Home » News » University »

Speak Up, Speak Out forum discussed free speech at town hall meetings

 
Speak Up, Speak Out forum discussed free speech at town hall meetings
Grand Rapids senior Jack Buck gives his opinion on this summer’s town hall meetings to the panel and audience at Speak Up, Speak Out Tuesday evening in the Bovee University Center auditorium. The talk featured the founder and editor of ‘2Sides Magazine’, a political magazine that offers a viewpoint from both the left and right, encouraging readers to form their own opinion rather than following a party. (Jeff Smith / Staff Photographer)
email

The Speak Up, Speak Out series kicked off its tenth year with a forum on free speech and democracy.

Speak Up Speak Out is a series that invites students to join in a conversation about current events and present a variety of opinions, according to founder and facilitator Merlyn Mowrey, associate professor of philosophy and religion.

Tuesday’s forum, entitled “Can We Talk? A Conversation with Tony Citarella,” was introduced by Citarella, the founder and editor of ‘2 Sides Magazine.’

He was joined by Interim University President Kathy Wilbur, History and Social Studies Education Major and Traverse City senior Jonathan Tarrant and Assistant Political Science Professors Jayne Cherie Strachan and Thomas Greitens.

“We do have this basic right and I’d like to make sure people understand that,” Wilbur said.

The forum debated whether free speech as exercised at the town hall meetings was effective in changing policy.

“The fact that we’re using our free speech rights in this manner means that we don’t have a model,” Strachan said.

She feels the U.S. lacks a model and practice communicating with people who have different viewpoints, which is why the town hall meetings turned into shouting matches.

“Politics are supposed to be looking at an issue and effectively solving it,” said Milford junior Shannon Salk.

She fells the town hall meetings are all name calling, not looking at the issues.

Michael Kaye, an Illinois graduate student, felt the town hall meetings have had some positive effect.

“Instead of railroading a bunch of legislation the size of two phone books that no one bothered to read, it opened up a debate,” Kaye said.

Tarrant felt these debates intimidated elected officials to act the way their constituents wanted. Greitens and Strachan believed the shouting matches were ineffective and may have actually prevented legitimate debate.

“What’s the ultimate outcome of these town hall meetings?” Greitens said. “It’s not free speech really, it’s just you shouting.”

Students also thought meeting tension was a result of a lack of choices.

“There’s no middle man you can vote on,” said Southfield freshman Amanda Zerilli.

Citarella encouraged people to evaluate each issue individually, rather than sticking to party lines.

“Students don’t have to be part of something where they all fall in line, instead be part of something where they seek their own opinions,” he said.

Future topics for Speak Up, Speak Out events are “Dems and the GOP: Defining themselves in the Obama Era” Oct. 19 and “Challenges Ahead: Energy and the Environment” Nov. 17.

 
 
  • CM Life reader

    “Politics are supposed to be looking at an issue and effectively solving it.” With all due respect to Ms Salk, that is not politics. The most basic definition is who gets what and by what means.

    As for Professor Strachan and Mr. Tarrant’s comments, the issue of elected officials and constituents goes back to Edmund Burk. Do voters elect their politicians to be a trustee — meaning they free to vote their own beliefs — or do they elect their politicians to be a delegate — meaning to represent their own views?

  • Zamil

    wish I could have attended this event!

  • http://www.facebook.com king

    lol i forgot all about this event . uggh

  • Andrew

    With respect to “CM Life Reader,” I think it is you who are wrong. We need to embrace what politics SHOULD be (effectively solving issues) rather than what politics has become. It’s sad to see someone pessimistic trying to “correct” someone who’s clearly idealistic.

  • zac

    the problem is that the elected officials are forced to vote completely what their party backs/stands behind, even if they believe otherwise.