Richard Spencer’s
planned visit to the University of
Michigan in 2018, the University
rejected his request to speak
because the Division of Public
Safety and Security was unable
to “assure a reasonably safe
setting for such an event.” Other
universities like the University
of Minnesota have successfully
defended their venue changes
or cancellations for speakers
like Shapiro in court because of
legitimate safety concerns. The
same can be said for Ben Shapiro
in 2022. Hosting a speaker like
Shapiro
calls
into
question
the values of this university:
Why
does
the
University
prioritize giving a platform to
costly, hateful speakers over
opportunities to directly support
the students, staff, faculty and
everyone impacted by bigots like
Shapiro by ensuring our campus
is a safe space?
To University President Santa
Ono, this is an opportunity
for you to demonstrate your
commitment
to
listening
to
students, especially those on the
margins. As you said earlier this
year, “(m)y most important first
job is to listen to the community.
They understand what’s special
about Michigan, and that has to
inform what I’m going to do, even
in the first year.” If you care about
and are listening to the campus
community, you will prevent Ben
Shapiro from coming to campus.
To the regents, some of whom
were vocal about preventing
Spencer at the University of
Michigan in 2018, we ask that
you advocate for the safety of all
students and speak up against
bigotry at our university. And
to students, do not be silent on
this issue. Make sure your peers,
especially those targeted by
Shapiro’s rhetoric, are safe and
heard throughout this situation.
Op-Ed: Stop Ben Shapiro from
Speaking at the University of
Michigan
THE ETHICAL
INVESTMENT FRONT
M
any
voters
only
focus on presiden-
tial elections when,
in reality, it is state and local
elections that have a larger
impact on our daily lives. The
importance
of
down-ballot
elections is evident this year
in Michigan, where voters will
vote on everything from the
governor to two of the Univer-
sity of Michigan Regents and a
proposal to legalize abortion
in Michigan. These elections
are even more crucial given the
dangerous
anti-choice
elec-
tion deniers on the ballot for
some of Michigan’s key elected
positions. They are too impor-
tant for young people to sit
out, especially with important
issues around abortion rights
and preserving the integrity
of our democratic institutions.
That is why students need to
use their voices and vote to
play an active role in shaping
the future that we want to see.
The top three elected offi-
cials in Michigan — the gov-
ernor, attorney general and
secretary of state — are all up
for re-election this Novem-
ber. Despite the importance of
these roles in governing our
state, the Republican Party
nominated extreme candidates
with no political experience
and dangerous histories of try-
ing to usurp the will of Michi-
gan voters in the 2020 election.
Matthew DePerno, the Repub-
lican candidate for attorney
general, rose to fame within
the Republican Party for his
work to “audit” the 2020 elec-
tion, motivated by unfounded
claims of voter fraud. DePerno
is currently under investiga-
tion for allegedly accessing
and tampering with a voting
machine. Kristina Karamo, the
Republican nominee for sec-
retary of state, the office that
runs elections in Michigan, is
also an avowed election denier
who gained prominence by
claiming widespread fraud in
the 2020 election.
The fact that both of these
candidates are running for
offices that deal directly with
the rule of law and the admin-
istration of state elections is
unbelievable. Their election
would be detrimental to the
fundamental bedrock of our
democracy.
In
office,
they
would threaten the integrity of
Michigan elections going into
the 2024 election and elections
after that.
Many of the top Republican
candidates in Michigan this
year have shown themselves
to be radical and out of touch
on the issue of reproductive
rights, a topic that is of great
concern for many students
on campus. DePerno has sup-
ported restricting Plan B and
incorrectly claimed that Plan B
is being used after conception.
Tudor Dixon, the Republican
candidate for governor, has
also embraced a severely anti-
choice stance, stating that she
only supports abortion to save
the life of the mother. For so
many young people, reproduc-
tive rights are a defining politi-
cal issue.
The
topic
inspired
LSA
sophomore Olivia O’Connell to
vote in this election. “I plan on
voting because so many impor-
tant and crucial human rights
are at stake in this election,”
O’Connell said. “As someone
who’s passionate about social
justice issues, I want to ensure
that every single person can
fully embrace their identity
and exercise their personal lib-
erties.”
The issue of reproductive
justice is at the forefront of the
midterms this November. Fol-
lowing the overturning of Roe
v. Wade this summer, states
now determine the legality of
abortion within their borders.
On the Michigan ballot this
November is Proposal 3, which
would codify abortion in the
Michigan Constitution. For so
many young people, reproduc-
tive rights are a defining politi-
cal issue. As we face a future
in which we have fewer rights
than our parents did at our
age, young voters in Michigan
have the ability in this election
to vote yes on Proposal 3 and
ensure that reproductive rights
are codified in the Michigan
Constitution.
The passage of this propos-
al is not inevitable, as many
religious
organizations
and
outside groups have poured
money into defeating Proposal
3. Many of their ads have been
criticized for pushing alleged
misinformation, such as claim-
ing that the bill will allow
young children to get puber-
ty-blocking
drugs
without
parental consent, a claim that
has been disputed by Washt-
enaw County Prosecutor Eli
Savit. This incorrect claim is
an example of how anti-Prop
3 groups are trying to under-
mine this proposal through the
propagation of false informa-
tion.
One of the most important
elections for students in par-
ticular is the election of the
University’s Board of Regents.
Regents play a critical role in
the everyday life of U-M stu-
dents,
deciding
everything
from tuition prices to choosing
University presidents and how
the endowment is invested.
Voting for the regents is one of
the only ways that we as stu-
dents can have a direct say in
the actions of the larger school
administration.
The regents’ election is an
example of why it is so impor-
tant that young people vote.
Historically, the people who
vote in midterm elections are
older and less representative
of the views of young people.
Youth civic engagement has
historically lagged compared
to older Americans. However,
in 2020, inspired youth vot-
ers came to the polls in record
numbers. It is estimated that
50% of young people between
the ages of 18 and 29 voted in
the 2020 presidential election,
which was an 11-point increase
from 2016. While these num-
bers are a vast improvement,
there is still significant room
for further increases in turn-
out among young people.
We are so fortunate to be at
a school that prioritizes civic
engagement and makes it easy
for students to vote. There are
two satellite clerk’s offices on
campus, one at the University
of Michigan Museum of Art
and one at the Duderstadt Cen-
ter on North Campus, where
students can go to register,
update their addresses, get a
ballot and vote. Both of these
spaces have been designed
with the intention of creating
a calming and welcoming vot-
ing environment. The spaces
even feature celebration sta-
tions that allow students to
take pictures with their ballots
and make celebratory voting
buttons embracing the fun and
excitement of voting.
There are friendly staff and
student
volunteers
on-site
who are able to assist with any
voting-related questions. The
general election is on Nov. 8,
but voters can already vote via
an absentee ballot or in per-
son at their clerk’s office. All
it takes is a few minutes, but it
is so critically important that
you vote. If young people go to
the polls and make their voices
heard, we can build a better
and more just Michigan.
ISABELLE SCHINDLER
Opinion Columnist
Design by Sara Fang
Design by Julian Kane
Pardon? Fine. Legalize it? Now!
O
n Oct. 6, President Joe
Biden pardoned thou-
sands of people in federal
prison on charges of possession
of marijuana and announced that
his administration would review
whether marijuana should still
be considered a Schedule I sub-
stance. There is no doubt that
this action by the president will
benefit the lives of thousands of
Americans. However, there are
still thousands of people in state
prison for possession of marijua-
na and in federal prison for the
distribution and sale of marijua-
na. Until marijuana is legalized
or decriminalized in the United
States, people will continue to be
sent to jail for use of a substance
that is legal for recreational use
in 19 states.
One important reason that
marijuana should be decrimi-
nalized is that, by some metrics,
marijuana is safer than alcohol, a
drug commonly used by Ameri-
cans. It is considered impos-
sible to overdose on marijuana.
It is also extremely difficult to
develop an addiction, although it
is possible to have a dependence
on it. Additionally, over 60% of
Americans support the legal-
ization of marijuana for recre-
ational use and 90% support its
legalization for medical use.
Besides the attitudes of the
vast majority of Americans as
well as the safety of marijuana,
there are economic reasons why
the U.S. should legalize the drug
federally. If marijuana were
legalized at the federal level,
people who currently purchase
weed from unregulated sources
would purchase it from licensed
cannabis dispensaries. Shifting
demand away from unlicensed
sellers would allow the gov-
ernment to benefit from taxa-
tion of marijuana. Currently,
recreational marijuana is legal
in 19 states and the District of
Columbia. In 2021, those states
reported a combined $3.7 billion
in revenue.
Regulation would allow for
consumption of safer marijuana
and knowledge about what is in
the product. Purchasing mari-
juana illegally increases the
possibility of potency inconsis-
tencies, mold and pesticides.
Legalization would allow cus-
tomers to know what is in their
marijuana, including tetrahy-
drocannabinol (THC) and can-
nabidiol
(CBD)
percentages,
allowing users to be aware of
the potency of their marijuana.
Regulation will help keep people
safe from the dangers of using
too much marijuana in a short
period of time. Though mari-
juana overdoses haven’t been
observed to be lethal, they can
still cause serious adverse men-
tal and physical effects.
Legalization of marijuana also
leads to greater participation in
the labor market and higher rates
of employment, as more people
are employed to work in this new
industry. Legalization of mari-
juana federally would allow all
states in the country to reap the
benefits that many states have
already seen. Additionally, legal-
izing marijuana would reduce
law enforcement and incarcera-
tion costs, freeing up those dol-
lars for other priorities.
Finally, the U.S. should legal-
ize marijuana because of the
complexity of laws that exist
in this country about the sub-
stance. While marijuana is legal
in 19 states for recreational and
medicinal use, it is fully ille-
gal and criminalized in four
states. In addition to the states
where marijuana is legalized for
medicinal use, there are a vari-
ety of reasons why marijuana
is legal in other capacities in
the U.S. On top of that, federal
law prohibits the use and sale
of marijuana, further confusing
the legality of marijuana in the
U.S. While marijuana is legal in
many states, possession or use of
marijuana on federal property
can lead to federal charges, even
if marijuana is legal in that state.
Marijuana’s
continued
place-
ment as a Schedule I drug along
with heroin and LSD, and above
fentanyl, leads to uncertainty
about the consequences of using
marijuana.
Efforts to legalize or decrimi-
nalize recreational and medical
marijuana have been attempted
on both sides of the aisle. While
many of the states that have
fully legalized marijuana are
controlled by Democrats, states
under Republican control such
as Mississippi and Alabama have
legalized marijuana in some
capacity. This demonstrates that
efforts to decriminalize mari-
juana have support from both
parties, making it easier to pass
at the federal level.
Additionally, Congress has
attempted
to
decriminalize
marijuana and remove it from
the federal list of controlled sub-
stances, with some Republican
support. There are currently two
bills in Congress regarding the
legalization or decriminalization
of marijuana, one introduced by
a Democrat and one introduced
by a Republican. The Democrats’
bill would remove marijuana
from the Controlled Substances
Act and impose a tax on mari-
juana. Three Republicans signed
onto this bill. The bill introduced
by Republicans would impose
a lower tax on the sale of mari-
juana and treat marijuana like
alcohol under the Controlled
Substances Act. While the 50-50
Senate may make it difficult
to pass measures legalizing or
decriminalizing marijuana, par-
ticipation by Republicans in such
efforts are possible.
Biden’s decision to pardon
people in prison for marijuana
possession and to review wheth-
er marijuana should remain a
Schedule I drug is absolutely a
step in the right direction. How-
ever, it does not go far enough.
Marijuana is a commonly used
drug that does not have signifi-
cant negative impacts on health.
People do not deserve to be
imprisoned for marijuana charg-
es. It’s crucial that the U.S. legal-
izes marijuana now.
LYDIA STORELLA
Opinion Columnist
Design by Allison Payne