Michigan 2012 Elections: University of Michigan Board of Regents

To contact us Click HERE
(By Andrew MacKie-Mason)

Every year, it seems, there are candidates for the University of Michigan's Board of Regents who try to win on a nativist platform. The temptation is obvious, since only Michigan residents are able to vote, but it's also extremely misguided and dangerous for the University.

This year, those candidates are Dan Horning (R) and Rob Steele (R). For Steele, it's quite literally the only issue he addresses: "In-state money = In-state students." Horning also opposes affirmative action and graduate student research assistant unionization, but he thinks that in-state students should be considered for admission before out of state students.

Horning and Steele's obsession demonstrates a fundamental lack of understanding of the University of Michigan. UMich is not, primarily, funded by the taxpayers of Michigan. In fact, only about 17% of its General Fund budget for FY2011-2012 came from state appropriations (see here and here). And even with that low level of public support, 66% of UMich undergraduates come from in-state. UMich more than pays its debt to the state, and anyone who doesn't realize that doesn't understand the institution well enough to lead it.

Mark Bernstein (D), on the other hand, seems to have a good grasp of important issues facing the University, from the affordability of higher education to public engagement with the Regents. There's no apparent word on where he stands on GSRAs, for those interested in that. But as a Democrat, he probably supports it.

Shauna Ryder Diggs (D) offers very little either on the good or bad side. Her issue statements are mostly platitudes, and she doesn't have a strong administrative background. On top of that, the Michigan Daily raises troubling nepotism concerns about her nomination. On the other hand, she doesn't seem to hold any objectionable views, so it's hard to say much of anything about here.

Joe Sanger (UST) hardly warrants a mention. Other than a rant about increasing cost without any plan on how to counter it (cf. Bernstein's detailed plan), and concerns about people being "forced" to take a 5th year (I doubt a significant number of UM students who work hard and plan well have to take a fifth year to finish a single major), he doesn't really have any substance. Then, of course, there's this: "Many graduates today have never read either the Declaration of Independence or The Constitution of the United States, and are economic illiterates, but they have been heavily indoctrinated in the collectivist ideology and the alley cat morals of the state sponsored false pagan religion of “political correctness”. Shakespeare and Plato are giving way to “How to be Gay”."

James Lewis Hudler and Gregory Scott Stempfle (L), Gerald Van Sickle (UST), Eric Borregard (G) and Nikki Mattson (NL) appear not to have campaign websites. If I'm wrong, please let me know. (It's also worth noting that Stempfle probably has no real interest in the University of Michigan, given that he ran for the Wayne State Board of Governors just two years ago.)

Summary: So, in short, I support Mark Bernstein, for being the candidate most clearly prepared and ready to do the job of leading the University of Michigan. I also support Shauna Ryder Diggs, mostly because she's not Sanger, Horning, or Steele.