I'm Endorsing Mike Behm For Regent Comment Count

Brian

So I'm about to break the no politics rule. I regret this, but…

1. If I'm going to run for regent that has to happen anyway.

2. I am only going to do this for Michigan regent.

3. I don't think regent is a particularly partisan position—see the lack of transparency as to how they operate and the lack of "no" votes.

4. I am not a registered anything. I don't like politics for the same reason I don't like coachspeak. I would strongly prefer regent elections to be nonpartisan, but they're not. This is life.

3cb5b7_8c03f722ad39472180da8cc8505050fa.png_srz_p_359_100_75_22_0.50_1.20_0[1]

All right, that said: when the regents' candidate forum was canceled on October 8th (it is now Friday at 4 PM, be there or be square) for scheduling issues, one guy still came into town because he was planning to do so anyway. He did a number of previously-scheduled in-person interviews, then emailed me. We got a couple beers at Ashley's, and we talked about the state of the regents, what was wrong about the current setup, and how to fix it. That guy is Mike Behm, and I'm endorsing him for regent.

This is not because he uses MGoBehm.com for his web presence. Mostly not.

Behm is a lawyer who graduated from Michigan in '89 with a BA in English with deep Michigan roots—his dad played football and ran track in the 50s. He went to the Rose Bowl in '89 as a student, and he reads the blog. I asked him to boil down his philosophy and goals into a few hundred words, and he's done so.

--------------------------------------

Q: What is the most important issue facing the University right now?

A: Affordability and accessibility. Over the past four decades, the State of Michigan has drastically reduced its financial support of the University. Thirty-five years ago, the State of Michigan covered 70% of U of M's costs, with the other 30% being paid for by tuition and endowment. Today, only 30% of the costs are covered by the State. I would like to see the State of Michigan invest in one of its most valuable assets, and increase its funding for U of M. But because of today's economic environment, I don't believe there is going to be a drastic increase of state funding. This being the case, I believe it is very important to examine the present cost structure of the University and cut and reduce unnecessary costs at all levels, including administration and operations.

Next, I would like to investigate ways to lower interest rates on student loans. Presently, banks borrow money at a rate that is nine times less than the average student loan. New legislation that has been introduced recently (Bank on Students Emergency Loan Refinancing Act) that would help to lower student loan rates. If the government is not successful in reducing student loan interest rates, I would act to direct U of M's newest endowment program (Victors for Michigan) to provide low interest loans to our students.

Q: What are your thoughts regarding U of M's compliance with the open meetings act?

A: While I understand the need to protect individual's rights of privacy when it comes to limited circumstances such as some personnel issues. I am a firm believer that the Board of Regents would benefit from seriously listening to the concerns of the public. In addition to having Regents meetings where decisions are made with public comment and public interaction, I would use other ways for the Regents to gather information. For example, while the composition of the Board of Regents cannot be changed without involving the State of Michigan Constitution, I would propose forming advisory committees. I am in favor of forming small separate committees of students, faculty members, and supporters of the Athletic Department so that they can meet with and advise the Board of Regents when it comes to making important decisions.

In addition to being an attorney, I serve as Chairperson of Business Forward Michigan, an organization that helps local business leaders from Michigan advise Washington on how to create jobs and accelerate our economic recovery. The present Board of Regents seems to conduct business like politicians in Washington, in an isolated and deaf manner. Like what I do with Business Forward, I will work to help the Regents make decisions with the help of many informed and concerned voices.

--------------------------------

While the above issues are obviously more important than the athletic department, we talked about that, too, and he'd support a change at the top there.

The above language is a little stiff, I know, but in talking to him it was clear he deeply cared about the university and was basically just a guy who wanted to help out. He's not much interested in serious political office; the opportunity to help the U out was a different matter. I think you should vote for him, no matter your political affiliation.

-Brian

Comments

jmdblue

October 21st, 2014 at 3:12 PM ^

He reads the Blog and drinks beer..... and he wants to reduce costs to attend UofM potentially helping my kids.  I'll let the lawyer part slide and vote for him.

mgolund

October 21st, 2014 at 6:22 PM ^

When I was at U of M (99-03), Ashley's prided itself on not carrying any American macrobrews. During hash bash, it put a sign in its window that it did not carry such products. Unless management has drastically changed, I find this hard to believe. So, I checked the website, which lists the beers it has on draft http://www.ashleys.com/whatsontap.xhtml. No Bud or Miller/Coors.

True Blue Grit

October 21st, 2014 at 3:17 PM ^

Seriously though, he seems to have some very good ideas and has a strong business orientation which could be very helpful in some decisions.  He also attended the last Rose Bowl I went too also, so that's a plus!  (One we actually won).  He's got my vote.

AZ-Blue

October 23rd, 2014 at 2:59 PM ^

With no additional research?   //sigh//    I'm not saying you should or shouldn't support the guy, but because you read something on a sports blog?   Are you familiar with what the regents do exactly?   If you value the school (regardless if it's your alma mater) you'd do signficantly more research into someone before you "support," which I assume to mean you'd vote for, him.

Sheeples to our Herder Brian.  Lead us on.

justingoblue

October 21st, 2014 at 3:42 PM ^

In all seriousness, there are way too many positions decided by partisan elections. I'd venture a guess that the average Michigan citizen's opinion on a state party platform isn't meaningfully correlated with their opinion on how the university ought to be run. Even that doesn't take into account the massive group of people where party affiliation is based on national politics, even further removed from what a regent does.

There are municipalities where a library board election is partisan. Ridiculous, IMO.

justingoblue

October 21st, 2014 at 4:26 PM ^

I don't disagree, but my point was that going through a regents voting record or sitting in on a library board meeting is unlikely to yield much insight into the person's politics and that's what makes a partisan election so utterly ridiculous.

At the very least if there's a Democrat, Republican, Libertarian and Green Party candidate for judge I can see where their allegance will inform their rulings.

turd ferguson

October 21st, 2014 at 4:51 PM ^

I think I agree, but in the absence of party affiliation, how would those election outcomes realistically be determined?  Most people don't spend time really learning about candidates, so they rely on cues like political party and endorsements to help them figure out which candidate they probably would like if they really looked into it.  Political party is obviously pretty flawed / peripheral when it comes to understanding how someone would behave in a job like university regent, but I wonder if you'd get winners based on who has a nicer last name, distributes more/prettier lawn signs, appears on the ballot first, etc., if people couldn't rely on political party.

The best-case scenario would be the public truly learning about its candidates, but that's not about to happen, so I'm not sure which is the least bad alternative.

justingoblue

October 21st, 2014 at 5:33 PM ^

I don't have a 100% non-biased answer, but I don't think getting a nomination is based on anything more intrinsically noble than what you mention here, and making it a partisan election means one of two candidates will win virtually every single time.

Best case, you get six candidates or whatever and they campaign and people listen, worst case the election is decided by an arbitrary factor other than party affiliation, which I believe has little to do with being a regent in the first place.

Sam1863

October 22nd, 2014 at 5:02 AM ^

That's one of those scurrilous rumors that he been around since I got my English degree (A.B., 1982), and frankly, I'm a little tired of it. People have been under the mistaken impression that an English major only has two career choices: teacher or hobo. This is unequivocally NOT true. Some of us go into porn.

AZ-Blue

October 23rd, 2014 at 3:06 PM ^

Following that worn out logic, a civil engineering grad should be teaching CE, a medical school grad should be teaching medicine, an econ major should be teaching finance.  Why is it that English majors are assumed to be following the correct career path if they're teaching?   That's called the School of Education and I think it's on South Univ. b/w Forest and the law school somewhere.  Sorry, I get tired of hearing that.  I'm in law, BTW.

Update:  Should have read further down.  Dead horse = beaten.

JeepinBen

October 21st, 2014 at 3:25 PM ^

Spent some time on his (Behm's) site and you really have to search for a party affiliation. I do appreciate the disclaimer at the top and think that it sounds like he would be a good regent for Michigan.

bluebyyou

October 21st, 2014 at 4:12 PM ^

In spite of being a Michigan alum, I and other members of my family who attended Michigan have always lived out of state except for our presence as students and really have no interest in Michigan politics.

Would someone please explain, and I am not politically naive by any stretch, why political affiliation would make a difference for a regent?  I'm not trying to get into a political discussion, but I completely fail to comprehend what difference it would make.  I have heard that that Brandon being a republican didn't help him.