O
n Nov. 4, University
of Michigan students
filled the Diag as Gov.
Gretchen Whitmer stepped out
of her campaign bus to rally
the young crowd. With her was
Pete Buttigieg, U.S. Secretary
of Transportation. The next
day, Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt.,
made his own stop in Ann
Arbor, encouraging students to
vote for the Democrats in the
looming 2022 midterms.
Their mission: Get out the
college student vote.
They succeeded. On Election
Day, young people made up a
much-larger-than-usual voting
bloc. University of Michigan
students waited for hours to
cast their ballots at a campus
polling place, giving Michigan
Democrats a boost in what could
have been close races. The Blue
Blitz paid off, with Whitmer
and her allies winning another
term in each of the state’s four
state-wide offices, this time
with a Democratic Michigan
House
of
Representatives
and state Senate. All three
progressive
ballot
measures
were also approved.
The race was called and
many Wolverines rejoiced —
even though many of them are
not from Michigan. Students
from across the country who
had registered to vote in Ann
Arbor celebrated the triumph of
their values. Michigan, a swing
state, had swung left, and they
had helped.
And when summer comes and
they return home, they leave
the people of Michigan to live
with the results of the election.
For this reason, these students
need to be voting in their home
states. Absentee ballots exist
precisely for this reason. Even
New Hampshire, the hardest
state to vote in, only requires
a simple form. The process is
designed so that those abroad
on
Election
Day,
including
students, can still vote in their
own communities.
Many people in line at the
campus polling place, however,
missed the deadline to fill out
these forms. Procrastinating
paperwork
was
not
the
only
force
driving
out-of-
state students to register in
Michigan;
strategic
voting
also played a large role. Over a
quarter of U-M undergraduate
students come from deep-blue
California, Illinois, New York
or New Jersey.
A Democratic vote in Chicago
or Newark is a blue drop in a
vast ocean. A Democratic vote
in Michigan could change the
color of the whole state.
President Joe Biden said
democracy was on the ballot,
and
Michigan’s
Republican
gubernatorial candidate was
an election denier. Roe v. Wade
was overturned, and polling
on Proposal 3, which would
guarantee reproductive rights,
looked uncertain.
Mobilized by national leaders
and consequential issues, many
out-of-state students accurately
concluded that a ballot in
Michigan has a higher chance of
swaying elections than a ballot
in Illinois or California. So they
cast one here. LSA freshman
Ava Hammerman, who voted in
Ann Arbor, explains, “I voted in
Michigan because my vote has
more of an impact here than in
Maryland, which is much more
blue. It is important to vote in a
state that I can help swing.”
But what does this difference
in voting power mean for
lifelong
Michiganders?
Was
our political system meant to
contend with these issues of out
of state votes?
Michigan’s political diversity
is a feature, not a flaw. An
out-of-state vote in Michigan
does not answer a defect,
it dilutes the influence of
permanent residents. Abortion,
immigration,
gun
control
and education may be less
contentious issues in liberal
cities and states, but not in
Michigan. In future elections,
it should not be so easy for non-
Michiganders to influence the
issues Michiganders feel so
passionately about.
Federalism,
the
bedrock
of the United States, is based
on local people making local
decisions. State governments
are meant to represent the
interests of their constituents,
not temporary lodgers. Though
out of state students live here
for four years, and any state-
level policies will impact them,
they certainly do not have a
comprable insight to lifelong
Michiganders.
A student living only in a
dorm, paying few taxes and
counting down the days until
they can return to New York
has little of the knowledge
necessary to cast an informed
vote in Michigan, and they
are far less affected by the
results. Most important issues
on the ballot are not as flashy
as
reproductive
rights
or
the governor. Further down
the ticket, local judges, city
council, the mayor and state
representatives
are
equally
important.
These are serious contests
with significant consequences
for people in the community.
But they lack the heavyweight
titles and gravitas to excite out-
of-staters driven by national
issues. Even within Michigan,
the idea of a Detroiter voting for
the Ann Arbor School Board is
absurd, let alone another person
with
permanent
residence
hundreds of miles away doing
so.
Many
students
feel
like
they are wasting their ballot
voting in their deep blue home
state, but they are wrong. The
small races that really define
a community all demand their
voice. America is a country
built
on
communities,
and
the nationalization of politics
has had very negative impacts
for them. Detroit, Ann Arbor,
Chicago and New York all have
their own neighborhoods with
their own problems that require
a highly localized response.
The diversity that makes
America special manifests itself
in school boards and city halls.
These seats of local government
should be emblematic of the
people living there.
The big issues still matter.
Election denial must stop and
women must have the right
to choose, but it is up to local
people to make it happen.
And they usually do a good
job
—
Trump’s
handpicked
conspiracy theorists lost at the
polls. Only nine states prohibit
abortion with no exceptions and
Michigan is not one of them. So,
to all the out-of-staters who
voted in Ann Arbor, your own
community needs your vote
more. Michigan does a good job
on its own.
Jack Brady is an Opinion
Columnist and can be reached at
jackbra@umich.edu.
Wednesday, December 7, 2022 — 9
The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com
To Medicate or not to medicate?
College students must decide
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
Zhane Yamin
Nikhil Sharma
Lindsey Spencer
Evan Stern
Anna Trupiano
Jack Tumpowsky
Alex Yee
Quin Zapoli
VANESSA KIEFER
AND KATE WEILAND
Managing Editors
Out-of-state students help swing
the vote
JACK BRADY
Opinion Columnist
T
his past week, I went
to the University of
Michigan’s
student
health services to get routine
blood work and lab tests done.
After
checking
in
for
my
appointment, the receptionist
handed me a small clipboard
with a questionnaire attached.
“It’s just protocol,” she assured
me. “We ask all college students
to fill it out.” The survey asked
me to consider my feelings and
behaviors over the past two
weeks, prompting me to rate
the extent to which I had little
interest or pleasure in doing
things or felt tired and had little
energy — and, unsurprisingly
for a college student in the
middle of exams, I ranked each
of these categories pretty high.
When I was finally admitted
into
the
doctor’s
office,
I
handed over my questionnaire,
and waited as she scanned
over my responses. After a
couple
minutes,
she
began
slowly
nodding
her
head
back and forth while I braced
myself
for
the
follow-up
question that I already knew
was coming: “Have you ever
considered taking anti-anxiety
medication?”
It
is
precisely
this
line
of
questioning
that
has
contributed to the doubling
of
anti-anxiety
and
antidepressant prescription use
among college students, with
one in four college students
reporting having taken some
form of psychiatric medication
within the past year. Although
pharmacological treatments for
mental illness have provided
life-changing results for many
people, they do not come without
repercussions. Specifically, the
appallingly low thresholds for
prescribing psychiatric drugs
have
engendered
harmful
trends of overprescription and
misdiagnosis.
The form that I was asked
to complete by the receptionist
in
the
doctor’s
office,
formally known as a PHQ-9
questionnaire, is a major culprit
in the progression of this
epidemic of overmedication.
Not only does the form’s reliance
on self-reporting of symptoms
open up a strong potential for
error and response bias, but
in a recent study researchers
at
McGill
and
Stanford
found that the questionnaire
“substantially
overestimates
depression prevalence.”
When
compared
with
structured clinical screenings
for depression, the PHQ-9 was
shown to falsely overestimate
depression
rates
by
more
than 50%. This is particularly
concerning, considering that
almost all population estimates
of depression prevalence are
based exclusively on cursory
screening tools such as the
PHQ-9. Thus, a vicious cycle
ensues: depression and anxiety
rates are inflated by inaccurate
and
unreliable
clinical
practices, and production of
psychiatric drugs is bolstered to
meet false quotas of perceived
necessity.
Consequently, such trends
of
overdiagnosis,
paired
with worsening shortages of
psychiatric professionals, have
promoted the false perception
of psychiatric medication as
a complete and total solution.
The
National
Institute
of
Mental Health identified the
growing threat of this mindset,
affirming
that
“prescription
drugs are not a cure for anxiety,
but rather only one part of
treatment.”
In
fact,
multiple
studies
have found that the continued
use of antidepressants may be
harmful in a way that many
would not expect. Identified
as
“tardive
dysphoria,”
experts have established that
extended use of these drugs
substantially
increases
the
risk that an individual will
experience chronic depression
in the long term. This is
normally accompanied by an
overall loss of antidepressant
efficacy, rendering the patient’s
corrective options limited and
fraught.
A study conducted at Yale
found
that
usage
of
SSRI
(selective serotonin reuptake
inhibitor)
antidepressants
more than doubled the risk
that a depressed individual
would
develop
bipolar
disorder. This emerging patient
demographic has been revealed
as chronically overmedicated
and undertreated, highlighting
a growing need for critical
reevaluations of societal views
of mental illnesses and their
plausible remedies.
The solution to this problem
lies in the prioritization of
both holistic and cognitive
therapies for mental illness,
rather than strictly chemical
ones. These approaches have
tentatively
been
shown
to
be equally or more effective
than
psychiatric
drugs
in
treating depression and anxiety
disorders, with reduced risks of
relapse after ending treatment.
Another recent study coming
out of Georgetown University
Medical
Center
suggests
that
consistently
practicing
mindfulness
and
meditation
had the same success rate in
reducing symptoms of stress
and anxiety as psychiatric
medication did. Such findings
are imperative for efforts to
reduce medication reliance, as
the results could increase the
likelihood of insurers to cover
costs for holistic treatments
and therapies, which currently
can cost up to $500 for an
8-week session.
These circumstances serve
as a sobering reminder that
matters of health are highly
personal and unique to each
individual.
Mental
health
issues
in
particular
are
extremely complex, and often
unable to be fully ameliorated
through blanket solutions such
as medication. Health care
systems have come to rely too
heavily on prescriptions rather
than preventative action, and
this trend threatens to pose
serious harm to the American
public
if
not
corrected.
Ultimately, although effective
for
some
individuals,
no
medication
comes
without
a
set
of
side
effects
and
repercussions. Accordingly, it
is important to always do your
research, with considerations
of whether these potential risks
will be offset by the benefits.
Tate Moyer is an Opinion
Columnist & can be reached at
moyert@umich.edu.
Design by Samantha Sweig
Opinion
Design by Evelyne Lee
Double Decker December
Cartoon by Anya Singh
TATE MOYER
Opinion Columnist