Dear Lisa: November

Dear Lisa,
This Christmas should be filled with excitement, cheer, and kisses under the mistletoe with my new boyfriend. However, instead of being happy and joyous, I’m filled with dread and anxiety. This Christmas Break I am meeting my boyfriend’s family for the first time, and I have many concerns. First, what do I wear? I want to be respectable, but I don’t want to appear as though I’m trying too hard. I especially don’t think wearing an ugly Christmas sweater would be a good idea. Also, do I bring presents? If so, do I need gifts for each member of the family? Finally, is it appropriate to show affection toward my boyfriend in front of his family, or should I just act like we are friends? Please help me!
Sincerely,
Christmas-Confused

Dear Christmas-Confused
I understand meeting the parents is a big step, but all you need to do is show them your true self. Ask your boyfriend if when meeting them if it is going to be a formal occasion or a casual one, so you know what to wear. Personally, I would just wear a nice pair of jeans and a nice top. With the gift situation, I believe you do not need to take a present because you are meeting them for the first time, but if you are really concerned you can also again ask your boyfriend what he thinks. Now the part about showing affection, if you feel comfortable showing affection by holding his hand go for it. They know you are dating their son, so holding his hand should not be a big deal at all. Do not stress about meeting his family, just act like yourself and enjoy spending time with him and his family

xoxo
Lisa

Dear Lisa,
My boyfriend and I will have been dating for a year this December. Our anniversary is just a few days before Christmas. Do you have any gift ideas for our one year anniversary? Also, do you think I need to get a Christmas gift and an anniversary gift? This would mean setting aside two days to celebrate the two dates separately. I’m so confused, and I’m afraid to talk to my boyfriend about combining the days because he will probably think I’m being a money-saver by skimping out on buying him two separate gifts. What do you think I should do?
Sincerely,
Afraid-of-appearing- Christmas-Cashless

Dear Afraid-of-appearing-Christmas-Cashless,
I think combining your anniversary with Christmas is acceptable, I do not believe that buying two separate gifts is necessary. What you could do is buy him two gifts or buy him one expensive thing. Like buy him his favorite Xbox game that he wants and buy some CDs or DVDs. Also, making him Christmas cookies along with the present would be a sweet touch. You should never be afraid to talk to your boyfriend about this issue at all, he should understand if you want to combine Christmas and your one year it is a totally rational idea especially when you will be seeing him a lot anyway during Christmas break there is no point in making the anniversary one day and then celebrating Christmas another.

xoxo
Lisa

Dear Lisa
I love Christmas, but my girlfriend absolutely hates it. What should I do about this? Should I continue liking Christmas even though it annoys my girl? Should I try and get her to like it just as much as I do? Should I take her to see Christmas movies or to pick out a Christmas tree with my family? I’m really concerned because my family also enjoys Christmas a lot and my parents expect me to have her over to bake Christmas cookies with them and decorate the tree with lights and ornaments. I’m afraid my girlfriend will break up with me because of my family’s Christmas cheer. Do you have any ideas as to what I should do?
Sincerely,
Boyfriend-with-a-Christmas-Cheerless-Girlfriend

Dear Boyfriend-with-a-Christmas-Cheerless-Girlfriend,

I believe that you should not change the way you look at Christmas. Everyone looks at it a different way. Do not push Christmas on your girlfriend. Do not play loud Christmas music, and do not talk about it all the time because that may make her break up with you. Ask her if she wants to come over for Christmas and help your family, even though she does not like Christmas that much. If she truly loves you, she will come and help your family. Do not fret about this. It is still early to get into the Christmas mood, a lot of people do not feel the Christmas cheer until later in December. Give her some time. Don’t push her to do anything she does not want to do because that will lead to conflict, not so much the Christmas cheer.

xoxo
Lisa

Word on the Street: Holiday Break

Michigan State University is out for vacation the second week of December. Whether you are out earlier or later, you are bound to have some extra time on your hands this winter break.

Coming from backgrounds across the state, country and world, MSU students each have a different story to tell about what they are doing this winter season. With winter upon us, some students are eager to hit the slopes or absorb the natural beauty of crisp snow flakes falling on a brisk early morning. Others can’t wait to leave to warm weather and beaches, something that is far from Michigan at this time of the year. Either way, students are getting a reprieve from class work, extracurriculars and sleepless nights in the library.

Lovelesh Chawla, a senior majoring in Computer Science and Engineering, will be spending winter break studying for and taking the GRE to prepare for grad school. When he finishes taking the GRE, he will be escaping to Florida with friends during the last week of December.

“Instead of studying, what about just going to the Florida and catching some rays?” Chawla said.

Many Spartans are going home for the holidays. Home for Spartans is as diverse as the activities they will be doing. For Matthew Swartz, an Arts and Humanities junior, he will be resting from the stress of classes by going home to Downers Grove, Illinois. Like Swartz, Carena Townsend, junior, will be going home to Ann Arbor to catch up on sleep and hang out with family and friends. She looks forward to enjoying her break by reading and being close to her family.

Others, such as Jai Rawat, will travel across the globe to see their families during winter break. Jai will be traveling to Jaipur and Udaipur, India to visit with family and friends and go to Thailand for ten days to take advantage of two of his favorite hobbies: traveling and photography.

For others, winter break is about getting an advantage in the job market.

Emily Pawlak, an Advertising and Design senior, will be spending her time during winter break filling out intern applications, sending out résumés and preparing for her last semester at MSU.

“Living in the dorms I’ll be going home for the semester break, visiting friends and networking for jobs come April and May,” Pawlak said.

For Joe Larsen, a senior in Media and Communication Technology, winter break will be spent doing humanitarian work in impoverished communities of Tanzania.

“I will be going to a village outside of Arusha in Tanzania where I will help provide internet connectivity to a secondary school and installing software that allows the students freer access to the internet,” Larsen said.

He is also hoping to visit a wildlife preserve during his time in Tanzania.

“[Winter break] is many things. It is a time to take a break from school, see friends and family, to earn some money, and, being a technology major, apply some of the skills I have learned in real world applications,” Larsen said.

Whether they are traveling, staying at home, or getting ahead in the job market, Spartans will be taking advantage of their time away from campus and the stress associated with college life.

Putting the Promise in Perspective

By: Alanna Powell

I hear people all over campus complaining about their hard-earned scholarship being taken away. They cry out, “This is a violation of our rights!” But let’s be rational. How did you earn your “Promise Scholarship”? Oh, yeah—by making patterns on MEAP test scantrons.

I’m a college student too, and I would love to get $2,000 for free. Unfortunately, there is no such thing as free money. There is, however, something called redistribution. This happens when the government taxes its citizens and then uses that money, among other things, to hand out to certain groups of people under the guise of lofty, feel-good names.

Euphemisms and promises aside, when there’s a $2.8 billion budget deficit in Michigan, we need to see the Promise Scholarship for what it is: not a promise, but an unsustainable social program that shouldn’t have implemented without first considering how to fund it.

This may be a bold claim, but the Promise Scholarship is a pretty bold program. People everywhere are mad that their “promise” has been taken away—but this is the heart of the problem. Nothing has been taken away; the money to fund the Promise Scholarship was never there to begin with. How can you take something that doesn’t exist in the first place? Furthermore, in order to have the money to fund something, our elected officials have to take money from us.

People just don’t seem to get it: social programs are not an inherent right. They aren’t this constant, primordial force of society—they are evidence of tax dollars at work. So, when government officials don’t fund a program, they’re not cheating you out of your rights. And, if you want to make the argument that you’re being cheated out of your hard-earned money, then you should complain on April 15.

Governor Granholm re-vamped the Michigan Promise scholarship program in 2007 when the state was facing a budget deficit of $600 million. That’s right, when the state had negative $600 million, she offered up to $4,000 per student for the Promise Scholarship.

Republicans did the responsible thing by cutting this year’s Promise Scholarship funding—it turns out that you cannot fund things when you do not have funds. For this fiscal year, maintaining this program would require an increase from $80.5 million to $140 million. Democrats can call Republicans heartless for cutting funding, and Republicans can call Democrats heartless for getting people’s hopes up by making false promises. But more importantly, when you look past party politics, it doesn’t matter how many promises politicians make. Because government doesn’t operate on promises, it operates on money.

Michigan simply does not have the money to afford the Promise Scholarship this year. What if, for once, we stopped looking to the government for a solution? What if tuition was lowered? Then, instead of subsidizing education to make it more affordable, it could be directly more affordable. (Plus, one could make the argument that the Promise Scholarship is actually inflating tuition costs). Or, what if taxes were lowered? Then, people could use the money they saved to put toward education directly, thereby eliminating the government middleman.

While Americans may not be ready to accept these Republican principles, the Michigan budget crisis has shown us some of the gaps in the Democratic ideal. Government-intensive social policy is inefficient, and as the lack of Promise Scholarship funding has shown us, it is also unreliable. The unfunded Michigan Promise Scholarship is not a broken promise. If anything, it’s broken idealism.

Fair Tax Simple, Easy Way to Solve Tax Problems

By: Matt Sunderlin

It seems these days that healthcare reform is the issue everyone is talking about. Sure, we’re fighting two wars (well, a war-and-a-half), we’re clawing our way out of an economic recession, and the national debt continues to spiral out of control, but apparently the top priority is somehow convincing Uncle Sam to pay for Grandpa’s hip replacement. Fine and dandy.

The fundamental question, though, is: where does that money come from? Before you storm off, remember that this is not an article on healthcare reform. Powers know we’ve seen enough of those already. No, the purpose of this article is to discuss something underlying every other major national issue today: tax reform. Healthcare is merely the trillion-dollar icing on the cake.

The primary purpose of taxation is to provide revenue for government. The U.S. tax system fares poorly here—by its own admission, the IRS is able to collect only about 85 percent of taxes owed, leading to shortfalls in the hundreds of billions of dollars. Additionally, since tax liability is based on income, any income that comes from sources difficult to document, such as cash-only businesses, is effectively untaxed; such enterprises total about $1.5 trillion per year, meaning additional hundreds of billions in lost revenue.

The U.S. tax code is even a burden on economic growth. While many large corporations can limit their taxable income by moving offshore—taking jobs with them in the process—and investing in foreign tax shelters, small and medium businesses cannot afford to do so. For every $100 paid in taxes, small businesses pay over $724 in tax code-compliance costs. This is a total of $500 billion wasted every year, a number which grows at the rate of eight percent annually. And due to punishing corporate tax rates of nearly 40 percent, starting a new business on US soil is all but discouraged.

These numbers are not encouraging. Most troublesome of all, however, are the projections from the U.S. Government Accountability Office, which state that if current trends continue, federal revenues by 2040 will be insufficient to cover the interest on the national debt, much less pay for anything else. (This report was issued before the current healthcare bill was proposed; doubtless, trillions more in Federal expenditures will only accelerate the crisis.) Clearly, it is important to find a solution, and it is probably not too difficult to determine that doubling the income tax is a bad idea.

Enter a bill known as “FairTax.” First proposed by Congressman John Linder (R-GA) in 1999, FairTax would replace all federal income taxes with a national sales tax, levied on purchase of consumer goods and services, without exception. To counter the inevitable objection that this would unfairly increase the cost-of-living for those least able to pay, the FairTax bill provides for a monthly payment to households to preemptively refund all subsistence spending up to the poverty level.

Revenue generation is greatly enhanced under FairTax. Because tax is assessed as a percentage of spending, not income, it’s much more difficult to avoid the system or avoid tax liability once inside it. Avoiding a sales tax on items you purchase every day is much more difficult than simply lying about the size of your income and hoping the IRS is too overworked to find you. And because everyone eventually buys goods and services, even the $1.5 trillion cash-only economy will be taxed—hot dog stands are hardly self-sufficient, after all.

The elimination of corporate taxes, which are mostly passed on to consumers via higher prices anyway, is the true genius of FairTax. The lack of corporate taxes provides a powerful incentive for U.S. companies to come back from overseas and for foreign companies to follow them—along with their attendant jobs and investment capital. This not only enriches the U.S. economy, but since more and better jobs allow more people to consume more, the tax base is expanded.

The profit motive is what makes the economy run; any system that tries to dampen the profit motive therefore also dampens the economy, and an income tax is no exception. So the next time you hear President Obama, or another of your elected officials, talk about funding healthcare reform or some other expensive new entitlement program by increasing corporate taxes, or through a “tax on the wealthy,” do yourselves a favor and point them at FairTax, instead. After all, the US income tax started as a tax on the top 0.5 percent of earners, and look where it is now.

Regulation not a Democrat or Republican Issue

By: Ameek Sodhi

It is a politician’s job to get elected every two to four years. Once elected for a first time, we as constituents re-elect incumbents overwhelmingly. By that definition, politicians have very little incentive to take a careful and detailed analysis of policy measures. As long as they get 51 percent of the vote, they’re happy. So what is an election-fearing politician to do when a serious, substantive debate comes up? Make a catchy slogan and run with it.

Political slogans have the wittiness of a fourth grade comeback – watch out. They have become commonly used in political elections big and small, and their strategies are pretty simple. If it scares people, brilliant. If the headlines make the other view sound like they have no backbone, wonderful. And if you can mischaracterize your opponent’s intentions, it’s all the better. With Regulation, more than any other issue, this childish rhetoric does not match up to the seriousness the debate requires.

Regulation is probably the most overused word by politicians. Politicians spin the concept which ever way the winds blow, to the tune of their own ideological note. Democrats complain that without regulations, the marketplace will run wild. Republicans insist that overregulation can restrict the healthy, needed risk-taking for a vibrant free market. On face value, both claims make sense. However, a firm understanding of economic history points to a solution more in depth and complex than just misleading catch-phrases.

Frankly, regulation is a case by case issue. There have been industries subject to Soviet-style overregulation where deregulation has worked. An example would be the deregulation of telecommunication industries in India, which has dramatically increased accessibility to cell phones. When I visited India, I noticed that even people with the most modest income could afford cell phones. Also, China has taken many steps in embracing a much less regulated and transparent marketplace. As a result, they have become an economic powerhouse. So in those specific cases, deregulation worked out very well.

On the other hand, there have been cases where eases on regulation have caused for the market to abuse its new found opportunity – particularly in the financial markets. The Asian Financial Crisis in 1997 is a good example. Capital was allowed to flow in and out with virtually no regulations, and caused Indonesia, Malaysia and South Korea to almost collapse. Clearly, more regulation was needed in that case.

Our current recession is another example we should learn from. For years, banks sold risky sub-prime mortgage backed securities under almost no regulation. It caused our markets to come to the precipice of collapse last September. So we know that we must be prudent when it comes to deregulating financial markets. With this case, however, there is more to the story.

For years, Republican and Democrat presidents pressured banks to make these sub-prime loans in the first place. Then, for eight years, a Democrat lead Finance Committee under a Republican president sat on their hands as the problem became much worse. In this instance – which our economy barely escaped economic Armageddon – there were institutional screw-ups, not just the question of regulation. So when politicians complain about the deregulation or regulation of American financial markets, they really are trying to cover their own mess with ideological blabber.

Clearly, regulation is a multifaceted subject that requires a case by case analysis. I look for the few, intelligent politicians from both parties that genuinely take the time to study issues like this with prudence. Some issues are cut and dry, and that is ok. However, there are certain issues where things are not so simple. On those more complex issues, like regulation, it makes sense for us to study the economics, not the rhetoric.

Michigan Republicans Poised for a Comeback

By: Brittany Hartmann

Who would have ever thought that Michigan would have a Republican comeback?

Well, I’m here to tell you it is happening. The Republicans are amped up and excited for the coming campaign season because they know Michigan is tired and fed-up with the way the government is handling things.

Take for instance, the economy. Wasn’t the stimulus package supposed to supply us with more jobs? Wasn’t the Michigan Promise Scholarship supposed to be a promise? Weren’t taxes supposed to stay down and Medicade supposed to get better? Weren’t our roads and public safety supposed to get better? Instead, we have a state government who is allowing convicted felons back on the street. The state can no longer afford to keep them in prison due to the very expensive new building we purchased to house them.

We have a Governor who can’t keep a promise, who can’t create jobs and who can’t give people incentives to stay in Michigan. Michiganders know that we need a new approach. We need a new plan, a new party; hence the comeback of the Republicans.

Recently Michigan had a visit from Michael Steele, Chairman of the Republican National Committee; Bobby Jindal, Governor of Louisiana; and Sarah Palin, former Governor of Alaska and Vice Presidential Nominee for the Republican Party. Michael Steele was the guest of honor at the Kent County Lincoln Day Dinner and he gave a wonderful speech on the power of young people and the their ability to make our party prosper in the future, but they must be given that chance first. Bobby Jindal shared with the Michigan republicans his abilities to stick to conservative ideals, resulting in election victories and changes for his state country.

Sticking to a conservative platform and standing by those ideals to correct and implement policy is one thing that conservatives and republicans must do if we are going to realize the comeback that we are so avidly after. Sarah Palin was in Grand Rapids for the kick-off of her book tour. She made a campaign promise to come back to Michigan because she has a connection to the state, through her son playing hockey here multiple times. She chose Michigan as the starting point of her tour. Unlike President Obama and his inability to keep his campaign promises, and unlike Granholm and her inability to keep a monetary promise, Sarah Palin and the Republican Party can keep their promises!

We can stick to a platform of conservative ideals, keep our promises and bring Michigan back up on its feet again. Michigan needs to thank these fellow Republicans for coming to our state and sparking up a fire that has long been put out by Democrats. It is through the keeping of our promises and the sticking with our ideals of conservatism that Republicans are going to have a powerful comeback in Michigan. So let’s fuel the ignited flame and get ready for 2010. I know the Republicans are.

Corrections Spending out of Control

By: Andrea Bommarito

Here are some numbers to think about. $2.08 billion: This is how much money the Michigan Department of Corrections (MDOC) spends annually. $1.9 billion: This is the portion of those expenditures that come from the general fund. And finally, 538 percent: This is how much corrections spending has increased in the last 34 years. If the MDOC continues spending as they are, it is projected that they will reach over $2.6 billion in spending by 2012. As of right now, Michigan is one of only four states where the state spends more on corrections than higher education.

Many groups and businesses across the state support structural reforms to our state budget to increase savings. One of these groups, the Detroit Regional Chamber, has presented a goal to the state to cut correctional spending by $500 million.

Oakland County Sherriff and Republican gubernatorial candidate, Mike Bouchard, has already introduced a few ways that MDOC can cut spending. He has even facilitated some of these practices in his county jails. At a press conference last month he outlined his actions.

“As Sheriff in Oakland County, I competitively bid for inmate food services in the jail,” Bouchard said. “This stand-alone item saves Oakland County taxpayers $1.6 million every year.”

If this process was facilitated in the 49 prisons statewide, we could save nearly $40 million annually.

Another way that Bouchard and the state of Michigan can cut MDOC spending is by re-introducing the ‘good time’ credit, where inmates can be released earlier by receiving these credits. It was previously used in the state until the late 1970s. To receive these ‘good time’ credits, inmates would have to receive their GED, Associates Degree or any other achievement that would increase the probability that the inmate would be a productive member of society. If 3,000 inmates gained these credits and were released early, the corrections department would save nearly $100 million.

By introducing and facilitating just these two practices in our prison systems, we can save the MDOC and the state almost $140 million annually. Bouchard is largely in favor of instating these programs across the state.

“I suggested to the Granholm/Cherry administration that they do the same with the corrections department as I did with my Oakland County jails,” Bouchard said. “I never even received a no thank you letter.”

With the right leadership and programs we can cut spending and help to return Michigan to its prosperous days.

Affirmative Action Ban Challenged in U.S. Circuit Court

By: Anna Bliss

On Nov. 16, opponents of the 2006 Michigan Civil Rights Initiative (MCRI) had their day in court, in the Sixth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. The MCRI was a ban on affirmative action in public institutions. The amendment barred state institutions, agencies and universities from showing preference or discrimination against anyone based on race, sex, ethnicity, gender or national origin.

In 2006, the ballot initiative was passed to amend the state’s constitution by a 58-42 margin.

The proponents of the lawsuit included University of Michigan students, faculty, applicants and various civil rights groups such as the ACLU, NAACP and Immigration Rights and Fight for Equality By Any Means Necessary (BAMN) who opposed the amendment on the basis that minorities are being underrepresented on the job and in the university because of unfair hiring preferences.

Attorney George Washington, representing BAMN believes that the law is discriminatory, racially-based and does not promote equality.

“It results in creating second-class citizenship for black and latino citizens,” Washington said. “It passed because white people outvoted black people. Black people voted against it by 90 percent. If you put all those things together, this is the most racist law passed in Michigan in many decades.”

Attorney General Mike Cox prosecuted on behalf of the state of Michigan. In 2006, Cox was the only statewide official to support Proposal 2.

“Three years ago, Michigan families spoke loud and clear when they overwhelmingly voted to amend our constitution and end the use of preferences in public institutions,” Cox said. “Today my office is defending that choice at the Court of Appeals and I am confident the court will again reject this attempt by activists to overturn the will of the people.”

International Relations junior Geoff Levin opposes the passage of Proposal 2.

“I think that our society needs to place a value on ensuring that those with academic potential and motivation of every ethnic and racial background get a fair opportunity at a higher education,” Levin said.

Political Theory and Constitutional Democracy junior Aaron Majorana believes that the lawsuit was meritless.

“I think it’s wrong that a small amount of people are tying to overturn the democratic decision of the majority,” Majorana said. “Michigan wanted to eliminate affirmative action and it did, end of story.”

The hearing on Nov. 16 was an appeal from the March 18, 2008 decision by the Federal District Court in Detroit which ruled that the amendment was constitutional and did not violate the Equal Protection Clause of the state constitution.

While a decision is not expected for several months, it is likely that the case will be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. As the case challenges the constitutionality of the amendment, it may be plausible that it will be heard. If the Supreme Court were to rule the ban unconstitutional, this state amendment of the Michigan Constitution would be struck down.

Hoekstra: Michigan Needs a Return to the Basics

A Spartan Review Exclusive

By: Pete Hoekstra

As I campaign across the State of Michigan, I’m often asked, “What can you do to turn around Michigan?” I’ve met with and talked to thousands of Michiganders who love their state, but are so frustrated with the current situation in Lansing. There is a complete void in leadership that has resulted in business out-migration, job loss and ultimately significant population loss.

When you look at the statistics, 53 percent of University of Michigan graduates left Michigan to find work elsewhere. At Michigan State, the number is 49 percent. The inability of our state to keep our graduates is an ominous sign for our economy. We must do better at providing quality opportunities for our graduates. Since we help pay for their education, we must put a premium on keeping them here so we can benefit from their expertise and leadership.

While government doesn’t create jobs, as evidenced by the recent figures from federal stimulus spending, government can create an environment for job providers. By breaking down bureaucratic barriers, creating a more tax-friendly environment and growing a quality work force, Michigan can once again be a national leader.

It wasn’t that long ago that Michigan had a Republican governor who led us to the lowest unemployment rate in the nation at 3.2 percent. We were below the national average in unemployment for several years. More importantly, we were number one in job creation. Our work force was growing and other states looked at our economic development efforts with envy.

That’s why I advocate a return to the basics. Programs with fancy names attract headlines, but that isn’t much of a consolation if they don’t attract jobs. Michigan has fantastic natural resources and a knowledgeable work force. We must build on our strengths. Unfortunately, the longer we wait to take action, the more the brain drain from Michigan accelerates.

When you look at successful states around the country, there are common elements among them. These states have rational tax codes, strong leadership from their governor, and a state bureaucracy that encourages growth, rather than stifling it. Michigan is currently at the wrong end of the spectrum on all of these aspects.

Under a Hoekstra administration, we will immediately scrap the onerous Michigan Business Tax. I will appoint strong department directors and give them the tools they need to help Michigan prosper. My department directors will make improving the Michigan economy their top priority. I will scrap the current Michigan Economic Development Corporation because it has gone from being the top economic development agency in the country to the most ineffective. In its place, we will create an economic development program that works with all businesses, instead of a few select favorites.

We will increase state revenues by growing the tax base, rather than continuously increasing rates on overburdened taxpayers. I will model any replacement taxes after successful models in other states.

I will encourage creativity in our education system, starting with strong support for charter schools and schools of choice. I will provide incentives for consolidation and reducing costs. There’s no reason for taxpayers to fund massages as part of teacher health benefits.

Given my experience on the House Intelligence Committee, I know how important public safety is to our citizens. After all, protecting our citizens is one of the fundamental responsibilities of state government. Our State Police and local sheriff, police and fire departments have been decimated under the current administration. It’s time for Michigan’s governor to respect and support our law enforcement community.

And there are so many other issues I will address during this campaign. This isn’t about grand plans, big spending programs and a bunch of hype to grab headlines. Michigan needs a strong leader with the ability to get the job done. It’s emphasizing the fundamentals and running an administration that responds to the needs of its citizens.

When I came to Michigan from the Netherlands, I was a young child. My parents saw Michigan as the land of opportunity where they could provide a good life for their family. Michigan certainly lived up to that promise. I was able to get a quality education and an M.B.A. from the University of Michigan. That foundation led to a successful career as an executive at Herman Miller.

I thought the capstone of my career would be serving in the United States Congress. I’m very proud of what I’ve been able to achieve for Michigan through that service.

But I won’t rest until we can once again say that Michigan has the lowest unemployment rate in Michigan and is number one in job creation. I will be laser-focused on that goal as your governor, and I look forward to detailing my vision during the upcoming campaign.

—
Pete Hoekstra is a U.S. Representative from Michigan’s second district. More information on his gubernatorial campaign can be found at HoekstraforGovernor.com

The Spartan Review is a non-profit organziation and therefore cannot endorse any candidate for political office. We extended the opportunity to write an op-ed for this print edition to all five republican candidates for governor. Only the George and Hoekstra campaigns responded with articles for this edition. The invitation for the Cox, Bouchard, and Synder campaigns to write an op-ed piece for print never expires. We hope that those campaigns will accept our offer so we can provide our readers their points of view.

Silver Bells in the City Kicks off the Holiday

By: Deema Tarazi and Kaitlyn Stephens

Traveling to downtown Lansing on a crowded bus with no available seats sounds like an interesting way to start a Friday night. On the evening of the Nov. 20, downtown Lansing had the 25th annual Silver Bells in the City celebration with the lighting of the Christmas tree in front of the capitol building.

Even though the bus ride was crowded, the atmosphere made up for it. The inside of the buses were decorated and the bus drivers blasted Christmas music to lift the spirits of college students. It was convenient that the bus ride to and from Lansing was free. In the bus, we could tell people were excited to be on their way to a fun night.

Before the lighting took place, a colorful parade of lights traveled down Washington Avenue. This parade included many floats, all covered in decorative Christmas lights, and marching bands performing Christmas tunes. With all of the excitement in the air, people in the parade were waving and shouting “Happy Holidays!” to the many locals watching the parade go by.

When the parade finished, many people rushed over to the capitol building to wait in anticipation for the lighting of the tree and the big firework display. We tried to rush through the crowd to get a good spot, but ended up in a mosh pit of people eagerly waiting for the show to begin.

We heard a big boom, and the fireworks began. While not as long as a July 4 display, the fireworks were nevertheless exciting and colorful.

“I liked all the different activities and the light parade. I felt it was a good way to bring the community together,” Katharine Macpherson, a freshman and a first timer at the festivities said.

The many activities if the evening included: self-guided tours of the capitol, face painting, free cookies, live reindeer, free horse drawn carriage rides, a bag pipe concert and the science center was open with slime making. There were activities for those of all ages. This night was very family-friendly.

The celebration brought out a lot of the local community as well as students from Michigan State University and Lansing Community College. This event was a great way for the community to kick off another Christmas season filled with cheer and unity. Just walking down the street, people were recognizing each other from class or from their hometowns.

Another freshman, Aly Prussing, had a different view.

“It was okay and the tree lighting was fun, but kind of disappointing compared to others I have seen. It was kind of uneventful,” Prussing said.

The downside of the celebration was that it was so crowded. It was a hassle to wait in line, let alone the walk to get in line. The fireworks were not as extravagant as they could have been, but we need to remember that the economy is not as good as it use to be.

Even with these downsides, Silver Bells in the City was a success. It brought college students out of their dorm rooms and families out of their living rooms to come together as a community.

Next Page »