BY ALEX MICH, Staff Reporter

I do hope you all enjoyed that little skit Mike and I had about elections. It is actually quite a unique process when one goes through the entirety of it all.

I am certain that many people will find the article offensive. But if no one has written back before about it, I am sure they all expect it now. As for whom my vote is going towards…well that is very tough. I did have to flip a coin for this one (a little hard to do with three parties running). Here are my final thoughts on the matter.

To Student Voice: I wish I could have found out more about you a bit sooner. There is absolutely nothing anywhere about what you stand for on any issue. Perhaps it is a reaction to the chaotic mess that SG elections can display, but I do hope you will stop by and visit me though. Matt, I know you know where you can find me. Sadly, until I hear more from you guys, I am not going to vote for you. It is tough; I know Matt from high school and he is an amazing guy, but it is not entirely about knowing an individual. It is knowing what that individual intends to do in Student Government.

Which leads me to the next party the One Michigan Coalition. By far, one of the best groups of students who can handle my rants and ravings that I have seen, and they certainly have been very patient with my concerns (which are sometimes unfounded and rather explosive). Also, I am very big advocate for several of their policies that are being put forward. I love the idea of having a fall break, I love the idea for a shuttle bus to the mall, and I think a Director of Inclusion would be a wonderful addition for the SG.

However, I think I have my doubts with some of the policies put forward. I worry about where on our campus faculty parking would go if we try to add more faculty spots. Not to mention why on Earth a political body designed to represent the students wants to promote an agenda item for the faculty. I find it rather strange also that they will implement a Student Judiciary (a Supreme Court for the SG) when it is not even in formation yet?

Obviously, it will be if they implement it…hence they want to implement it, right? I mention this because it goes back to my previous rants about the Constitution Referendum that will not be on the ballot since Ann Arbor Legal is taking way too much time in reviewing it. See, the new Supreme Court is to be voted upon by the students in the referendum for amending the Constitution.

However, I find it arrogant that this party wants to implement this new judiciary when the students first have not voted for this new judiciary, and second haven’t even seen the official proposed amendments to the Constitution to even consider whether this is a good idea or not. Yes, it is silly point to argue but it points to the perceived arrogance that the common frustrated student has with SG. It was that way when I was in SG and I could not change it, and despite their best efforts, I find that it is still prevalent in some shape and form.

Yet, they still have a good platform with good ideas. Certainly they will try to help promote the renovation of the second floor to the library (or at least they will get student input into it) and their discussion for a survey data to pinpoint weak spots in Wi-Fi connectivity is certainly professional. As such, I would probably vote for the Senators that I know personally.

But I feel that when it comes to voting for an executive board and for a group of senators en masse, I would vote for the Simple Needs Party. Now, these guys are not exactly immaculate either. The idea that there should be more promotion for C-tools is just a terrible waste of time. The idea of a campus vaccination day is just borrowing a concept developed from the incumbent One Michigan Coalition group that helped to bring discounts on flu shots (or so the Student Government Facebook says).

Also, a list of 5 senators really doesn’t show a lot of support for the policies put forward.
However, I do find that the Simple Needs Party has ideas that may be useful to the campus. The idea to automatically log-in to the Wi-Fi connection seems to be a progressive idea. Also, I do like the idea of getting more printers and hand sanitizers around the campus.

The one thing that impresses me the most about my balding Danish friend’s platform is the honesty in it. Yes, Mike and I pointed out his epic grammar fail by saying “raise student activities”.

However, I think raising the student activity fee is an important change to this campus. The student activity fee is a 30 something fee (or some amount) that is used to fund all student life activities on campus. Rather than just floating with the existing budget by raising some advisory council’s limit on event spending, Jacob appears to be saying (in my opinion) that it is not good enough. With the vast increase in student organizations, there are more student organizations who feel entitled to a certain amount of cash. That set amount is either insufficient to support every organization or that amount has to be dramatically reduced.

We can try to adjust numbers all we want, but it is still going to be a problem unless we directly face it. That is the message that I get from Jacob when I see that on the platform. It is not the most popular choice (I would not want to spend a few more dollars on this place if I don’t have to) but it is the reality that we must face. At least Jacob has the guts to actually face it. His hair may fall off trying to step forward but at least the majority of him is stepping up to say something.

These are just a few thoughts on what I have seen as of 3:00 in the afternoon yesterday. As I said, I would vote for the Simple Needs Party. No offense to anyone else, but that is all I got to say. I am not campaigning (although I do like the parody Mike and I put forward…again, my deepest apologies. Please try to find the humor in it. If possible, Mike Brennan is a safe alternative to the candidates…just joking…kind of).

However, I do have one last request. To whoever wins this election, I ask that you be kind with the upcoming referendum (that hopefully will be in April). Unless you are absolutely certain that you can produce a better set of amendments (and I am certain that it can be done), please do not let the hard work of this past group be a waste. At least, let it come up for a debate amongst the Student Body unless you can make better changes.

The views presented, unless otherwise noted, are of the individual authors and do not necessarily represent those of The Michigan Journal Editorial Board, the University of Michigan-Dearborn faculty or administration.


  1. Hello, I don’t know how many people actually read these comments but I figure I give it a shot. I would like at least the opportunity to make one major correction. In regards to the OMC’s proposed plan to “increase availability of faculty parking spots” (that was taken from the poster I saw before 3pm), I understood it to mean that more faculty spots would be created for faculty members. However, after a fun conversation with one of my fellow MJ writers, I understand that to mean an increase availability to faculty parking spots…as in students would gain access to faculty parking spots. I do apologise to the OMC for that misunderstanding. In regards to it, I think its a nice idea. I don’t know if it will work out well but at least its worth trying to fix. However, again I do apologise for the misunderstanding.

    As for the rest of it, yea… If my opinion actually has the so-called wide readership and potential impact that some people might think it has…I highly doubt it. My articles are rather too long and dry to really be enticing to the reader. But again, I still feel that waiting for next week to write a retraction is too late to do so and although this probably won’t have the same effect as a normal retraction would being printed, I do still feel it is right to at least admit to that grave error.


Comments are closed.