The Roosevelt Institution

1527 New Hampshire Ave, NW

Washington, D.C. 20036

The Great Stakes

Volume 1 • Issue 1 • March 2008
Copyright 2008 by the Roosevelt Institution

Midwest Regional Coordinator

Hilary Anne Doe

Chair of the Editorial Board

Kirti Datla

Printed by Mount Vernon Printing of Landover, Maryland.

This journal has been specially issued by the Roosevelt Institution

The opinions expressed within this journal are exclusively those of the individual
authors and do not represent the views of the editorial board, the Roosevelt Institu-
tion, or any of the organization’s chapters, advisors, or affiliates.

The content of this journal is held in copyright by the Roosevelt Institution. To gain
permission to reprint any of the articles published here, contact
info@rooseveltinstitution.org
 Great Stakes
For the Great Lakes

A Publication of
The Roosevelt Institution’s
Midwestern Region

March 2008
Dear Readers,

As a native Midwesterner and an active member of the Roosevelt Insti-

tution, I have experienced first-hand both the strengths and struggles of
our region, as well as the creativity and intelligence of the new generation
of student leaders. In this time of regional transition, then, it was natural
to focus the Roosevelt Institution’s innovative minds on the complex chal-
lenges facing their home states. Impassioned by their love of the Midwest,
informed by their personal experience, and empowered by their university
resources, local networks, and the Roosevelt Institution, students spent the
past year researching and writing policies focused on celebrating and rein-
vigorating the Great Lakes region. Midwestern Roosevelt Institution mem-
bers engaged in a new kind of student activism—they demanded change
and facilitated improvement by not only identifying regional challenges, but
by offering smart, inventive public policy solutions. We entitled the project
Great Stakes for the Great Lakes.

The policies printed in this publication tackle some of the region’s most
pressing topics, including environment issues, economics, education, energy,
democracy, and urban planning. They also embrace the unique beauty of our
home states, which make development work both rewarding and worthwhile.
It is our hope that all policymakers, educators, stakeholders, and interested
citizens reading this publication—the culmination of the Great Stakes for
the Great Lakes project—will be inspired to continue improving the region
as a result of the pioneering solutions provided here.

With Hope for a Bright Future,

Hilary A. Doe
Midwest Regional Coordinator
The Roosevelt Institution

The Roosevelt Institution is a national student think tank with nearly 7,000 members at
over 50 college campuses across the United States. Founded in 2004, Roosevelt strives to
give students a voice in the policymaking process through print and online publications,
direct student-to-lawmaker connections, and annual conferences.

For more information on the policy ideas published here, please visit
http://www.rooseveltinstitution.org
 Table of Contents
The Alternative Energy Solution
Michigan Wind Power Op-Ed 9
Jamie O’Malley et al, University of Michigan - Ann Arbor
Michigan Wind Energy 13
An Assessment and Future Policy Implications
Dan Blue et al, Michigan State University
Federal Renewable Portfolio Standard 21
Benjamin Reid, University of Wisconsin - Madison
The Case for Wind Farms in Lake Michigan 25
Kevin Atherton, University of Wisconsin - Madison

Mitigating Poverty’s Effects:

Nutrition, Housing, State Aid, and Disenfranchisement
The Role of Public Schools in Improving Nutrition and Fitness 29
Among Detroit Youth
Lesley Plimpton and Erika Zviklin, University of Michigan
Obesity in Michigan: A Growing Problem 33
Joshua Ward et al, University of Michigan - Ann Arbor
DHS Pregnancy Centers Meet Detroit Needs 43
Hilary Anne Doe, University of Michigan - Ann Arbor
‘Housing First’ in Cinncinati: A Proactive Solution 47
Alex Hollingsworth and Erik Lambert, Miami University
Compensation Reform 51
Matt McCrea et al, University of Chicago

A Better Place To Live: Wealth, Health, and Democracy

The Affirmative Case for Public Smoking Bans 55
Michael Diedrich, University of Wisconsin - Madison
Public Financing for Statewide Elections 57
Karl U. Stark, Kenyon College

Disturbances to the Great Lakes Environment

Examining the Effects of Atrazine in the Great Lakes 61
Kenneth Chen, University of Michigan - Ann Arbor
Ending the Non-Therapeutic Use of Antibiotics in Agriculture 65
Scott Reid, University of Michigan - Ann Arbor
 Michigan Wind Power
Jamie O’Malley, James Fuller, Zach Bay, Adena Kass, Kenneth Chen
Environmental Policy Center, University of Michigan

The debate over the existence of anthropogenic climate change has been settled.
An overwhelming number of scientific sources have linked the release of carbon dioxide
and other greenhouse gases with rising temperatures across the globe; in May 2007, the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change released a comprehensive report concluding
that there is a 90% chance that current warming trends are due to anthropogenic sources.
Additionally, the report warned that with current policies, greenhouse gas levels in the
atmosphere will continue to grow. The globe will continue warming at rates even higher
than those observed in the 20th century. To prevent the rise of global temperatures, the
report suggests the use of renewable energy resources such as wind and solar power to
replace conventional greenhouse-gas emitting fuels like coal.1
Unfortunately, the United States government has thus far failed to heed the
growing number of warnings. For example, the US was not a signatory for the Kyoto Pro-
tocol, an international treaty designed to lower global greenhouse gas emissions that was
ratified in 1997.2 Furthermore, Congress has not yet passed any bill that comprehensively
addresses climate change. The United States should set an example for responsible action
but in the absence of strong federal leadership, the role of addressing climate change has
been, by default, delegated to the states themselves. Twenty-four states have responded to
this call with the creation of renewable portfolio standards (RPS) of varying levels. Most
ambitious among these, California will require 20% of generated electricity to be pro-
duced from renewable sources by 2010. Unfortunately, the state of Michigan is not such a
state.
Michigan has a esponsibility to enact a renewable energy standard of her own.
Furthermore, wind energy should comprise a majority segment of this plan. Wind energy
is the most feasible technology in Michigan because of the state’s considerable wind
resources. Economically, wind energy is less expensive than other forms of renewable
energy.3 Environmentally, wind energy is both “clean” and renewable, producing no emis-
sions.4 While the disadvantages of wind energy have been loudly touted by opponents,
they pale in comparison to the economic potential to be gained through job creation and
environmental benefits.
Opponents of wind energy point to the fact that the turbines needed to gener-
ate electricity pose a hazard to birds. However, various studies have found that bird death
rates range from less than one bird per turbine per year to approximately four birds per
turbine per year.5,6 These figures are negligible compared to the millions of birds killed in
collisions with plate glass, buildings, and power lines. In fact, the Audubon Society has
placed official support behind the increased use of responsible wind power.7
Other concerns stem from the view that wind turbines are unsightly and severely
detract from the environmental landscape. While the aesthetic merits of wind turbines
can be debated, in comparison to the greater concern of climate change, this seems rela-
tively trivial. Additionally, in many cases, aesthetic concerns can be sidestepped by the use
of offshore wind technology. Other critics of wind energy instead support the creation
of additional nuclear power plants as a non-polluting energy source. While nuclear power
has immense potential and doesn’t produce any greenhouse gas emissions, issues regard-

9
ing its safety must be resolved before nuclear energy becomes a viable alternative to other
energy sources. As of yet, these issues have not been resolved. Currently, the nuclear
energy industry is unable to purchase sufficient insurance on the open market and U.S.
Department of Energy has no accepted plan for dealing with the long-term storage of the
high-level radioactive waste created.
Wind energy, on the other hand, is a viable alternative energy option, espe-
cially for Michigan. According to the Department of Energy (DOE), Michigan has the
fourteenth highest wind potential in the nation, a huge untapped resource. Wind resource
maps of Michigan show onshore utility-scale wind resources concentrated along the
shores of Lakes Michigan and Superior, as well as on the “thumb” and islands.9 The great
potential of offshore wind farms, a technology that is already being implemented in Eu-
ropean countries like Denmark10 is even more exciting. Off the shores of Lakes Michigan,
St. Clair, Erie, Huron, and Superior, the wind power potential is 44,288 megawatts.11
This power rate would result in 387,962,880 megawatt-hours per year of wind energy. To
compare, Michigan used 108,877,000 megawatt-hours of energy in 2003.12
Though currently more expensive, there are many benefits to off-shore wind-
mills— higher and steadier wind speeds, lessened noise pollution and aesthetic concerns,
and the elimination of land-use issues - a concern that adds considerably to the cost of
land windmills. Off-shore wind turbines would also allow for larger turbines and blades
than land turbines as well. Transportation capacity on land is limited to what can be
transported by trucks on major roads. If production facilities were located on coastal areas,
these limitations would not exist for off-shore wind generation. Off-shore wind turbines in
the Great Lakes region would be able to service many large population centers, notably
Grand Haven, Muskegon, and Detroit, which is close to Lake St. Clair. This would be
more practical than the land based wind farms in the plains states because of proximity to
the existing electrical grid and population centers.13
The adoption of a renewable energy portfolio in Michigan using wind power as a
major energy source would produce significant economic benefits. According to a number
of studies, wind power plants create many more jobs than conventional coal-fired plants –
according to one Australian study, up to eight times as many jobs.14 National Renewable
Energy Laboratory estimates that the construction of a wind farm in Michigan would
create 2,308 jobs during construction and support 346 jobs annually during operation. In
comparison, a coal power plant of similar capacity would create 2,181 jobs during creation
and then 146 jobs during operation.15 According to the US department of Energy’s Jobs
and Economic Development Impact, achieving 20% of the wind energy target could
translate into 40,000 “direct” jobs annually. With Michigan’s overall unemployment
rate at 7.7 percent and Detroit’s at 9.2 percent, it is easy to imagine how the jobs created
through a wind energy boom could greatly benefit the region.16
Right now, Michigan is at a crossroad; the state must decide which energy
venues are worth the time and money. At present, our state has not decided which path
to take to satisfy our increasing need for both jobs and energy, but to make this critical
decision we must consider both the benefits to the state-wide economy and the increasing
need for a sustainable energy system. Many Michigan legislators seem to understand the
environmental and economic benefits to be gained through renewable energy, and several
RPS proposals have been seen in the Senate and House since late March of this year.
Many of these bills set a minimum percentage of total energy to come from renewable
sources such as biomass, geothermal, solar, and wind power. Unfortunately, of the 61 total
acts—18 or more relating to renewable energy or energy efficiency—all have been tabled
10
at committee levels, and no public acts have been made in relation to our energy crisis
during the 2007-2008 legislative session. 17
Governor Jennifer Granholm has changed her position on energy recently, ac-
knowledging the need for a renewable energy portfolio standard. She is now in favor of a
RPS of 25% by 2025 as opposed to 15% by 2015. The Governor also specifically recog-
nizes the necessity of wind energy as a major source of renewable energy in the RPS. On
November 14th 2007, Governor Granholm also announced the creation of the Michigan
Climate Action Council. This group includes thirty-five people from public interest
groups, environmental organizations, utilities, the manufacturing sector, key industries,
universities, and state and local government.18
These are great steps for Michigan in the multi-faceted fight against climate
change. However, the most important decisions remain—the choice of which new energy
facility would be best for our state. It is absolutely crucial that the state government of
Michigan choose a path of economic and environmental sustainability through a Re-
newable Energy Portfolio including wind energy. In light of the current lack of effective
international or even national policies to combat climate change, it is the duty of state
legislators to demonstrate the leadership and responsibility necessary to produce world-
wide policy change.

Resources
1. IPCC, 2007: Summary for Policymakers. In: Climate Change 2007: Mitigation. Contribu-
tion of Working Group III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental
Panel on Climate Change [B. Metz, O.R. Davidson, P.R. Bosch, R. Dave, L.A. Meyer
(eds)], Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA.
2. United Nations Framework on Climate Change http://maindb.unfccc.int/public/country.
pl?group=kyoto
3. Namovicz, Chris. EIA Projection of Renewable Energy Costs. Presented at the Forum on
the Economic Impact of New Jersey’s Proposed 20% Renewable Portfolio Standard, Febru-
ary 22, 2005.
4. Environmental Protection Agency: Electricity from Renewable Sources http://www.epa.
gov/solar/renew.htm#wind
5. Osborn, Robert G., Kenneth F. Higgins, Robert E. Usgaard, Charles D. Dieter, and Regg
D. Neiger. 2000. Bird Mortality Associated with Wind Turbines at the Buffalo Ridge Wind
Resource Area, Minnesota. The American Midland Naturalist 143: 41-52.
6. Musters, C. J. M., M.A.W. Noordervliet, and W.J. Ter Keurs. 1996. Bird Casualties Caused
by a Wind Energy Project in an Estuary. Bird Study 43: 124-126.
7. Audubon Society, http://www.audubon.org/campaign/windPowerQA.html
8. Heyes, Anthony G. and Catherine Liston Hayes. 1998 Subsidy to Nuclear Power through
Price-Anderson Liability Limit: Comment. Contemporary Economic Policy. 16: 122-124.
9. Department of Energy Michigan Wind Resource Map http://www.eere.energy.gov/win-
dandhydro/windpoweringamerica/maps_template.asp?stateab=mi
10. Madsen, Travis, Timothy Telleen-Lawton, and Mike Shriberg. Energizing Michigan’s
Economy: Creating Jobs and Reducing Pollution with Energy Efficiency and Renewable
Energy Electric Power. Environment Michigan Research & Policy Center. February 2007.
11. Pryor, Scott, Mark Shahinian, and Matt Stout. Offshore Wind Energy Development in the
Great Lakes: A Preliminary Briefing Paper for the Michigan Renewable Energy Program.
Michigan Renewable Energy Program. April 2005.
12. California Energy Commission Per Capita Electricity Use by State http://www.energy.
ca.gov/electricity/us_percapita_electricity_2003.html
13. Pryor 2005

11
 14. Diesendorf, Mark. 2004. Comparison of Employment Potential of the Coal and Wind
Power Industries. International Journal of Environment, Workplace and Employment 1: 82-90.
15. Goldberg, M., S. Tegen, M. Miligan. 2006. User-Friendly Tool to Calculate Economic
Impacts from Coal, Natural Gas, and Wind: The Expanded Jobs and Economic Develop-
ment Impact Model ( JEDI II). Paper presented at National Renewable Energy Laboratory
Conference, WINDPOWER 2006, June 4-7, in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
16. United States Department of Labor Statistics http://stats.bls.gov/eag/eag.mi.htm
17. Michigan Legislative Records http://www.legislature.mi.gov/
(S(dccvbmnob5503tyayg3xk4rb))/mileg.aspx?page=home
18. Office of the Governor, Executive Order No. 2007-42 http://www.michigan.gov/gov/0,1
607,7-168-21975-180299--,00.html

12
 Michigan Wind Energy
Assessment & Future Policy Implications
Dan Blue, Kyle Bryan, David Carlson, Andy Cease, Olivia Cohn, Bryce Colquitt,
Cory Connolly, Griffin Sharp, Lauren Tomaszczck
Center for Energy & Environment, Michigan State University

Executive Summary
Currently the most common sources of energy in the state of Michigan and
the United States are coal, oil, and other non-renewable resources. Climate change has
become a reality and the need for alternate sources of energy for the state has become a
necessity. Wind, which in technical terms is the movement of hot and cold air, is a highly
underutilized resource and is abundant in certain parts of Michigan. Surrounded by wa-
ter, Michigan’s peninsulas possess a superior range of alternative wind energy capabilities
in comparison to other states in the region and nation-wide. Within the United States,
Michigan has been ranked as the state with the fourteenth highest wind energy potential.
However, the potential energy from wind in Michigan is largely untapped. It is estimated
that the potential Michigan offshore capacity is 44,228mW. Currently, Michigan pro-
duces only about 65 mW of energy using wind.
Wind energy reduces the detrimental effects to Michigan’s environment that
are caused by burning coal, the leading source of energy in the state. Wind power does
not use fuel and it does not release emissions related to energy production; chemicals
such as carbon dioxide, sulfur dioxide, mercury, and other substances are kept out of the
environment, thus reducing pollution. Wind turbines do not require mining, drilling,
or transportation of fuel, and turbines do not generate radioactive or other hazardous or
polluting waste. In addition, wind turbine construction does not contribute to Michigan
pollution, as the energy consumed in production and installation is regenerated within an
approximate nine-month period. According to the American Wind Energy Association
(AWEA), each wind turbine in Michigan reduces CO2 emissions by 1500 tons per year.

Wind Energy: Turbine Function

The process by which a wind turbine produces energy is simple. As headwinds
travel past the two or three turbine blades, the moving air is displaced by the pitched
blades causing them to revolve. The revolving motion turns a shaft inside the turbine’s
nacelle, which houses various components to generate the energy. Inside the nacelle, the
energy is converted from natural, direct current (DC) energy to electrical, alternate cur-
rent (AC) energy through a transformer for distribution.
Average wind turbines function within the range of 9 miles per hour (mph) to 56
mph. 16.8 mph is the minimum average wind speed for efficient wind energy production
on a large scale. Michigan has rich wind resources which are above this minimum, particu-
larly offshore. Onshore, the wind generally dies down; however there are areas inland where
wind turbines can be effective. While in certain regions onshore wind may be efficient, it is
offshore wind that holds exciting prospects in Michigan. Offshore wind resources in Michi-
gan produce wind speeds in the range of 17-21 mph, varying with height. Winds blowing off
the water, prevailing from the west, in areas immediately onshore are slightly diminished from
this wind speed. However, they generally maintain one to two mph above the required speed.
In wind energy production this one to two mph differential in speed seriously impacts overall
output because the energy output of wind is a cubic function of its speed (mph 3).
13
Wind Energy: Infrastructure Implementation
The exponential nature of wind energy makes it important to examine the condi-
tions and locations that constitute the highest wind speeds in Michigan. Offshore wind
is consistently faster than that of onshore wind. Wind speed is also directly related to
height. Wind resources are fastest at 100 meters, where wind speeds average approxi-
mately 20 mph. Lower heights of 50 and 70 meters have lower wind speeds; however,
they maintain sufficient speeds for wind energy production.
In studying Michigan’s wind resources, there are three key areas of focus where
wind energy is likely to be effective, efficient, and practical: the Port Huron region, the
Lake Michigan shore, and the Keweenaw Peninsula. All three of these regions demon-
strate more than adequate wind potential. However, through the juxtaposition of trans-
mission grid, wind resource, and population density maps, one of the more promising and
practical regions is the Lake Michigan shore, especially near the cities of Muskegon and
Grand Haven. Later, this report will examine economic and technical issues at a micro
level for an offshore project in that region.
The logistics for offshore implementation become more impractical and expen-
sive as wind farm locations are moved further from the shore. The furthest distance of a
proposed wind farm location is approximately nine miles, and most sites range from one
to six miles offshore. Offshore wind farms also require relatively shallow waters of 50
meters or less. Anything past 50 meters requires floating bases for the windmills, which
at this point, is experimental technology. As water depth increases at the site of a wind
farm, so too increases the cost and difficulty of the implementation process.
Also essential to the successful implementation of a wind farm is the necessity for close
proximity to the transmission grid. Large distances from transmission lines create
obstacles that are both financial and nautical. The greatest amount of transmission lines
are in urban areas and in the southern part of the state. There are also many transmis-
sion lines along the coast of Lake Michigan south of Leelanau County; however, north of
Leelanau county transmission lines become scarce. The locations of the transmission lines
are important for investors when choosing a site for potential wind energy farms. For off-
shore wind projects the proximity to the grid is an essential component its construction.
Offshore wind requires underwater cables to be run from the turbines to the shore and be
connected to the transmission lines. Water is not an obstacle.
Given the general criteria for an offshore wind site, two areas of interest are
along the Lake Michigan shore: Muskegon and Grand Haven. Both locations have
practically identical attributes in terms of wind speed, lake depth, grid connection, and
population. For both regions average wind speeds are approximately 19-20 mph — speeds
that are more than sufficient for efficient output. In regards to depth, Lake Michigan gets
drops off quickly making it essential to build within 0-5 miles from the shore. At 0-3
miles from the shore, depth is commonly 25 meters or less. Wind speeds at 1-3 miles
from the shore are adequate for wind production at 19-20 mph at a height of 70 meters.
From 3-5 miles from the shore, wind speeds mirror those nearer to the shore, but water
depths reach 50 meters. While still feasible, 50 meters is not an optimal depth. Along
the shore between Grand Haven and Muskegon wind speeds stay relatively high near
shore making a wind farm 1-3 miles offshore more appealing. In terms of the transmis-
sion grid, Grand Haven and Muskegon have ideal points for potential grid connection.
Population density is also adequate in both regions, including the highly populated city of
Grand Rapids.

14
Wind Energy: Existing Infrastructure
Wind turbine technology has been exponentially improving in efficiency since
its introduction. In 1996, average wind turbines were no taller than three stories; today
the tallest turbines are built 400 feet tall, and by the year 2015 it is expected that some
wind turbines will rival the Seattle’s Space Needle in height.
Offshore wind farms require their own particular set of technology, both for
connecting the turbines to the onshore grid and for anchoring the windmills in the water.
Anchoring methods vary from using buoys and pontoons to driving the shaft of the
turbine into the lakebed. The Great Lakes’ mild current makes flotation anchors practi-
cal. Fixed based anchors like steel piling, trusses, and gravity caissons can be problematic
for the environment; however, they tend to hold up better to foul weather. To establish
an offshore wind farm site, marine cables are run through the lakebed. Establishing this
infrastructure causes significant environmental disruption, but over time, the cables es-
sentially become impact-free.
The nature of electricity in the grid is that it is in a constant state of flow. There
is no mechanism for storage within the system and so the energy produced has to always
equal the energy being used. The intermittent nature of wind makes it difficult to depend
upon farms for a constant level of production, one of the reasons that wind should always
be a supplement to conventional sources. The battery or energy storage technology does
not yet exist to effectively store significant amounts of energy at the wind farm. Due to
the nature of the electricity in the grid, in every nacelle there is a controller, which regu-
lates the periods in which energy is collected and transferred to a terrestrial power grid.

Wind Energy: Cost-Benefit Analysis

The overall potential of wind energy has exponentially improved in the last de-
cades. The rise of more efficient turbine technology coupled with the skyrocketing price of
conventional electrical energy has made wind energy more economically viable than ever
before. Wind speed is the most important factor in determining viability because, as men-
tioned earlier, every unit increase in wind speed corresponds to an exponential increase in
energy output.
Michigan has several regions where the wind speeds reach and exceed cost-effec-
tive levels. As outlined earlier in the report, these regions are near the “thumb” and along
most of the coastal areas. The interior of the state, apart from a few isolated areas, lacks
serious wind resources. For the purposes of simpler analysis, we will focus on one particu-
lar area – off the coast of the west side of the state, near Muskegon. This region presents
itself as particularly viable not only due to the fact that it benefits from the strong winds
off Lake Michigan, but because the power grid runs directly up to the shore, allowing less
expensive connection for offshore turbines. There is also a serious electricity demand in
both the coastal city of Muskegon and in Grand Rapids, which is about 40 miles ESE
from there.
The following short basic microeconomic analysis will evaluate a wind farm in
this area using GE’s 3.6 mW offshore series turbine. This turbine is one of the largest and
most efficient turbines available, with a rotor diameter of 111 meters and varying tower
heights. The wind speed data are derived from a height of 50m above sea level, which
is lower than plausible tower heights for the 3.6 mW’s large rotor diameter. Any tower
would be constructed higher than 50m and would be subjected to higher wind speeds,
therefore generating even greater energy output.

15
 The average wind speeds in the area, at 50m above sea level, are about 17.5-20
mph, or about 9-10 m/s. This average wind speed corresponds to an output of 2.0mW
using the power curve of the GE 3.6mW offshore series turbine. 1mW of energy pow-
ers 200-300 homes, this means that for every turbine on the lake up to 600 homes can be
powered in the Muskegon-Grand Rapids area on average. Moreover, the wind speeds
are relatively higher in the winter months, the time of year when Michigan residents use
the most energy. There are currently no wind turbines in this area; this highlights the
potential for the area as a catalyst for Michigan’s role in producing the clean energy of the
future.
There has been a long standing argument against wind turbines that claims
conventional energy is much more cost-effective. It is true that in the past wind energy
has cost up to twice as much as conventional energy. With advancements in technology,
however, this is changing. Today, over 80% of the costs associated with wind turbines are
start-up costs (the turbine, connection, assembly, etc.), and 80% of those start up costs are
the cost of the actual turbine itself. This poses a serious problem for private investors, as
the returns on wind energy are entirely long term. In the past, turbines broke down before
the investment paid for itself. Modern wind turbine technology lasts longer and produces
energy more efficiently, even when wind is not blowing at its peak. The GE 3.6 mW
offshore wind turbine is rated for 2,000 kW when the wind is blowing at an average of 10
m/s. In turn, over the course of a year it will produce on average over 63 million kW h,
which, when sold at the average retail price of energy in Michigan of 8.26 cents per kW
h, translates into an annual revenue of over $5.2 million per turbine. Because the main-
tenance cost of turbines is small, one could expect consistent profits of almost $5 million
per year after the initial short-term stage.

Wind Energy: Comparison To Coal Energy

The primary competitor of wind energy in the state of Michigan is coal. Coal is
abundant, low cost, and produced in the United States. Michigan itself produces a total
of zero tons of coal, but the state has traditionally been one of the top-ten coal consum-
ing states in the country. According to the Energy Information Administration (EIA),
coal provides about 70% of electrical energy for the Great Lakes region, compared to 50%
nation-wide. It is safe to assume that the average price of electricity in the state of MI,
8.26 cents per kW hour (kW h), is the price for coal, considering both that it consists of
70% of the market and is cheaper than the alternatives. However, the low price paid “at
the pump” for coal electricity does not reflect the massive fixed costs of a coal power plant.
More importantly, it does not reflect the negative externalities associated with the burning
of coal.
A coal-based power plant has large start-up costs such as construction and the
energy supply must constantly be purchased. However, this has not prevented investment
in the past. Moreover, not a nugget of coal is mined within the state. Coal energy is al-
ways going to be dependent on importing out-of-state coal, while a wind turbine’s energy
supply is widely available and courtesy of nature.
The social costs of coal’s massive negative externalities, like greenhouse gases,
smog, and even increased levels of child asthma, are difficult to measure in dollars. The
effects of these externalities are well documented, particularly in recent years. Compare
these externalities to those of wind energy, the worst of which are mild environmental
disruption and a turbine along the horizon. In the long term, the costs-benefit outputs of
both coal and wind make any short-term price discrepancies seem trivial.
16
Wind Energy: Economic Incentives
State policymakers have a few effective avenues they can take to encourage
investment. One is an immediate incentive to help allay the cost of a wind turbine. As
has been established, the turbine accounts for 80% of the start-up costs, which account
for 80% of all costs associated with wind turbines. Thus, the purchasing of the turbine
represents 64% of all the costs associated with the building and upkeep of a wind farm.
This means that the greatest opportunity to help firms or other investors with a wind
farm is to provide some form of rebate or tax incentive for the purchase of the turbine.
This could come in the form of a state-paid rebate, income tax credit for money spent on
a turbine (similar to that given for money donated to a charity), or an array of other in-
centives directed at the turbine itself. Manufacturer location complicates any incentive, as
Michigan currently has zero wind turbine manufacturers. Policymakers should be careful
not to create a system that funnels state money out of the state.
Another service the state could provide to firms interested in wind farms is free
grid connection. The public works department has the ability to provide this, and getting
connected to the grid represents the second largest expense at 8% of all costs. The state
could also create a tax credits program, and grant credits on the energy once it has been
produced. If profits from a wind turbine were not taxable in the state of Michigan this
would offer an incentive for investors, as the type of revenue that would be generated by
the GE turbine could equal over 200,000 dollars per year in tax credits.
Any combination of these incentives would prove effective at little cost to indi-
vidual consumers. A currently popular idea with lawmakers is a state Renewable Portfolio
Standard (RPS), which, at a state level, mandates that a certain percentage of energy used
by utilities is generated by renewable sources. The burden of the more expensive energy
falls mainly on the consumer. Energy is a fairly inelastic good; people will need it no mat-
ter how high the price rises. Currently, twenty-four other states in the U.S. have an RPS
enacted.

Wind Energy: Potential Challenges

The great potential of wind energy for the state of Michigan is not without its
downsides. First of all, there are few examples of wind farms in the state. This makes
assessment and policy recommendations more difficult, as there will likely be unforeseen
obstacles and problems. Secondly, electricity produced from wind turbines is still more
expensive in the energy market than coal fired energy, the foundation for Michigan’s
dependence on this harmful fossil-fuel. Thirdly, the politics of wind turbines has its own
complexities. “Not In My BackYard” (NIMBY) public opinion problems exist towards
wind turbines because of issues such as noise created by the blades and visual displeasure
caused by turbines, some almost as tall as the length of a football field. The attitude of
Michigan residents towards the state’s treasured Great Lakes makes offshore farms a
particularly delicate issue.
The United States Army Corp of Engineers (USACE) reviews and administers
all maritime infrastructures, from marinas to wind turbines. The process by which wind
farms are approved and regulated is lengthy and requires private investors to finance
various public opinion and environmental studies. The length and cost of this process
discourages private investment. However, all of these issues are becoming more peripheral
as energy costs rise and climate change hastens.

17
Wind Energy: Conclusions
The advancements in technology make wind a competitive entrant into the en-
ergy market. The GE 3.6 mW offshore wind turbine has lasted in the harsh conditions of
the Irish Sea since 2003. Such a timeframe makes wind farms profitable in the long run
and thus ultimately competitive against other forms of energy. With regard to unforeseen
policy issues, it is true that wind farms in the state of Michigan are sparse. However, the
state can easily learn from the mistakes and successes of others. The most unique problem
the state might face with regard to the Great Lakes is NIMBY. Given the conditions
of the state’s economy since 2003 and the looming specter of a national recession, it is
unlikely that Michigan citizens would be opposed to any policy that could help their state
and by extension their lakes.
Future research should focus on keeping wind resource information current
and on the economics of the wind energy industry. Of particular interest to the state of
Michigan is the potential of wind turbine manufacturing. The state has proven itself adept
at advanced manufacturing, especially with steel. The existing manufacturing infrastruc-
ture related to the troubled auto industry could be easily converted to turbine production.
Research should examine both successful conversion business models and the role that
state government can play in encouraging the industry to develop in the state.
An offshore wind farm in Lake Michigan, off the Muskegon area coast would reduce the
state’s dependence on outside energy, decrease the dangerous externalities of coal energy,
and provide a long-term profit strategy for the energy company fortunate enough to own
the wind farm. This report has examined the potential of wind energy in the state of
Michigan, both at an aggregate level and in a microeconomic context. Advancements in
wind technology have changed the economics of wind energy and it is now emerging as
the choice for providing renewable energy in the 21st century.

Citations
1. Archer, Cristina. Dvorak, and Jacobson. “California Offshore Wind Energy
Potential.” Stanford University Atmosphere/Energy Program. National Aeronau-
tics and Space Administration. <http://www.stanford.edu/ ~dvorak/papers/awea-
2007-poster-r4.pdf>. 07 Dec. 2007.
2. Amlin, Jeff. Polich and Kulesia. “A Study of Economic Impacts from the Imple-
mentation of a Renewable Portfolio Standard and an Energy Efficiency Program
in Michigan.” NextEnergy Center (2007): 1-86.
3. “Basic Principles of Wind Resource Evaluation.” American Wind Energy Asso-
ciation. 11 Feb. 2008 <http://www.awea.org/faq/basicwr.html>.
4. “EIA Electric Power Monthly,” Energy Information Administration (EIA). Janu-
ary 2008
5. “Great Lakes Bathymetry.” Map. NOAA Satellite and Information Service. 11
Feb. 2008 <http://map.ngdc.noaa.gov/website/mgg/greatlakesbathy/viewer.htm>.
6. “Life Cycle Assessment (LCA).” VESTAS. <http://www.vestas.com/en/about-
vestas/sustainability/wind-turbines-and-the-environment/life-cycle-assessment-
(lca).aspx>. 15 Dec. 2007.
7. Michigan Department of Labor and Economic Growth (DLEG). Michigan
Wind Energy Resource Maps. 11 Feb. 2008 <http://www.michigan.gov/dleg/0,16
07,7-154-25676_25774-101765--,00.html>.
18
8. Miller, Bruce. “Coal Energy Systems.” Elsevier Academic Press, 2005.
9. Morthoust, P. E. “WIND ENERGY – THE FACTS, Volume 2, Costs & Prices”
Risø National Laboratory, Denmark.
10. Musial, Walt. “Offshore Wind Energy Potential for the United States.” National
Renewable Energy Laboratory (2005): 1-23.
11. “Offshore Wind Energy Development in the Great Lakes.” University of Michi-
gan. April 2005.
12. Pryor, Scott, Mark Shahinian, and Matt Stout. “Offshore Wind Energy Develop-
ment in the Great Lakes” Michigan Renewable Energy Program (2005): 1-25.
13. “Power Grid and Electricity Delivery.” NYS Energy Research & Development
Authority (2005). 1 Feb. 2008 <http://www.powernaturally.org/Programs/Wind/
toolkit/8_overviewpowergrid.pdf>.
14. Ram, Bonie. Offshore Wind Developments in the United States: Institutional
Issues, Environmental Regulations, and Jurisdictions. World Renewable Energy
Congress VII. Sept. 2004.
15. “Technologies: Wind Energy Basics.” How Wind Energy Works. U.S. Depart-
ment of Energy. 2 Feb 2008 <http://www.eere.energy.gov/windandhydro/wind_
how.html>.
16. “Wind Energy: Energizing Michigan’s Future.” MSUE Wind Power. Michigan
State University. 11 Feb. 2008 <http://web1.msue.msu.edu/wind/windbasics.htm>.
17. “Wind Energy Fact Sheet.” American Wind Energy Association (AWEA). 11
Feb. 2008 <http://www.awea.org/ pubs/factsheets/Wind_Energy_How_does_it_
Work.pdf>.
18. “Wind Energy FAQ: CO2 Emissions: Wind vs. Trees.” American Wind Energy
Association (AWEA). <http:// www.awea.org/faq/co2trees.html> 20 Jan. 2008.

19
20
 Creating a Federal
Renewable Portfolio Standard
Benjamin Reid
University of Wisconsin at Madison

Demand for a New Energy

It is well known that states need to address their energy costs and concerns
throughout the country. While there is an indistinct federal plan, many states have taken
it upon themselves to solve their energy issues. Many states have adopted a Renewable
Portfolio Standard (RPS) to create renewable energy standards for utilities to follow.
These standards allow utilities to gradually integrate renewable energy sources into their
grids. The goal of such programs is to guard against uncertain energy costs, combat envi-
ronmental degradation, and stimulate state economies.

Impact of RPS
California’s aggressive RPS has lead the way for other states. In 2004, California
was already receiving 10.2 percent of electricity from renewable sources. Many states are
now adopting similar policies and finding that RPS programs are beneficial for strug-
gling state economies and help create jobs. The initial cost to consumers is small when
compared to the future savings expected from renewable energy. A study done by the
Massachusetts Division of Energy Resources (on the costs of increased renewable energy)
stated that only .4% would be added onto consumer utility bills in 2003.
If the ten percent standard is used in Wisconsin until 2020, it would create new
capital and new jobs. Since most project sites are expected to be rural, there would be a
resurgence of job opportunities for rural America. The Union of Concerned Scientists
compared projected job creation of renewable energy to fossil fuels in the state of Wis-
consin:

21
 In the same study, the Union of Concerned Scientists expects Wisconsin to
gain 1.3 billion dollars in new capital investments by 2020 with the ten percent standard.
Most states would experience similar results because of new job creation and long-term
consumer utilities savings. Furthermore, the environmental benefits would be massive.
The current renewable energy sources in RPS programs combined would cut carbon di-
oxide emissions drastically. By 2012, the collective amount of this reduction would be the
equivalent of taking 5.4 million cars off the road.

The Case for a Federal RPS

The successes of the RPS’s have rewarded state and local leadership on this issue
and, more importantly, demonstrated the states’ ability to handle such a task. It is now
time for the federal government to join the states’ effort. A federal program that adminis-
ters minimum standards and long-term goals for renewable percentages would unite the
country on this issue, generating the kind of economic and environmental benefits that
only comprehensive national action can achieve.
Federal Program Functions
The minimum standards should embrace a progressive increase in percentages to
allow individual states with new RPS programs to catch-up. The federal program should
look at each state independently and work with state officials in setting reasonable goals.
A national minimum level might be set low to allow new state RPS programs a chance
to meet it; however, if done poorly, this same measure could also create an incentive for
existing RPS programs to stagnate. The individual goals in all the states will allow an in-
cremental change towards a national minimum energy goal. The federal program should
look at each state independently because states with existing RPS programs can handle
higher percentage increments than new RPS programs. Federal RSP responsibilities
would include:
• Coordinating and meeting with state directors and officials
• National long-term renewable-energy goals
• Tracking and verification standards
• Setting state-specific minimum renewable percentages

The influence of such a federal program would be limited to national goals, and minimum
standards. The current RPS programs have been effectively run by the states and should
remain that way.

Funding
Many federal and state financial incentives that would support such a project al-
ready exist. Incentive programs like the Renewable Energy Production Incentive (REPI),
as part of the amended Energy Policy Act of 2005, pays 1.5 cents per kilowatt-hour. In
2006, REPI made payments of nearly five million dollars. The federal program could
work with state officials and easily direct funding through RPS programs. States would
be able to effectively allocate funds to appropriate sectors.

22
Conclusion
The successes of the RPS program have been demonstrated all across the coun-
try. States have been taking the initiative to battle the energy issues facing their states.
The federal government should further facilitate their efforts by establishing a national
requirement for all states to participate. The federal RPS program would be basic and
relatively non-intrusive to states, allowing established RPS programs to continue with
their goals. National minimum standards and long-term goals will ensure a directed
national effort.
The benefits of the RPS program are invaluable compared to the initial invest-
ment to meet standards. The environmental and financial security of America’s future
depends on the actions we take today. A federal RPS program will bring the country
together and help address the nation’s demand for new energy.

Resources
1. “California’s Renewable Energy Programs.” California Energy Commission. 10 Jan. 2008. 7
Feb. 2008 <http://www.energy.ca.gov/renewables/index.html>
2. “Creative Energies | Renewable Portfolio Standards.” Creative Energies. 2007. 8 Feb. 2008
<http://www.creativeenergies.biz/go.php?id=26>.
3. Increasing Wisconsin’s Renewable Portfolio Standard.” Union of Concerned Scientists.
12 Apr. 2007. 6 Feb. 2008 <http://www.ucsusa.org/clean_energy/clean_energy_policies/
increase-wisconsin-rps.html>.
4. Increasing Wisconsin’s Renewable Portfolio Standard.” Union of Concerned Scientists.
12 Apr. 2007. 6 Feb. 2008 <http://www.ucsusa.org/clean_energy/clean_energy_policies/
increase-wisconsin-rps.html>.
5. “Fact Sheet: Renewable Energy Standards at Work in the States.” Union of Concerned
Scientists. 28 September 2004 <http://www.ucsusa.org/clean_energy/renewable_energy/
page.cfm?pageID=47>
6. “Renewable Energy Production Incentive: About the Program.” U.S. Department of En-
ergy. 10 Apr. 2007. 7 Feb. 2008 <http://www.eere.energy.gov/repi/about.cfm>.

23
24
 The Case For Wind Farms
In Lake Michigan
By Kevin Atherton
University of Wisconsin at Madison

Wisconsin’s Renewable Energy Outlook

The state of Wisconsin has little potential for clean and renewable sources of
energy. There is no potential for solar energy, for example, with the exception of consum-
er-sized home solar panels. There are no geothermal hotspots in Wisconsin, and the wind
level ratings for wind energy are all lower than four (the minimum level required for large
scale wind turbines to be economical). With these statistics in mind, it becomes very
hard for Wisconsin to enact the goal of “generating one-fourth of the state’s electricity
and one-fourth of its transportation fuel from renewable sources by 2025.” In order to
meet these objectives, wisconsin must look beyond its own borders to Lake Michigan, an
untapped source of wind energy.

Lake Michigan’s Wind as a Source of Energy

Throughout Wisconsin, the wind energy readings never go higher than a level
three on the seven-level wind speed scale. With the exception of some small coastal areas,
the Lake Michigan wind level is either five or six, both of which provide ample wind
power for wind turbines. The only real chance Wisconsin, Michigan, Illinois, and Indiana
have for generating substantial wind power would be to build wind farms in the Great
Lakes. Lake Michigan particularly has the potential to bring power to millions of people
in just Milwaukee and Chicago alone. Many countries in Europe, especially England,
are looking to build large-scale wind farms miles into in the North Sea, which has much
more volatile environmental conditions than Lake Michigan. If Europeans can feasibly
build wind mills in the North Sea, it should be relatively easy for Americans to build
windmills in a great lake.
A new windmill recently developed in Germany could help further the potential
of this project. Enercon, a power company in Germany, recently finished construction
on the e-126, the largest and most advanced windmill on the planet. Much of the cost
of windmills come from the actual construction of each individual windmill, so enor-
mous savings can be reaped both in the short-term and in the long-term per megawatt

25
by constructing one seven-megawatt windmill, like the e-126, compared to seven one-
megawatt windmills. The e-126 also has no turbine, which greatly inmproves its efficiency,
while reducing the likelihood of parts breaking down.3 The e-126 is officially rated at six
megawatts, but Enercon believes it will produce well over seven megawatts of electricity,
even enough electricity to power 1776 average American homes. 4
If windmills like the e-126 are built in Lake Michigan, they would hold tre-
mendous potential for creating electricity. Even just 10 of these windmills could produce
more than 75 megawatts of electricity. These windmills have a 436-foot diameter for their
blades, so the construction of these in Lake Michigan would be costly, but the benefits
are too high to ignore. The e-126’s new innovative technology allows for it to be more ef-
ficient with less parts and comparatively less up front cost make it a clear choice for being
built, but help from the state and the federal government is required.

The Need for Renewable Energy

As Wisconsin attempts to reach its goal of 25 percent renewable energy, wind
energy in Lake Michigan must be seriously considered. Wisconsin must also do its part to
lower its greenhouse gas emissions. For electrical plants over 100 megawatts, Wisconsin
has 15 natural gas plants, 13 coal plants, 2 oil plants, and 2 nuclear plants.5 This energy
profile does not mesh well with the report from the 2007 Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change, which stated that the higher concentrations of carbon dioxide humans
have produced since 1750 are very likely responsible for the climate phenomenon that we
are currently experiencing.6 Wisconsin needs this wind development project to become to
help cut carbon dioxide emissions, to become more energy independent, and to help reach
the goals Governor Doyle laid out for the state.

Funding
Building a large-scale wind farm in Lake Michigan would be quite expensive.
The added construction costs of building in a lake would further increase the already large
initial investment that is required to build a wind farm. To help offset costs, if a company
is willing to build at least a 70-megawatt wind farm in Lake Michigan, this note proposes
a tax credit as an incentive for the said company. A company that builds a wind farm
in Lake Michigan will receive up to 20% of their construction costs back in the form
corporate income tax credits. These tax credits can be held for up to a period of ten years
without being used. With these tax credits, the price tag for a wind farm in Lake Michi-
gan can be much more comparable to that of a wind farm on land.

Conclusion
Wisconsin needs to increase its renewable energy portfolio in a way that also
lowers carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions. A wind energy project in Lake
Michigan would be a perfect fit. There are no emissions, no noise issues that accompany
wind turbines on land, and if an advanced wind turbine like the e-126 is chosen, the wind
farm could be very efficient. The tax credit system offered by the state, along with other
federal subsidies, would make building the windmills a very economical option for an
energy company. Also, any other state bordering a great lake could adopt this same policy,
tapping into a large-scale energy source previously unused.

26
Resources
1. United States. Energy Information Administration. State Energy Profiles. 31 Jan. 2008. 5
Feb. 2008 <http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/state/state_energy_profiles.cfm?sid=WI>
2. Parzen, Julia, and Adele Simmons. Meeting the Challenge: Opprotunities for Mid-
west Climate Change. Global Philanthropy Association. 1-48. 5 Feb. 2008 <http://
www.google.com/url?sa=t&ct=res&cd=1&url=http%3A%2F%2Ftonto.eia.doe.
gov%2Fstate%2Fstate_energy_profiles.cfm%3Fsid%3DWI&ei=zACpR4GAFJqMiwHN
v-CiDg&usg=AFQjCNGcANEqdett_3_suYDQ9r6CIXKSFQ&sig2=81KHWFMqIMq
S2-ClMmOZKw>.
3. “World’s Largest Wind Turbine (7+ Megawatts).” Metaefficient. 03 Feb. 2008. 04 Feb. 2008
<http://www.metaefficient.com/news/new-record-worlds-largest-wind-turbine-7-mega-
watts.html>
4. Enercon E-126 - World’s Largest Wind Turbine.” NewLaunches.Com. 03 Feb. 2008. 5
Feb. 2008 <http://www.newlaunches.com/archives/enercon_e126_worlds_largest_wind_
turbine.php>
5. United States. Energy Information Administration. State Energy Profiles. 31 Jan. 2008. 5
Feb. 2008 <http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/state/state_energy_profiles.cfm?sid=WI>
6. Richard Alley, Terje Berntsen, Nathaniel L. Bindoff, Zhenlin Chen, Amnat Chidthaisong,
Pierre Friedlingstein, et al. (2007). Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (intergov-
ernmental No. 10). Switzerland: IPCC.

27
28
 Improving Nutrition & Fitness
Among Detroit Youth
By Lesley Plimpton and Erica Zviklin
Education Policy Center, University of Michigan

Executive Summary
The rise of obesity among American children has received considerable attention,
and has been labeled as one of the greatest public health issues facing today’s generation.
This issue is particularly relevant in the state of Michigan, which has one of the high-
est rates of obesity in the country. Within Michigan, obesity is especially prevalent in
Detroit, a city that many sources label as one of the most obese cities in America. For the
Detroit Public School system, childhood obesity is not only a relevant public health issue,
but also a threat to academic performance. Detroit Public Schools can take a direct role
in decreasing and preventing childhood obesity by improving existing physical educa-
tion programs, incorporating nutrition education and physical activity into core curricula,
and increasing parental involvement in student nutrition and fitness. Such a multifaceted
program should provide health benefits even to students who are not at risk of obesity,
and would increase Detroit students’ receptiveness of to academic instruction.

Child Obesity Risks & Effects of Health on Student Achievement

The prevalence of overweight children aged 6-11 years has more than doubled
in the past 20 years, and the prevalence of overweight adolescents aged 12-19 has more
than tripled. In Michigan, the rate of adult obesity is at an alarming 25.3 percent, the
6th highest in the nation. There are numerous health risks associated with childhood
obesity, including increased risk of diabetes, high blood pressure, high cholesterol, asthma,
joint problems, heart disease, osteoporosis, and poor overall health status. Public schools,
due to their access to continuous and intensive interactions with young people, serve as
important vehicles for preventing and alleviating the personal and social costs associated
with poor nutrition and poor exercise habits in children.
When it comes to improving health education policy, schools are also impor-
tant stakeholders. But increased focus on student achievement testing in core academic
subjects due to the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 has led to the undervaluing—and
the deterioration—of physical education in schools. As a result, it is believed that children
are beginning to know and care less about their health. Devoting adequate time and
energy to physical education will not only improve children’s health, but will also enhance
student learning, achievement, and confidence in all other areas of life and education.
For example:

1. Poor nutrition and hunger can impair cognitive abilities and cause lower academic
performance.
2. Iron deficiency is linked with difficulty concentrating, shortened attention span,
irritability, and fatigue.
3. Eating breakfast can significantly improve memory, test scores, class participation
and school attendance.
4. Physical activity is linked with increased development of social skills, improved

29
 mental health, and decrease in risk-taking behavior.

There are direct links between nutrition, physical activity and improved learning. The
Detroit Public School System thus has a critical role and a vested interest in improving
nutrition through health education policies. To accomplish this goal, school administra-
tors, teachers, parents, students, and the community must align their goals, strategies, and
practices with respect to improving health education.

Improving Fitness Education

Developing effective fitness education programs would be an essential improve-
ment to Detroit Public Schools’ wellness policy. A comprehensive physical education
program would consist of providing a required physical education class, access to intramu-
ral sport programs and physical activity clubs, recess for elementary school students, and
recurrent integration of information about physical activity into the daily curriculum.
On a fundamental level, evaluation and reward in physical education classes
should be based on effort and progress at all age-levels. Programs should also be tailored
to fit the needs and desires of different age groups, especially with regard to the incen-
tives established for enhancing participation and motivation. For middle school and
high schools, it may be beneficial to include an informal physical fitness-testing program
whose purpose is to reward students for reaching certain national benchmarks in areas
like endurance, flexibility, and strength.
Fitness education in schools should also find ways to involve parents and the
community, since they also have a great influence on children’s exercise habits. The school
could provide fitness programs and/or access to the school gymnasium during after-
school hours.

Integrating Nutrition Education And Physical Activity

Into The General Academic Curriculum
As part of its Wellness Policy, the Detroit Public School system offers nutrition
education to students at every grade level through its comprehensive health education
program. However, research suggests that supplementary health education programs do
not provide enough instruction to influence student behavior. 1 The Detroit Public School
system can increase the quantity and maximize the effectiveness of nutrition instruction
by integrating nutrition information into the core academic curriculum. According to the
American School Health Association, “nutritional science and mathematics form a natu-
ral partnership,” making math classes a particularly effective place in which to introduce
nutrition information. Nutritional science can serve as a context for teaching mathemati-
cal concepts at every grade level. For example, nutritional concepts such as daily-recom-
mended servings of different food groups, and understanding and comparing information
on food labels can be incorporated into units on fractions, decimals, and percentages.2 An
integrated math and nutrition program could effectively improve the nutritional knowl-
edge and nutrition-related decisions of Detroit public school students, while simultane-
ously increasing student engagement and retention of mathematical knowledge.3
The Detroit Public School system can also improve student health by mak-
ing physical activity a part of academic instruction. While it would be inappropriate for
teachers to use class time for sustained aerobic activity, they can improve student fitness
simply by incorporating physical movement into typically sedentary lesson plans. The

30
American Association of Pediatrics confirms that increasing movement during lesson
time could have significant health benefits. In fact, “it is believed that participating in
regular physical activity is probably more important for obtaining health-related benefits
than is the intensity of the activity.” Furthermore, increasing regular physical activity
during the school day could also bring significant academic benefits. According to fit-
ness and education expert Hiba Shublak, “When anyone sits for too long, it’s too much
pressure on the brain. But to get up and run around helps the mind breathe and gets the
blood pumping so that when they [students] sit down, they’re ready to learn.” Shublak has
developed a number of physical classroom activities for teachers in Southern California
schools. One such lesson plan for middle and high school students incorporates math
skills into hip-hop dance movements, and another lesson involves students performing
a certain number of jumping jacks or similar exercises to reinforce a significant number
they have learned in class.4 While such activities should not replace proven methods of
academic instruction, they could provide a valuable supplement to both existing fitness
and academic programs in Detroit schools. Detroit teachers can draw on a wealth of
existing nutrition and fitness-oriented academic lesson plans to implement such changes
in their classrooms.

Increasing Parental Involvement In Promoting Student Health

While the Detroit Public School system can improve student health by increas-
ing opportunities for physical activity and providing in-class nutrition and fitness instruc-
tion, the reach of a school’s influence only goes so far. So in order to have a broad impact
on student health, Detroit Schools need to pursue policies that assist the families of their
students in pursuing healthy lifestyles. Such policies should inform parents of health
risks facing their individual children, provide parents with information about fitness and
nutrition, and offer families more opportunities to participate in physical activity after
school. One strategy that has proven effective in increasing parental awareness of student
obesity risks is sending home confidential “health report cards.” In schools that utilize this
strategy, school nurses collect height, weight and Body Mass Index (BMI) information
about students, and send annual health reports home to parents. These reports include
information on appropriate follow up procedures for obesity intervention. In Cambridge,
MA elementary schools, “parents of overweight children who received health reports were
more aware of their child’s weight status and more likely to consider looking into medical
help, dieting, and physical activity for their child than parents who received general or no
health information.”5 Such a program could have the added benefit of providing Detroit
Schools with data to measure the long-term impact of its fitness and nutrition programs.
Detroit Schools should also seek to directly involve parents in their school-based nutri-
tion and fitness initiatives. Some schools have achieved results by sending students home
with packets of nutrition and fitness information, and related activities to complete with
their parents during the week. At the end of the week, families receive points for complet-
ing the activities. While these programs had a limited impact on extracurricular physical
activity, they were effective in inspiring dietary changes. According to the study, families
in the program group “showed a significantly lower intake of total fat at post-test than the
control group.” Schools can perhaps more effectively encourage extracurricular physi-
cal activity by increasing the availability of fitness facilities to families. For example, the
Detroit Public School system can “make school gyms and swimming pools available to
students and their families after school and on weekends.”6 Such policies would ensure

31
that the benefits of in school nutrition and fitness programs are not compromised by out-
of-school behavior.

Conclusion
The Detroit Public Schools could improve health of their students and thus the
effectiveness of their schools by improving fitness education, incorporating health educa-
tion and physical activity into the general curriculum and increasing parental awareness
and involvement in promoting student’s health. The impact of healthy eating and physi-
cal activity on student achievement is obvious and indisputable. A wellness model that
stresses the importance of relationships among students, teachers, curriculum, and outside
influences is important to consider when addressing changes in health education policy
and in order to enhance students’ nutrition and fitness education, each aspect must be
improved individually as well as in relation to the others. Health education is not only a
social responsibility of the school system, but a vital instrument in fostering better learn-
ing.

Resources
1. Center for Disease Control and Prevention. “Nutrition and the Health of Young People”
May 2006.
2. Trust for America’s Health. “F as in Fat: How Obesity Policies are Failing in America”.
2005
3. Story, M, K. M. Kaphingst, S. French. (Spring 2006). “The Role of Schools in Obesity
Prevention”. The Future of Children, 16(1), 109-142.
4. Delores C S James, Thomasenia Lott Adams. “Curriculum integration in nutrition and
mathematics. “ The Journal of School Health 68.1 (1998): 3-6. Research Library. ProQuest.
University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI. 3 Dec. 2007 <http://www.proquest.com/>
5. Sarah C Yaussi. “The Obesity Epidemic: How Non-PE Teachers can Improve the Health
of Their Students. “ The Clearing House 79.2 (2005): 105-108. Research Library. ProQuest.
University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI. 3 Dec. 2007 <http://www.proquest.com/>
6. Chris A Hopper, Kathy D Munoz, Mary B Gruber, Kim P Nguyen. “The Effects of a
Family Fitness Program on the Physical Activity and Nutrition Behaviors of Third-Grade
Children. “ Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport 76.2 (2005): 130-9. Research Library.
ProQuest. University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI. 3 Dec. 2007 http://www.proquest.
com/

32
 Obesity in Michigan
A Growing Problem
By Joshua Ward, Christopher Reade, Hannah Baek, Taylor Johnson, Alexandra Kaya, Kinjal Shah
Healthcare Policy Center, University of Michigan

Abstract
Obesity rates across the United States have increased dramatically over the last
two decades and are now reaching epidemic proportions. Action in the public sector is
needed to combat this growing problem. Although many believe the problem of obesity
is a private matter better addressed by individuals, mounting evidence suggests that more
blame should be attributed to societal factors. Two thirds of American adults are now
overweight or obese, leading to greater rates of chronic disease such as diabetes and can-
cer. Obesity is costing healthy American citizens through higher insurance and tax rates.
These problems are particularly severe in Michigan and Detroit. In the US, Michigan is
currently the 9th most obese state and Detroit is the 5th most obese city. In order to stop
these soaring obesity rates, changes must be made in three areas:
• The WIC program must receive increased funding to be more effective at prevent-
ing obesity among participants,
• The state must implement stricter guidelines for nutrition and physical education
in public schools;
• And we must find new ways to introduce fresh, healthy foods to inner-city De-
troit.

Introduction to Obesity
Obesity is defined as having a body mass index (BMI ) greater than 30. This
equates to approximately 196 lbs or above for men of average height (5’9”) and 174 lbs
for women (5’4”). Overweight is defined as a BMI greater than 25. The number of
categorically obese and overweight persons in the US has increased drastically over the
past 20 years. In fact, the national obesity rate has more than doubled from 15% in 1980
to 32.2% in 2007. National statistics indicate that, in 1990, ten states had a prevalence of
obesity less than 10%; in 2006, only four states had a prevalence of obesity less than 20%.
According to the Center for Disease and Control’s 2006 statistics, the Midwest and
Southern states show the highest rates of obesity.2 These trends have parents, guardians,
government officials, and policymakers highly concerned about the health implications of
the epidemic, as well as the high economic costs of obesity.
The increases in the number of obese and overweight individuals should cause
concern for a number of reasons. For one, obesity has been shown to increase the risks
for a number of chronic disorders. In one study, obese individuals showed more than a
10-fold increase in the risk of Type II diabetes mellitus relative to healthy individuals.
Similar correlations have been found linking obesity to increased rates of high blood pres-
sure, gall bladder disease, and various cancers. The increases in chronic diseases not only
devastate the afflicted individuals, but also significantly affect healthy Americans by way
of rising insurance rates and taxes.
The causes of obesity are numerous and complex. Most simply, weight gain is
due to an imbalance in food intake and energy expended. Many Americans today have

33
poor eating habits, which include problems of portion size and food type. The problems
resulting from a poor diet are further exacerbated by a lack of exercise or physical activity.
However, the roots of the present obesity epidemic are more complicated than the afore-
mentioned and transcends individual decisions. With evidence suggesting the significant
effects of poverty, infant nutrition, and nutrition education, obesity can be viewed as a
public problem requiring governmental action.

Public Crisis or Private Concern?

Obesity is a public health problem because it has significant social ramifications.
Obese individuals are at a much higher risk of serious chronic illness, leading to a lifetime
of exaggerated health care costs. Obese individuals require more ‘avoidable’ hospitaliza-
tions, longer hospital stays, and increased usage of healthcare resources in general than
individuals of normal weight. Overall, the annual medical expenditures of obese people
are 37% higher than the expenditures of non-overweight individuals. Because health
insurance premiums do not take obesity into account, any non-obese person in a pooled
health insurance plan theoretically ends up subsidizing the obese members’ care.
One theory suggests that obesity is not a public health problem because it is
(supposedly) only the obese themselves who pay their increased medical costs. Obesity is
correlated with a significant increase in illness, disability-related work absenteeism, and
lost productivity; these costs are reflected in lower wages of obese workers. However,
this fails to take into account that an obese individual’s greatest medical costs are incurred
after the age of 65, placing most of the burden of obesity on Medicare. An obese indi-
vidual incurs roughly 50% higher Medicare costs, and the cost of a severely obese individ-
ual (BMI>40) is double than that of a non-overweight individual. Adding to the strain
is the fact that those living in poverty, and therefore requiring public health insurance
such as Medicaid, are also more likely to become obese. In the current system the poor
are undernourished, the undernourished become obese, and the obese earn lower wages
and are more likely to be poor. This vicious cycle ensures that social healthcare programs
feel the financial strain of obesity. As obesity rates skyrocket, there is a significant social
cost involved: Americans face the potential for increased taxes or the loss of social health
care programs.
It is also common belief that obesity is due solely to individual choices, such as
diet. Sadly, this is not the case – the causes of obesity are more complicated. Current
research suggests that obesity results from an early developmental response to improper
nutrition, which is manifest as permanent changes in the metabolism of appetite regula-
tion and energy expenditure. This means that individuals may be preconditioned to the
disorder and that by the time someone seeks treatment for obesity-related complications,
the damage has already been done. If the only approach taken is individual treatment,
then the costs of obesity will only continue to rise. In order to reduce obesity’s strain
on healthcare resources and thus stop the epidemic, focus must shift from treatment to
prevention. Prevention must be achieved through large-scale public health interventions
focusing on delivering adequate nutrition to the American people.

Obesity in Michigan and Detroit

Similar to the rest of the nation, obesity rates in the state of Michigan are on the
incline. Since 1988, adult obesity rates in Michigan have grown from less than 14% to
26.8% in 2006. In addition, over 60% of Michigan residents are considered either over-
34
weight or obese, just slightly above the national average and enough to make Michigan
the 16th most overweight state. Not surprisingly, these high rates correlate with high
rates of diabetes and heart disease. Michigan has the 13th highest rate of non-pregnan-
cy-related diabetes and ranks 13th in heart disease death rates.
Not only is Michigan one of the least healthy states; Detroit stands out as one
of the least healthy cities in all the US. In a recent study conducted by Forbes Magazine
using 2006 data on BMI collected by the Centers for Disease Control’s Behavioral Risk
Factor Surveillance System, Detroit ranked 5th in the nation’s most obese cities. Similar
studies have consistently named Detroit within the top 10 as well. These high rates of
obese and overweight individuals can be attributed to a number of factors like poverty,
lack of access to fresh foods, and the failure of Michigan public schools to address this
issue.
One of the most significant factors contributing to the high rates of obesity is
poverty. Poverty has always been correlated with poor health - especially malnutrition.
Although the entire state of Michigan’s poverty rate is only slightly worse than average,
Detroit is currently the poorest big city (population>250,000) according to the US Cen-
sus Bureau; 32.5% of residents live below the poverty line. While one might intuitively
link poverty-stricken areas with hunger, they actually tend to be areas with high rates of
obesity. To understand this paradox, we must consider a number of facts about poverty
and nutrition.
First, healthy foods like fresh fruits or vegetables cost much more than unhealthy
foods. For decades, the US government has given subsidies to farmers in order to provide
Americans with an affordable food source. Wheat, soybeans and corn have consistently
been the most subsidized crops , yet these are also the crops used to make many of the
unhealthy products contributing to obesity. These products, including high-fructose
corn syrup and hydrogenated fats, are used to make unhealthy foods tasty. However, US
subsidies make unhealthy foods cost less by utilizing these products. Also, these products
typically have longer shelf lives, reducing their cost even more. These price disparities are
magnified in urban areas like Detroit, where access to fresh produce is limited and fast
food restaurants are numerous.
Secondly, recent data suggests that prenatal and neonatal nutrition have strong
roles in influencing one’s risk of obesity. These studies show that undernourishment dur-
ing these critical periods change the body’s physiology to become more efficient at storing
energy; thus actually increasing the likelihood of obesity later in life. This means that
women who are unable to afford proper nutrition or are simply ill-informed are already
predisposing their children to becoming overweight or obese. Therefore steps must be
taken to minimize the effects of poverty on the diets of expectant mothers.
As previously mentioned, another factor causing high obesity rates in Detroit
is lack of access to fresh produce and an abundance of unhealthy foods. Long called
a “food desert” by analysts, Detroit is known for lacking supermarkets that could pro-
vide fresh food. According to one study, the nearest grocery store for more than half of
Detroit’s population is twice as far as the closest fringe store. This means that although
it is possible for most city residents to travel to a supermarket, it is far easier to shop at
gas stations, drug stores, party stores, and fast food restaurants. This effect is exacerbated
by the distribution of Food Stamp retailers. Currently, 92% of retailers accepting USDA
Food Stamps are fringe stores specializing in selling liquor, tobacco, and a small selec-
tion of prepackaged foods. Thus, poor residents not only need to overcome the difficulty
of traveling greater distances to access fresh foods, they are also further restricted by the
35
fact that quality supermarkets won’t accept Food Stamps. The inevitable result is that
most residents shop at fringe stores which do not sell fresh fruits and vegetables or other
healthy food options.
Finally, Michigan public schools have failed to take action to combat obesity.
Although lack of action is not unique to Michigan public schools, many other states have
begun to take some responsibility for their students’ health. In 2006, 29 states had state-
wide school nutrition or physical education programs in place. Michigan was not one of
these states and still lacks such a program. There were also 6 states that had mandates for
BMI screening in school. Arkansas, which has a similar obesity problem, was one of the
first states to take action through Arkansas State Public Act 1220. In accordance with
this act, all public school students’ BMIs were to be calculated and reported to their par-
ents confidentially. This provided both schools and parents information which they could
use to assess their students’ health and make changes accordingly. The act also mandated
the removal of all vending machines from public elementary schools, limiting student’s
access to soft drinks and other unhealthy snack foods. Michigan does not restrict the
availability of unhealthy competitive foods in public schools.

Solutions
Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children
According to recent studies, obesity rates seem to be highly dependent on
prenatal nutrition and care. For example, multiple studies have shown that breastfeeding
can reduce an infant’s risk of obesity later in life, sometimes by as much as 20%. These
findings make it imperative that we target children and pregnant women in our efforts to
prevent obesity.
The Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Chil-
dren (WIC) is a federal program aimed to provide food and other nutrition services to
low-income women and children deemed to be at nutritional risk. This is accomplished
by providing participants with checks or coupons which can be used to purchase specific
foods to supplement their diets. Participants are also eligible for educational counseling
sessions with health professionals regarding nutrition strategies. Established in 1972,
the program now serves over 8 million people, including 230,000 women and children in
Michigan. This represents almost half of all infants and a quarter of 1- to 4-year-olds in
the United States. With huge participation, the WIC program has great potential for
influence in reducing obesity rates.
Although the program has historically been successful in feeding so many
women and children, the growing obesity crisis requires that some changes are made in
the WIC program in order to effectively fighting childhood obesity. The first is a change
in the WIC-provided food packages. Current food packages encourage consumption
of dairy products and fruit juices, but do not provide the recommended fresh fruits or
vegetables. In 2005, it was suggested that these changes were made by the National
Academies’ Institute of Medicine (IOM) in their report, WIC Food Packages: Time
for a Change. In response to this report, the US Department of Agriculture (USDA)
proposed a rule in 2006 to revise the food packages including many, but not all, of the
IOM’s recommendations. The rule proposed less allowance for fruits and vegetables than
recommended by the IOM and did not include the suggestion of using yogurt as a milk
substitute. WIC program costs were cited as the reason for these exclusions. Increases in
WIC funding would allow food packages to be modified to include more fresh foods.

36
 Insufficient funds have also lead to ineffective counseling. Local WIC agencies
can only spend approximately one sixth of their funding for nutrition counseling ses-
sions; in 1997, this equated to about $11 per participant per month, but more funding
could allow WIC counseling services to be more effective. For example, although health
professionals are trained to clinically treat obesity, many lack the counseling skills needed
to educate low-income parents about nutrition. WIC should devote time and money
to training staff in counseling skills specific to the needs of low-income families. An
increase in funding could also extend the length of these sessions. Currently, these volun-
tary sessions tend to last only ten to fifteen minutes and most of this time is usually spent
on nutrition screening purposes as opposed to education. For longer and better sessions,
WIC counseling needs to be increased. If federal grants cannot be increased, we suggest
that additional grants be provided by the state for local WIC agencies.

Nutrition and Physical Education in Public Schools

The nutritional and physical education programs in Michigan present a unique
opportunity to begin fighting obesity while children and teenagers are in school. Na-
tional statistics show that 70-80% of overweight adolescents will become overweight
adults, which is why it is important to create effective physical and nutritional education
programs in schools. The current laws in Michigan require elementary schools to offer
physical education instructional periods totaling 150 minutes per week and middle and
high schools to offer instructional periods totaling 225 minutes per week. In addition,
students must complete at least 1 credit of physical and health education in order to
graduate from high school. The vast majority of physical and health education program-
ming in Michigan schools is left up to the discretion of each individual school district.
Reducing obesity among Michigan’s children will require the government to
create stricter guidelines and requirements for both physical and nutritional education
programs throughout the state. A statewide-recommended curriculum that combines
healthy eating and physical activity programs should be distributed to and adopted by
school systems throughout the state. In doing so, children can begin learning at a young
age how to live a healthy life style. The ‘Healthy Kids, Healthy Michigan’ program cur-
rently serves as a base program that helps school districts develop and implement anti-
obesity plans; but it is necessary for Michigan to start devoting more resources to these
efforts.
Another important aspect of preventing childhood obesity is creating healthy
eating options for children in school. The National Lunch program is a federally assisted
meal program that operates in public or nonprofit elementary, middle, and high schools.
The program, which is run through the Department of Agriculture, provides subsidies
to schools that are part of the program for every lunch they serve that meets the Federal
requirements. These requirements are based on the “Dietary Guidelines for Americans”
which recommend that less than 30% of an individual’s calories come from fat, and less
than 10% from saturated fat. School lunches must also provide one-third of the recom-
mended amounts of protein, Vitamin A, Vitamin C, iron, calcium, and calories accord-
ing to standards. These standards create problems since they do not place requirements
on what foods must be used in school lunches and how they are prepared. For example,
some school districts have been able to implement healthy eating lunch programs that
include fresh vegetables, fruit, and other healthy options but cannot meet the federal
calorie requirements without serving unhealthy, high calorie options. This forces schools

37
to provide higher calorie options in order to receive the necessary funding.
Another nutritional problem that exists in Michigan schools and in schools
throughout the nation involves student accessibility to unhealthy foods in school vending
machines. Since schools receive revenue from the sale of the food in vending machines,
it’s a difficult choice for school districts when weighing the benefits of vending machine
revenue and the negative nutritional effects of the their products. The Government Ac-
counting Office reported that 30% of high schools raised at least $125,000 annually from
having competitive foods in their schools.
There are two possible solutions to this problem. Some school districts have
chosen to replace the unhealthy foods in their vending machines with healthier op-
tions which allow them to continue receiving the revenue while eliminating the negative
nutritional effects. Schools in Maine, California, Minnesota, and Pennsylvania have
implemented restrictions on the beverages that can be offered in schools and by limiting
the options to healthier drinks and have not lost any revenue due to the change. Another
option would be to subsidize schools for the loss in revenue by providing grants to schools
that abandon unhealthy competitive foods.

Urban Agriculture
Urban agriculture is an interesting new development in many large cities around
the world. The idea of this is to introduce and integrate the growth of plants and produce
into an urban setting in order to provide aesthetics and natural products for the city, espe-
cially its lower class population. This may include using abandoned land space for farming
or the use of “green roofs” (gardens installed on building rooftops). They provide vegeta-
tion, pleasant views, and many more benefits to a community. With relatively uncompli-
cated engineering and planning, a rooftop becomes a source of needed green space in the
midst of urban areas that have diminishing environmentally friendly places. The US is
unfortunately behind in these advancements despite the overwhelming necessity. As an
alternative to other economically demanding solutions to obesity, green roofs may provide
an alternative solution and an ideal investment.
Some cities have already successfully implemented this strategy. For example,
there is the Rooftop Victory Garden atop the True Nature Foods Market in Chicago
(the garden was implemented and is overseen by Urban Habitat Chicago, a non-profit
organization in Illinois). The installation of the garden has been extremely successful in
producing fresh, organic vegetation like buckwheat and artichokes. Since the roof is actu-
ally producing fresh vegetation, owners of True Nature Foods grocery will sell the local
organic foods downstairs.
The Fairmount Waterfront Hotel in Vancouver has a similar model where the
advantages are both health related and monetary. The hotel’s green roof saves the kitchen
almost $30,000 annually on fresh produce because they grow many herbs and vegetables
on their own rooftop. Other economical benefits include decreased energy costs because
the gardens will provide overall insulation for the building (depending on the kind of
garden installed).
Some initiatives have been made to introduce green roofs to Michigan, includ-
ing efforts at Michigan State University in East Lansing and to the Blue Cross’ parking
structure in Detroit. Hopefully, this is only the beginning. Employing green roofs will
make fresh produce available and accessible to the population of Detroit, thus providing
the option to live a healthier life. Green roofs also provide economic, aesthetic, and envi-

38
ronmental benefits, and create a unique opportunity for Michigan and Detroit to become
leaders in urban development.

Source of Revenue for Proposed Solutions

Many of the solutions proposed will create some costs to the state. In order to
resolve these costs, we propose the implementation of a new soft drink tax. Taxing the
sale of unhealthy food has been a revenue source in some states since before World War
II. Nationally, such taxes raise nearly $1 billion annually and already exist in 18 states and
the District of Columbia.
One of the most successful is Arkansas’ Soft Drink Tax that was enacted in
1993. The syrups used in making fountain soft drinks ($0.21 per gallon) in addition to
bottled and powdered drinks ($2.00 per gallon) are taxed when sold from a wholesaler
to a retailer. Every wholesaler is licensed by the state and responsible for paying the tax,
though the cost is often passed farther down the sale. In the end, the tax is often negligi-
ble to the consumer. While these types of taxes have not been shown to lower consump-
tion, Arkansas brings in close to $40 million annually, which goes to help fund the state’s
Medicaid program. Washington state and West Virginia also have similar taxes in place.
A tax similar to this would be efficacious in Michigan. The state has high sales
in soft drinks and enough to bring in significant revenue. Michigan consumers and re-
tailers are both used to higher point of sale prices for soft drinks, as most bottled products
are taxed under Michigan’s Bottle Return Law. While significant opposition from bot-
tling groups and soft drink manufacturers has caused the reversal of taxes in many other
states and jurisdictions, Michigan has long had one of the highest Beer taxes in the region
and the industry has stayed in place. Soft drinks already represent a significant hole in
the tax policy as they are defined as a “food” and as such are exempt from the state’s 6%
general sales tax. Michigan could be the first state that dedicates its soft drink tax rev-
enue to combating the issues raised by soft drink consumption.
Based on the figures from the aforementioned Bottle Return law, $415 million
was collected in 2006 in revenue for a Soft Drink Tax could be high (though 96% of this
money was returned to retailers and consumers). Other states that have similar popula-
tions may provide a close estimate as well. Ohio’s $0.60 per gallon syrup tax that lasted
from 1993 to 1994 pulled in $59 million for the state.

Conclusions
The challenges of obesity in Michigan warrant a statewide response. Without
action to combat the causes of obesity and to solve current deficiencies in addressing it,
obesity rates will continue to rise. The solutions to these issues lie in the public sphere
and these solutions must be far-reaching and preemptive. We must focus on the forma-
tive, biological changes that decide one’s propensity to obesity in the womb and in early
life; and also on access to healthy foods in schools and inner cities. Furthermore, in a
cash-strapped state, these solutions must provide a way to fund themselves. Ultimately, if
these measures are taken, Michigan can look forward not just to a healthier future, but a
solid economic and social future as well.

39
Resources
1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. National Health and Nutritional Examina-
tion Survey: Healthy Weight, overweight and obesity among U.S. adults. (2000) www.cdc.
gov/nchs/data/nhanes/databriefs/adultweight.pdf
2. Ibid.
3. Trust for America’s Health. F as in Fat: How Obesity Policies are Failing in America,
2007 http://healthyamericans.org/reports/obesity2007/
4. Must, A., Spadano, J., Coakley, E. H., Field, A. E., Colditz, G., & Dietz, W. H. (1999). The
disease burden associated with overweight and obesity. JAMA: The Journal of the American
Medical Association, 282(16), 1523-1529.
5. Schafer MH, Ferraro KF. Long-term obesity and avoidable hospitalization among
younger, middle-aged, and older adults. Arch Int Med. 2007; 167(20): 2220-2225.
6. Zizza, C., Herring, A. H., Stevens, J., & Popkin, B. M. (2004). Length of hospital stays
among obese individuals. American Journal of Public Health, 94(9), 1587-1591.
7. 6Quesenberry, C. P.,Jr, Caan, B., & Jacobson, A. (1998). Obesity, health services use, and
health care costs among members of a health maintenance organization. Archives of Inter-
nal Medicine, 158(5), 466-472.
8. Finkelstein, E. A., Fiebelkorn, I. C., & Wang, G. (2003). National medical spending at-
tributable to overweight and obesity: How much, and who’s paying? Health Affairs,
9. Bhattacharya J, Sood N. Health insurance and the obesity externality. NBER Working
Paper Series 2005; Working Paper 11529.
10. Ferrie, J. E., Head, J., Shipley, M. J., Vahtera, J., Marmot, M. G., & Kivimaki, M. (2007).
BMI, obesity, and sickness absence in the whitehall II study. Obesity, 15(6), 1554-1564.
11. Arena, V.C., Padiyar, K.R., Burton, W.N., Schwerha, J.J.. The impact of body mass index
on short-term disability in the workplace. J Occup Environ Med. 2006; 48(11): 1118-1124.
12. Ricci JA, Chee E. Lost productive time associate with excess weight in the US workforce.
J Occup Environ Med. 2005; 47: 1227-1234.
13. Bhattacharya J. Dollars to Doughnuts. Hoover Digest. 2007; 3. Available online at http://
www.hoover.org/publications/digest/8101162.html
14. Finkelstein EA, Brown DS. Why does the private sector underinvest in obesity prevention
and treatment? NC Med J. 2006; July/Aug 67(4): 310-312.
15. Daviglus, M. L., Liu, K., Yan, L. L., Pirzada, A., Manheim, L., Manning, W., et al. (2004).
Relation of body mass index in young adulthood and middle age to medicare expendi-
tures in older age. JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association, 292(22),
2743-2749.
16. Taylor PD, Poston L. Developmental programming of obesity in mammals. Exp. Phys.
2007; 92(2): 287-298.
17. Godfrey KM, Barker DJP. Fetal nutrition and adult disease. Am J Clin Nutr. 2000;
71(suppl): 1344S-52S.
18. Vickers MH et al. Fetal origins of hyperphagia, obesity, and hypertension and postnatal
amplification of hypercaloric nutrition. Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab. 2000; 279: E8
3-E87.
19. Trust for America’s Health. F as in Fat: How Obesity Policies are Failing in America,
2007 http://healthyamericans.org/reports/obesity2007/
20. The Percent of Adults Who Have Ever Been Told by a Doctor that They Have Diabetes.
(2005). Retrieved December 2007, from Henry Kaiser Family Foundation Web site: http://
statehealthfacts.org/comparetable.jsp?ind=70&cat=2
21. Number of Deaths Due to Diseases of the Heart per 100,000 Population. (2003).
Retrieved December 2007, from Henry Kaiser Family Foundation Web site: http://state-
healthfacts.org/comparemaptable.jsp?ind=77&cat=2
22. Ruiz, R. (2007, November 26). America’s Most Obese Cities. Forbes Magazine . http://
www.forbes.com/health/2007/11/14/health-obesity-cities-forbeslife-cx_rr_1114obese.html

40
23. U.S. Census Bureau, 2006 http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/ACSSAFFFacts?_event=&
ActiveGeoDiv=geoSelect&pctxt=fph&_lang=en&_sse=on&geo_id=16000US2622000&_
state=04000US26
24. Fields, Scott. The Fat of the Land: Do Agricultural Subsidies Foster Poor Health? Environ
Health Perspectives. 2004 October; 112(14): A820–A823. http://www.ehponline.org/mem-
bers/2004/112-14/spheres.html
25. Godfrey, 2000.
26. Peter D. Gluckman, Mark A. Hanson, Alan S. Beedle. Early life events and their conse-
quences for later disease: A life history and evolutionary perspective American Journal of
Human Biology Volume 19, Issue 1, Date: January/February 2007, Pages: 1-19
27. Mari Gallagher Research and Consulting Group, Examining the Impact of Food Deserts
on Public Health in Detroit (2007) http://www.marigallagher.com/ The Henry Kaiser
Family Foundation
28. Ibid
29. National Conference of State Legislatures. http://www.ncsl.org/programs/health/Child-
hoodObesity-2005.htm
30. Arkansas General Assembly. Act 1220 of 2003: an act to create a Child Health Advisory
Committee; to coordinate statewide efforts to combat childhood obesity and related ill-
nesses; to improve the health of the next generation of Arkansans; and for other purposes.
In: Arkansas nonannotated code; 2003.
31. Dewey, K. G. (2003). Is breastfeeding protective against child obesity? Journal of Human
Lactation, 19(1), 9-18.
32. Armstrong, J., & Reilly, J. J. (2002). Breastfeeding and lowering the risk of childhood
obesity. The Lancet, 359(9322), 2003-2004.
33. http://www.fns.usda.gov/wic/aboutwic/wicataglance.htm
34. Chamberlin, Leigh A., Med, RD; Sherman, Susan N., DPA; Jain, Anjali, MD; Powers,
Scott W., PhD; Whitaker, Robert C., MD, MPH. 2002. The Challenge of Preventing and
Treating Obesity in Low-Income, Preschool Children, Perceptions of WIC Health Care
Professionals
35. Taylor, Jessamy. 2006. Updating the WIC Food Packages: It’s About Time. National
Health Policy Forum. Issue Brief – No. 816
36. Besharov, Douglas J. and Germanis, Peter. Is WIC as good as they say? The Public Inter-
est. Winter 1999 http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0377/is_134/ai_53551864/pg_1
37. Grummer-Strawn, Laurence M.; Rice, Susan P.; Dugas, Kathy; Clark, Linda D.; Benton-
Davis, Sarah. 1997. An Evaluation of Breastfeeding Promotion Through Peer Counseling
in Mississippi WIC Clinics. Maternal and Child Health Journal. Vol. 1 – Issue 1
38. Birkhead GS, LeBaron C, Parsons P, et al. The immunization of children enrolled in the
Special Supplemental Food Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC): the impact
of different strategies. JAMA. 1995;274:312-316.
39. Michigan Department of Public Health. How Can Physical Activity and Health Eating
Impact Michigan Children? 2005. <http://michigan.gov/documents/Childhood_Over-
weight_and_Healthy_School_Environment_Fact_Sheet_168750_7.pdf>.
40. State Board of Education, State of Michigan. Policy on Quality Physical Education. Sep-
tember 25 2003. Official State of Michigan Portal.
41. United States Department of Agriculture. National School Lunch Program Fact Sheet.
July 2007. <http://www.fns.usda.gov/cnd/lunch/AboutLunch/NSLPFactSheet.pdf>.
42. Weigl, A. (2007, November 18). Kids’ Waistlines Vs. Bottom Line. McClatchy-Tribune
Business News .
43. “Junk Food Infiltrating Schools.” September 7 2005. CBS News. November 23, 2007.
44. Story, Mary, Karen M. Kaphingst, and Simone French. “The Role of Schools in Obesity
Prevention.” The Future of Children 16.1, Childhood Obesity (2006): 109-42.
45. About Green Roofs. (2005, May 31). Retrieved December 2007, from Green Roofs for
Healthy Cities Web site: http://www.greenroofs.org/index.php?option=com_content&task

41
 =view&id=26&Itemid=40
46. Getting Started on a Rooftop Agriculture Project. (2007, May 29). Retrieved December
2007, from Urban Habitat Chicago Web site: http://www.urbanhabitatchicago.org/blog/
getting-started-on-a-rooftop-agriculture-project/
47. True Nature Foods. (2007). Retrieved December 2007, from Urban Agriculture Chicago:
http://urbanhabitatchicago.org/projects/true-nature-foods/
48. Green Roofs for Healthy Cities Web site
49. The Green Roof Research Program at Michigan State University. http://www.hrt.msu.
edu/greenroof/
50. Duggan, D. (2007, November 26). LEED-ing the Way: Blue Cross parking deck gets
green certification. Crain’s Detroit Business .
51. Jacobson, F. M. (2000). Small Taxes on Soft Drinks and Snack Foods Promote Health.
American Journal of Public Health , 854-857.
52. Arkansas Department of Finance and Administration. 1993-8 Soft Drink Tax Regulation
http://www.arkansas.gov/dfa/rules/et1993_8.pdf
53. Arkansas Department of Finance and Administration. 1993-8 Soft Drink Tax Regulation
http://www.arkansas.gov/dfa/rules/et1993_8.pdf
54. Jacobson, F. M. (2000). Small Taxes on Soft Drinks and Snack Foods Promote Health.
American Journal of Public Health , 854-857.
55. Michigan Department of Environmental Quality. (2007, September 18). Michigan Bottle
Deposit Law Frequently Asked Questions.
56.
57. Jacobson, F. M. (2000). Small Taxes on Soft Drinks and Snack Foods Promote Health.
American Journal of Public Health , 854-857.

42
 DHS Pregrancy Centers
Meet Detroit Needs
Hilary Anne Doe
University of Michigan at Ann Arbor

Executive Summary
For many low-income women in Detroit, unexpected pregnancy can be unbear-
able; facing the economic burdens of motherhood amidst a desperate financial situation
can make the thought of carrying a baby to term seem overwhelming. Consumed by the
reality of poverty, and turned off by the religious and moral agendas of existing women’s
centers, Detroit’s women take trying and dangerous actions that only further contribute
to the city’s economic depression and social instability - actions they may not have chosen
under different circumstances. Therefore, the Detroit Department of Human Services
(DHS), which exists to alleviate poverty for Detroit residents, has a responsibility to
provide the women of Detroit the services necessary to choose what’s best for them, free
of poverty’s influence.1 The best way to grant Detroit women this freedom, is to fund
free, city-run pregnancy centers, that provide shelter, counseling, medical care, maternity
clothes, financial planning assistance, and information on options for unplanned pregnan-
cies.2 If DHS can ensure lasting and reliable service provision, as well as non-discriminat-
ing and unimplicated aid, the city can meet the needs of its citizens and reap the benefits
of their independent choice.

Dhs Pregnancy Centers: Detroit’s Demonstrated Need

More women in Detroit choose abortion than do entire counties of women
elsewhere in the state.3 This is no doubt due to overwhelming burden of pregnancy felt
by the low-income population. In fact, a 1995 survey by the Alan Guttmacher Institute
shows that, “…women who are most likely to obtain an abortion have an annual income
of less than $15,000…”.4 Though abortion may be a woman’s best option, the decision to
have an abortion should be a choice, and not simply a sentence inflicted by one’s financial
situation; yet, the aforementioned study alludes to the fact that this is not the case. More
disturbingly, since abortions are expensive, poverty coerces some women into undergoing
life-threatening, “back-alley” abortions to cope with unexpected conception. Accord-
ing to the World Health Organization, “…approximately 68,000 women die annually
as a result of complications [associated with] unsafe abortion; and between two million
and seven million women each year…sustain long-term damage or disease…” from such
procedures.5 Further, “…for poor women…the ability to end a pregnancy is most likely
not the [only] factor that determines their ability to be full and equal participants in our
society. Rather, for them, salient issues include the ability to access health care and to have
the opportunity to bring children into the world that they can love, support, and raise in
a safe environment,” if they feel that is the best option for them.6 Pregnancy center could
provide the women of Detroit that freedom.

Dhs Pregnancy Centers: Expected Benefits

Beyond the simple need for the City of Detroit to protect the freedom of its
citizens, pregnancy centers offer tangible benefits in the form of crime reduction, and
economic stimulation. For example, “…post-abortion women are more likely to engage in
43
drug and alcohol abuse, often as a means of “numbing” negative feelings stemming from
the abortion.”7 Such emotional hardship is most apparent in women who chose abortion,
not because it was their best option, but because they felt it was their only option. “This
[in turn] affect[s] their ability to function in the workplace and may inhibit their ability
to enter into meaningful relationship[s].”8 Therefore, allowing poverty to strip women
of their ability to make such sensitive decisions can prevent them from being effective at
work, and thereby leave them in an even more desperate financial state. This self-perpet-
uating cycle injures the city of Detroit’s social stability and economic health by escalating
crime, increasing citizen dependence on state aid, and decreasing buying power in the city.
DHS-funded pregnancy centers, however, can begin to alleviate this burden. Though
there are similar establishments throughout Michigan, there only one provides most of
the aforementioned services, including shelter, counseling, medical care, maternity clothes,
financial planning assistance, and information on options for unplanned pregnancies, the
Detroit residents. Considering the number of unplanned pregnancies in the city and the
inaccessibility of transportation for low-income populations, this is clearly insufficient.
The feeling of desperation that exists amongst Detroit’s women is at least partially due to
the fact that Detroit government has historically ignored the challenges and needs of the
women facing unplanned pregnancies. City-run pregnancy centers, however, can begin to
reverse this trend.

Dhs Pregnancy Centers: Opposition Concerns

Despite the need for pregnancy centers in the city, opponents might object to
DHS-run centers due to the City of Detroit’s inefficient bureaucracy. This concern is
reasonable. It’s true that DHS’s management of pregnancy centers is likely to be disorga-
nized; for example, Head Start, another DHS-run program, displays disorder. However,
funding by Detroit’s city government also offers two key assets that make the DHS the
most desirable source for pregnancy center funding and implementation.

Dhs Pregnancy Centers: Long Term & Reliable Service Provision

First, DHS funding of pregnancy centers would create a sustainable, govern-
ment-sponsored institution that ensures the long-term, reliable provision of services.
The grants DHS provides for child development projects would eliminate the need for
donations, upon which similar privately-owned centers are dependent. Furthermore, city
officials and employees responsible for center operations would constitute a segment of
the government dedicated to continuing pregnancy support; if run by a private organiza-
tion, the provision of services would require constant renewal of public interest around
the needs of women with unplanned pregnancies. Bureaucratic inefficiencies, then, are
outweighed by the stability government provides.

Dhs Pregnancy Centers: Unimplicated & Secular Service Provision

Currently, the clinics that endorse a religious or pro-life message are the only
option for many Detroit women. Though these clinics provide many of the services
recommended for DHS-funded pregnancy centers, their pro-life or religious philosophy
makes them an unattractive option for the secular, progressive population. Indeed, there is
evidence that the majority of Detroit’s women are pro-choice. For example, the citizens of
Detroit have never elected a pro-life candidate. Clinics that endorse pro-life sentiment are
ineffective at providing service to the majority liberal population.9 Religious or pro-life
44
clinics stifle the choices of Detroit women by coercing them to make decisions based on
the moral agenda of others, but in order to be effective it is necessary for secular pregnan-
cy centers to offer unimplicated aid. Religious or pro-life clinics oppose the goals of the
proposed pregnancy center program; DHS-funded centers focusing on poverty alleviation
could most successfully appeal to the overwhelmingly pro-choice women of Detroit.10

Conclusion
In conclusion, the city of Detroit’s Department of Human Services should fund
and operate pregnancy centers in order to serve the needs of women with unplanned
pregnancies. The program would advance the DHS’s mission to alleviate poverty while
simultaneously providing the city’s women with the freedom to choose what is best for
their bodies and their lives. Moreover, despite the shortcomings of bureaucracy, DHS-
funded pregnancy centers would create a sustainable institution that supports pregnant
women and appeals to the needy, regardless of their stance on abortion. Subsequently,
implementation of this program would promote the freedom of women and the best
interest of the City of Detroit.

Resources
1. City of Detroit. (2007, August 15). Department of Human Services. Retrieved
November 28, 2007, from City of Detroit: http://www.ci.detroit.mi.us/humanser-
vices/
2. Mathewes-Green, F. (1996, July 28). “Seeking Abortion’s Middle Ground: Why
My Pro-Life Allies Should Revise their Self-Defeating Rhetoric.” Washington Post,
p. C1.
3. 1996 – 2006 Michigan Abortion Files. Population Estimate, National Center for
Health Statistics, Michigan Department of Community Health., Vital Records &
Health Data Development Section. (2007).
4. The Limitations of US Statistics on Abortion. (1997). Alan Guttmacher Insti-
tute, 3.
5. Ahman, E., & Shah, I. (2004). Unsafe Abortions. World Health Organization , 3.
6. National Advocates for Pregnant Women. (n.d.). About NAPW. Retrieved
November 28, 2007, from NAPW: http://www.advocatesforpregnantwomen.org/
main/about_us/about_us.php
7. Strahan, T. (1991). “Women Increasingly Receive Public Assistance as Abortion
is Repeated.”. Association for Inter-disciplinary Research in Values and Social
Change , 4(2):3-7.
8. Strahan, T. (1991).
9. Pro-Life Federation of Michigan. (2007). Certified Candidates. Retrieved No-
vember 28, 2007, from Pro-Life Federation of Michigan: <http://www.prolifefed-
eration.org/news.asp>.
10. Mathewes-Green, F. (1996, July 28).

45
46
 ‘Housing First’ in Cincinnati
A Proactive Solution
By Alex Hollingsworth and Erik Lambert
Co-presidents, Miami University Roosevelt Institution

Executive Summary
Homelessness is a problematic reality that afflicts most urban communities in
the United States. The Federal Government defines a homeless individual as one who
lacks a fixed, regular, and adequate nighttime residence or an individual whose primary
nighttime residence is a supervised shelter, a temporary residence for those pending
institutionalization, or a public or private place not intended to accommodate a sleep-
ing individual.1 Cincinnati, Ohio experiences significant homelessness, but has done
relatively little to alleviate it. In 2004, the city of Cincinnati eliminated its expenditures
on human services , only to have it later restored to 50% of its previous level.2 Currently,
the approach to alleviate homelessness in Cincinnati has taken a management-oriented
approach. Los Angeles, a city comparable in size and homelessness demographics, has
taken a more proactive approach by utilizing the “Housing First” model. This model seeks
to eliminate homelessness by providing the homeless and their families with relatively
inexpensive permanent housing, and providing pursuant social services. The model asserts
that the sequence of providing housing, then services to the homeless is the best ap-
proach for ensuring a long-term solution for the homeless. The demographic similarities
between Los Angeles and Cincinnati and the resounding national success of the model
seem to indicate that Housing First is an applicable and effective solution to homelessness
in Cincinnati.

The Homeless Problem in Cincinnati and Current Policy

In 2000, approximately 25,000 people in the city of Cincinnati were homeless at
some point during the year.3 On any given night in that year, up to 2,000 people in the
city were homeless.4 In the last 15 years, Cincinnati’s homeless population has increased
by 150 percent.5 These statistics indicate a significant and growing homeless problem in
Cincinnati. While “the City of Cincinnati contracts with nonprofit agencies and other
organizations to provide human services,” this approach has actually proven inadequate
because it relies on outside agencies to coordinate aid to the homeless.6 Human services,
the part of the city budget which governs the administration of funds to homeless-aid
organizations, has traditionally received only 1.5 percent of the city’s general fund. In
2004, this 1.5 percent was completely cut, and only later restored to .06 percent of the
general fund.7 This means that a significant portion of an already small fund toward hu-
man services has been dramatically reduced. While the non-profit agencies seek to treat
the homeless problem, they are not provided adequate resources to move beyond mere
management of the situation. A proactive alternative is necessary in order to significantly
reduce the number of homeless people in Cincinnati.

The Housing First Approach

The Housing First approach is a tried and true method of finding affordable
housing for homeless individuals and their families. Through this method, they are pro-
47
vided housing, and subsequently receive social services that are suited to help them adapt
and live in a sustainable way in their new environment. The approach emphasizes an
expedient relocation and access to services. The focus of the method is a progressive one;
its objective is to rebuild lives, not simply relocate them. Also, this method is relatively
cost-effective. Since each solution is designed on a case-by-case basis, all of the funds
used with each case are effectively utilized, not lost in bureaucratic confusion. While
the approach is generally successful, it has proven to be most effective when provided to
homeless families and chronically homeless individuals.

Implementation of Housing First in Los Angeles: A Case Study

The Housing First approach was put into practice in Los Angeles by the group
Beyond Shelter, which emphasizes a holistic approach to treating the homeless.8 The
group decided to use the Housing First approach to help homeless families below the
poverty line. The organization set forth rigorous criteria for prospective participating
families: a stable source of income, at least one child in legal custody of the parent, and
demonstrated sobriety for at least six months. After meeting these standards, prospec-
tive families were screened and interviewed, with selected families being matched with
a case manager who worked with them to form a Family Action Plan. Beyond Shelter
then worked with the families to identify practical housing options, and provided educa-
tion to the adults concerning outlining the responsibilities of tenancy. Although they are
voluntary after move-in, case management services continued to be used by most families.
These services provided access to local organizations which aided the individual needs of
the families. After one year, the families were expected to be integrated into their respec-
tive local communities. The results of this program have been outstanding: for the 2,800
families that were involved in the program between 1989 and 2003, 85% were stabilized
in their housing situation within one year. The families involved in the program “achieved
both improved social and economic well-being and stability in permanent housing.”9

Conclusion – Why Housing First is Applicable in Cincinnati

The comparable demographics of both Cincinnati and Los Angeles allow for
the model of Housing First to be expanded. An overwhelming majority of the homeless
populations of both cities are composed of minorities, and 24% of each homeless popula-
tion consist of homeless families. About 10% of the homeless populations in both cities
have a stable source of income.10 The percentages of the general population below the
poverty line, and the unemployment rates in both cities are also strikingly similar. Hous-
ing First will not entirely eliminate homelessness in Cincinnati, but if put into practice
will illustrate how tailored solutions to chronic homeless problems can be made effective.
The similarities of the cities, and the program’s proven success rate, lend credence to the
idea that the Housing First approach has the ability to positively change the homelessness
problem in Cincinnati. Housing First has been responsible not only for housing thou-
sands of formerly homeless, but also for helping to address the underlying reasons behind
their homelessness. The integration of a Housing First approach into the current welfare
system of Cincinnati would be a watershed moment for advocates of a tangible, progres-
sive and effective approach towards homelessness.

48
Resources
1. “Federal Definition of Homeless.” US Department of Housing and Urban Development.
30 Aug. 2007. 2 Feb. 2008 <http://www.hud.gov/homeless/definition.cfm>.
2. “Homlessness Facts.” Greater Cincinnati Coalition for the Homeless. 2007. 27 Jan. 2008
<http://www.cincihomeless.org/content/hfacts.html>.
3. “Homlessness Facts.” Greater Cincinnati Coalition for the Homeless. 2007. 27 Jan. 2008
<http://www.cincihomeless.org/content/hfacts.html>.
4. “Who are the Homeless?” Interfaith Hospitality Network of Cincinnati. 2007. 3 Feb. 2008
<http://www.ihncincinnati.org/ihn_homelessness.html>.
5. “Homelessness Facts.” Greater Cincinnati Coalition for the Homeless. 2007. 27 Jan. 2008
<http://www.cincihomeless.org/content/hfacts.html>.
6. “Community and Development Planning.” City of Cincinnati. 2007. 3 Feb. 2008 <http://
www.cincinnati-oh.gov/cdap/pages/-3523-/>.
7. “Homlessness Facts.” Greater Cincinnati Coalition for the Homeless. 2007. 27 Jan. 2008
<http://www.cincihomeless.org/content/hfacts.html>.
8. Graves, Florence. “First Things First.” The Boston Globe 24 June. 25 Jan. 2008 <http://
www.boston.com/news/globe/ideas/articles/2007/06/24/first_things_first/>.
9. “What is Housing First?” The National Alliance to End Homelessness (2006). 27 Jan. 2008
<www.endhomelessness.org>.
10. Tull, Tanya. “The “Housing First” Approach for Families Affected by Substance Abuse.”
The Source (2004). 28 Jan. 2008 <http://www.beyondshelter.org/aaa_initiatives/The%20
Source%20article.pdf>.

49
50
 Compensation Reform:
Wayne County Indigent Defense System
Matt McCrea, Amol Naik et al
University of Chicago

Executive Summary
The Wayne County indigent defense system is unjust because it handicaps its
lower-income defendants, who are less likely to receive a fair trial than wealthier de-
fendants. The low quality stems from the fee-based compensation structure for public
defenders in Wayne County. Studies have shown fee-based systems to be less effective
than salary-based payscales in ensuring high quality public defense. The fee-based system
does not encourage the defenders to work as hard as possible for their clients, resulting in
unfair outcomes of trials for these defendants. We advocate that Wayne County change
its compensation structure for all public defenders from a fee-based system to a yearly
salary structure.
Implementing this policy will require a local law be passed in Wayne County
mandating the reform of compensation systems. Carrying out the law will require some
one-time administrative operations, which will include replacing contract attorneys in
Wayne County with public defenders, and changing the public defenders’ salary structure
from a fee-based one to a yearly salary. The policy could incur small costs in the short run
but will decrease costs in the long run along with providing a higher quality of defense for
indigent county residents.

Formulation
Indigent Defense: A Question of Fairness
In Wayne County, public defense is clearly of a lower quality than private
defense. In accordance with the U.S. Supreme Court’s Gideon v. Wainwright ruling, the
Sixth Amendment right to a fair trial partially hinges on the universal right of the ac-
cused to the assistance of a Counsel. This is the basis for public defense systems every-
where. However, if those public defense services are likely to be of a significantly lower
quality, then it is doubtful that a fair trial is being provided.

Problems with the Current Indigent Defense Compensation in Wayne County

Wayne County’s public defense services are subpar for two reasons. First, these
attorneys are among the lowest paid in the country, earning between $180 and $420 for a
full day of trial work.1 Second, the Wayne County indigent defense compensation struc-
ture is suboptimal. Regardless of the method of employment, the compensation structure
is that of a fee-based system, in which pay depends on the services rendered. This fee-
based pay has been shown to generally be less effective than salary-based pay for provision
of public defense services.

What are the Advantages of a Salary-Based Compensation Structure?

Harvard Professor Radha Iyengar’s study2 on the efficacy of different types of
federal district-court indigent defenders highlights the advantages of a salary-based
compensation structure for public defenders. It is important to note that this study does
not concern itself with the level of compensation for attorneys. Rather, while control-
57
ling for the absolute level of pay, Iyengar considers the differences between fee-based and
salary-based pay structures. In her analysis, use of salaried public defenders leads to better
quality of service for the defendant at a lower cost to the public.
The study found that wage-paid, court-appointed private attorneys, the alterna-
tive to public defenders, generally have less experience and have attended “lower qual-
ity” law schools than salaried public defenders. Iyengar shows that the less experienced,
less qualified court-appointed attorneys are more likely to get a guilty verdict for most
defendants. This inefficiency means that it is possible for some innocent defendants to be
convicted unfairly. Clients of court-appointed attorneys also receive eight months more
jail time, on average, partially due to the attorneys’ unwillingness to engage in plea-bar-
gaining, as wage-based pay makes it unprofitable to end the trial early. The increased jail
time is often disproportionate to the crime.
Court-appointed private attorneys are also associated with higher costs that
must be borne by the public. The eight months of additional jail time leads to higher
aggregate prison costs for the county and state government. The hourly wage pay system
also causes higher court costs, approximately $5800 extra per case, because of the correla-
tion between longer cases and court-appointed defenders. To see an example of the scale
of potential cost savings from a complete switch to salaried public defenders, consider the
2006 study on Dallas County, Texas. This study estimated that such a switch would save
the county a total of $7,264,774 in a year.3 A similar potential exists for Wayne County.

Implementing the New Compensation System

Establishing a system of yearly salary compensation for all public defenders
in Wayne County should incur very little cost initially, and in the long run save large
amounts of money. The monetary changes would involve two steps: replacing some of the
contract attorneys with new public defenders, which would actually save money in both
the short and long run, and changing the salary structure of the public defenders. Imple-
menting a legal defense system consisting of only public defenders would require that a
law be passed on the local level to ensure that all indigent defense be on a public defender
system, and that people in need of defense would only be represented by public defend-
ers. This policy requires no repeated administrative operations, but only the initial task of
terminating the contracts of contract attorneys and hiring additional public defenders, as
well as switching the salary structure of the public defenders from a fee-based to yearly
salary system. This policy should not arouse significant political or public disapproval,
because although it incurs an initial pecuniary cost, it saves public money in the long
run. Furthermore, this better allocation of public funds ensures high benefits for indigent
residents in need of public defense.
One possible problem is the loss of jobs suffered by the current contract attor-
neys who would no longer be involved in indigent defense. However, these are private
attorneys who often do public defense as pro bono work or as an opportunity to gain
experience. It would be easy for all such attorneys to take on more private work to fill the
void created when their contracts were terminated. 4

Evaluating the Success of the Policy

The goal of the policy of changing the salary structure of Wayne County public
defenders is to make public defense in Wayne County conform more closely to the
Criminal Justice Act; i.e., its goal is to ensure that all people in Wayne County receive

58
high quality legal defense, no matter what their level of income. Other advantages of the
policy include decreased costs of maintaining public defenders, decreased court costs, and
decreased costs of maintaining prisons and jails.
Possible costs of implementing the policy include the time and effort it would
take to pass a law putting the policy into effect, the administrative operations of chang-
ing the pay structure, and the possible loss of income to the contract attorneys whose
contracts would be terminated. To assess the policy, it will be necessary to calculate and
compare the courts costs, costs of maintaining prisons, and total wages paid to public
defenders before and after the policy is put into effect.
In order to assess that the policy achieved its primary aim, it will be necessary
to compare trial length, amount of plea bargaining, and sentence duration for defenders
who committed similar offenses across different socio-economic groups in Wayne County
to see if these groups are receiving the same quality of public defense. If legislators feel
that conducting this study is necessary, then this part of the assessment could follow the
pattern of Iyengar’s study. However, conducting such a study could incur additional costs,
such as the cost of paying an organization to execute it.

Resources

1. “Trial Assigned Counsel Fees by Circuit.” 2007. Found at <http://www.sado.org/

publicdefense/2007trial.pdf>, page 1.
2. Iyengar, Radha. “An Analysis of the Performance of Federal Indigent Defense
Counsel.” 2007. Found at <http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nation-
al/20070712_indigent_defense.pdf>.
3. “Evidence for the Feasibility of Public Defender Offices in Texas.” 2006. Found
at <http://www.courts.state.tx.us/tfid/pdf/PD%20Feasibility_Final.pdf>, page 10.
4. Legal Aid and Defender Association. 2004. Found at <http://www.ladadetroit.
org/index.htm>.

This is the primary example of a privately contracted firm providing public defense for
residents in Wayne County.

59
60
 The Affirmative Case for
Public Smoking Bans
Michael Diedrich
Center on Public Health, University of Wisconsin

Executive Summary
The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) identify tobacco use as the leading pre-
ventable cause of death in the United States, resulting in nearly 440,000 deaths each year.
Secondhand smoke, classified as a Group A carcinogen by the Environmental Protec-
tion Agency (EPA), causes approximately 38,000 of those fatalities in nonsmokers alone.
Every day, thousands of employees increase their chances of developing lung cancer and
heart disease through no other action than going to work. Secondhand smoke restricts
bar and restaurant patrons’ choices, particularly for families with young children and those
who suffer from respiratory illnesses such as asthma.
Such evidence of public health risks, infringements on workers’ rights, and re-
strictions on consumer choice demands at least the consideration of broader government
action. Based on a preponderance of evidence demonstrating the benefits of current pub-
lic smoking bans, this note recommends implementing more widespread bans on smoking
in indoor public places and workplaces (hereafter “public smoking bans”).

The Health Argument

Obviously, if the detrimental health effects of smoking were confined merely to
the smoker, this issue would not be a matter of concern. However, the detrimental health
effects of secondhand smoke are numerous and well-documented. Secondhand smoke
contains 43 carcinogens, such as DDT, as well as other poisonous components, such as
cyanide. The National Cancer Institute, one of the U.S. National Institutes of Health,
reports that secondhand smoke is responsible for 38,000 non-smokers’ deaths every year.
Afflictions caused or exacerbated by exposure to environmental tobacco smoke include:
• Lung cancer: Both the EPA and the National Toxicology Program classify sec-
ondhand smoke as a cancer-causing agent. It is known to produce approximately
3,000 lung cancer deaths yearly. The victims are often individuals that were previ-
ously completely healthy.
• Heart disease: Over 35,000 people die every year from heart disease caused by sec-
ondhand smoke. According to the American Heart Association, cigarette smoke
“increases blood pressure, decreases exercise tolerance, and increases the tendency
for blood to clot,” all contributing to the spread of the disease.
• Asthma: Secondhand smoke increases the frequency and severity of asthma
attacks of 200,000-1,000,000 children every year, and aggravates the asthmatic
symptoms of countless other individuals.
• Lower respiratory tract infections: Secondhand smoke causes 150,000-300,000
infections such as bronchitis and pneumonia in infants of fewer than 18 months of
age every year. 7,500-15,000 of these cases are sever enough to require hospitalization.
• SIDS (Sudden Infant Death Syndrome) and low birth weight: The incidence rate
of SIDS is strikingly higher in women frequently exposed to secondhand smoke.
The same is true of low birth weight of their newborn children, who are left

51
 vulnerable to attack by other diseases.
Clearly, then, there exist myriad health-related reasons to attempt to reduce
nonsmokers’ exposure to secondhand smoke. On the question of whether or not smoking
bans have a salutary effect on secondhand-smoke-related health effects, the answer is af-
firmative. For example: a 2006 study of Pueblo, CO, by the American Heart Association
(AHA) found that, during the first year and a half after the city implemented its smok-
ing ban, admissions to hospitals for heart attacks dropped 27%, compared to no change
in similar admissions for surrounding towns which had not implemented a smoking ban.
The AHA attributed this to the reduction in secondhand smoke, which it identifies as a
prime trigger of heart attacks.
Not all exposure to secondhand smoke comes in public places and workplaces.
Some of it comes at home, where the government clearly has no place legislating smoking
behavior. However, studies conducted by the tobacco industry itself show that imple-
menting public smoking bans has carryover effects on tobacco consumption in general.
As one particular instance, a document prepared by Phillip Morris, found that public
smoking bans decreased tobacco consumption by 11-15%, and led to quitting rates 84%
higher than average. This could help reduce the exposure of children and other nonsmok-
ers to secondhand smoke.
In short, the implementation of public smoking bans has positive effects on
health by reducing exposure to secondhand smoke and decreasing tobacco consumption.

The Workers Rights Argument

Having established that public smoking bans decrease the negative health effects
caused by secondhand smoke, it should be noted that not only are non-smoking patrons
affected by secondhand smoke, but that workers are as well. Even when non-smoking ar-
eas exist for patrons, workers in restaurants and bars must still work in areas with concen-
trations of secondhand smoke. Thus, secondhand smoke can be considered a workplace
hazard, in that workers can find their own health compromised by their workplace for the
reasons outlined in the argument from health. Thus, public smoking bans address a work-
place hazard which is often either not addressed or unable to be addressed by businesses,
providing an additional justification for implementing public smoking bans.

The Consumer Choice Argument

While patrons of bars and restaurants who are smokers can have their wants
at least partially accommodated by the establishment of outdoor smoking areas, would-
be patrons with health issues such as asthma cannot be similarly accommodated in the
reverse situation. Even in cases where non-smoking areas are established, for customers
particularly sensitive to smoke their choice of establishment is sharply curtailed. In the
case of establishments without non-smoking areas, options are even more sharply limited.
Public smoking bans thus open up options previously unavailable to certain groups of
consumers while not severely curtailing the options available to others. While not achiev-
ing perfect Pareto efficiency, the implementation of public smoking bans is closer than the
current arrangement, in that the welfare of one group can be increased without decreasing
the welfare of the remaining population by a proportionate amount.

Counterarguments
Proposals for smoking bans have faced criticisms since their introduction. One
52
of the most common arguments against smoking bans is that they hurt business by
driving away would-be patrons of bars and restaurants, weakening local economies, an
argument here termed the “counter-argument from economy.” However, the counter-ar-
gument from economy as typically articulated relies heavily on anecdotal evidence rather
than on substantive data. When studies have been conducted, most tend to show either
a neutral or positive economic effect. A review of 97 studies conducted on the subject
found that, of the studies showing a negative impact of smoking bans, all were funded
by tobacco companies and engaged in faulty methodology. By contrast, all of the studies
with the best methodology found neutral to positive economic effects of smoking bans.
The counter-argument from economy thus appears to lack credible evidence.
An additional argument against smoking bans is that the government has no
right to interfere in business practices or personal lifestyles to the extent inherent in
implementing a smoking ban, an argument here termed the “counter-argument from
principle.” Strictly legalistic interpretations of this argument tend to focus on right to
privacy and equal protection rights. However, no legal challenge to public smoking bans
on these or other grounds has ever been upheld. In a broader sense, government inter-
vention over personal behavior strikes many as wrong. However, as documented in the
arguments from health and workers’ rights, this issue is about more than personal choice
regarding smoking. The effects of smoking extend beyond the smoker to detrimentally
affect nonsmokers and workers, creating a justification for government intervention.
To paraphrase a colloquialism, “Your right to smoke ends where my body begins.” The
counter-argument from principle, then, is without legal support and is unpersuasive.
The final major criticism of smoking bans is that there exist viable alterna-
tive solutions that are more efficient or less intrusive than an outright government ban
on smoking, an argument here termed the “counter-argument from efficiency.” As one
example, tobacco companies have stressed improved ventilation as a means of reducing
secondhand smoke without banning smoking outright. However, analysis of the costs of
this, particularly in light of the neutral-to-positive economic effects of public smoking
bans mentioned when refuting the counter-argument from economy, suggest that it is not
an efficient solution. As for other partial measures, such as solutions based in financial
incentives, the effectiveness of public smoking bans with regard to health – and by exten-
sion workers’ rights – is derived from their complete elimination of secondhand smoke.
The argument from consumer choice with regard to Pareto efficiency generally counters
suggestions related to cap-and-trade based solutions that involve issuing a limited number
of smoking permits within a city, in that the closest to Pareto efficient number of permits
would be zero. The counter-argument from efficiency is thus unpersuasive.
In short, the primary arguments leveled against smoking bans lack credible
empirical and theoretical support. Public smoking bans do not hurt the economy, do not
unjustly infringe on personal rights, and hold up as the superior solution when compared
to other proposed solutions.

Conclusion
There exists a clear need to address the various concerns caused by secondhand
smoke in indoor public places and workplaces. The arguments from health, workers’
rights, and consumer choice support the implementation of public smoking bans as a
solution to this problem, while the major counter-arguments – from economy, principle,
and efficiency – fail when evaluated with available data and the previously established

53
arguments. Without credible arguments in opposition and lacking any superior alterna-
tive solutions, public smoking bans should be implemented as a means of addressing the
public health, workers’ rights, and consumer choice concerns that stem from smoking in
indoor public places and workplaces.

Resources
1. “Cigarette Smoking and Cardiovascular Diseases.” American Heart Association. 2005.
AHA. 10 Dec 2005 http://www.americanheart.org/presenter.jhtml?identifier=4545
2. Diedrich, M, M Dulak, and J Sprangers. “Smoking Ban – Policy Analysis.” 11 Dec 2005.
Prepared for Prof. Dennis Dresang.
3. Heironimus, J. “Impact of Workplace Restrictions on Consumption and Incidence.”
Legacy Tobacco Documents Library. 22 Jan 1992. Phillip Morris. 11 Dec 2005. http://
legacy.library.ucsf.edu/cgi/getdoc?tid=rvv24e00&fmt=gif&ref=results&title=IMPACT&
20OF%20WORKPLACE%20RESTRICTIONS%20ON%20CONSUMPTION%20
INCIDENCE&bates=2023914280/4284
4. Huang, P, AK De, and ME McCusker. “Impact of a Smoking Ban on Restaurant and Bar
Revenues – El Paso, Texas, 2002.” Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report. 27 Feb 2004. 11
Dec 2005 http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5307a2.htm
5. “Reduction in the Incidence of Acute Myocardial Infarction Associated with a Citywide
Smoking Ordinance.” American Heart Association. 3 Oct 2006. AHA. 06 Feb 2008
http://www.americanheart.org/presenter.jhtml?identifier=3043008
6. Scollo, M, A Lal, A Hyland, and S Glantz. “Review of the quality of studies on the
economic effects of smoke-free policies on the hospitality industry.” Tobacco Control. Mar
2003. BMJ Publishing Group. 06 Feb 2008 http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/cgi/content/
full/12/1/13
7. “Secondhand Smoke.” American Cancer Society – Prevention and Early Detection. 4 Nov
2003. American Cancer Society. 11 Nov 2005 http://www.cancer.org/docroot/PED/con-
tent/PED_10_2X_Environmental_Tobacco_Smoke-Clean_Indoor_Air.asp
8. “Secondhand Smoke Fact Sheet.” Air Quality. 2005. American Lung Association. 11
Dec 2005 http://www.lungusa.org/site/pp.asp?c=dvLUK9O0E&b=35422
9. “There Is No Constitutional Right to Smoke.” Technical Assistance Le-
gal Center. 2004. Public Health Institute. 8 Dec 2005 http://64.233.167.104/
search?q=cache:Yn8Dz3Huo4oJ:www.phi.org/pdf-library?talc-memo-0051.pdf+is+smokin
g+constitutional&hl=en&client=firefox-a

54
 Public Financing
For State Elections
Karl U. Stark
Kenyon College

Ohio should adopt public financing for statewide elections to ensure that elected officials spend
their terms governing rather than raising money for reelection campaigns.

Summary
This proposal will make democracy work by decreasing the effect that fundrais-
ing totals have on the outcomes of elections, and would eliminate elected officials’ need of
fundraising once in office. Doing so would return elections to decisions about issues and
personal qualifications. Additionally, politicians would be able to spend the entirety of
their terms governing, rather than worrying about raising money for reelection.

Background
In a system of public financing, citizens can run for office regardless of their
wealth or ties to special interests. All qualifying candidates would receive equal amounts
of money, as well as matching funds for candidates who were funning privately. This
would increase competition in elections, both between publicly-financed candidates and
against privately-financed ones. In 2000, the successful candidate for Ohio State Auditor
raised $496,750 from the Lawyer and Lobbyist industry alone.1 A candidate without ties
to the industry would be at a severe disadvantage. Additionally, these contributors’ make a
living by trying to influence legislators toward certain policies. After contributing nearly
$500,000, it is likely that they would expect perks from a successful campaign. Public
Financing laws would remove these lobbyists from the legislative process.
“Clean Elections” laws have already passed in Connecticut, Maine, Arizona,
as well as for selected areas/elections in New Mexico, Oregon, New Jersey, and North
Carolina. In Maine, 78% of the legislature ran in 2006 as “clean candidates,” and for those
who didn’t run on public money, it became a substantial issue in the race. The number of
competitive races doubled between 1998 and 2004, and the rate of incumbent reelection
declined. In Arizona, voter turnout increased by 13% over eight years, and in 2006 “clean
candidates” were elected to Governor, Lt. Governor, and Attorney General.2

Proposal
Public Financing is optional. Candidates must qualify for public funding by
collecting a certain number of signatures and small-denomination contributions.3 Can-
didates who qualify for public funding receive matching funds for the amount raised
privately by their opponents. Ideally, both candidates would be running on public financ-
ing. Additionally, publicly funded candidates will receive extra funding for independent
spending on the side of their opponents.
The system could be implemented as it currently is for presidential candidates:
citizens voluntarily check a box on their tax return forms to contribute to the public
source of money. The amount could be raised in order to increase the size of the pool.
Alternatively, Arizona was able to implement the system away from taxpayer expense
through a levy on civil and criminal penalties.4 Even if a small tax were adopted, it would

55
only be marginal ($1.00 to $2.00), and the benefits would outweigh these costs, because
the role of their legislators would not be clogged by lobbyists and interests. The best can-
didates would be able to seek office regardless of wealth, race, or gender. In Arizona, the
number of Native American and Latino candidates tripled in two years.5
Candidates, interests, and the public all benefit from public financing of elec-
tions. Many times in races where one candidate was publicly financed and the other was
not, public financing became an issue of debate. Additionally, support rose for candidates
who were publicly financed versus those who were not (this is the case for both Demo-
crats and Republicans).6 Though the more powerful interest groups would lose influence
in the political process, minority interests would benefit from a more level playing field.
Proposals and positions would now be judged based on their quality and content, rather
than the size of the purse behind them. Finally, the public would benefit from a body of
policymakers who are not influenced adversely by well-funded lobbyists, because politi-
cians’ political fate would not rest in campaign contributions. Additionally, candidates
who run with public funding do not need to waste time fundraising while in office but
can rather turn their attention to lawmaking.

Audience
Many elected officials will be hesitant to eliminate the system that put them in
office, so it might be necessary to have this a ballot issue, voted on by the people directly.
Issue-groups would join the cause because their agendas and issues would be advanced by
a system that is rid of corrupt influence.

Next Steps
In order for this issue to get on the ballot, there would have to be substantial
grassroots support. This would include issue groups, minority groups, and an education
program to inform the citizens of the benefits of a public financing system. Democracy
Matters, a student organization already dedicated to the cause, is doing just that, and
through an increased outreach would likely be able to implement a successful educational
campaign. Additionally, citizens could be contacted through their local media sources: op-
eds and local television media. The Public Campaign is another organization that devotes
itself to implementing public financing of elections.

Resources
1. http://opensecrets.org/st/getssector.asp?state=OH&candid=oh30&cycle=2000
2. http://democracymatters.org/content.php?type=whyreform
3. http://www.publicampaign.org/node/34047
4. http://democracymatters.org/content.php?type=whyreform
5. Ibid.
6. http://www.publicampaign.org/video

56
 Ending the Non-Therapeutic Use
of Antibiotics in Agriculture
Kenneth Chen
Environmental Policy Center, University of Michigan

Executive Summary
Antibiotics are the first line of defense against bacterial infections. One of only
a few treatments that actually cure disease, they are an indispensable tool in the modern
arsenal of medicine. Antibiotics are also frequently used in agriculture; they are fed to
livestock at non-therapeutic rates in order to promote growth and prevent disease. In
many nations, the total amount of antibiotics used to cultivate livestock rivals or even
exceeds the amount used for medical purposes. This has resulted in antibiotic-resistant
bacteria in those animals, trace levels of antibiotics in the environment, and reservoirs of
antibiotic-resistant bacteria. Not surprisingly, many scientific and medical organizations
have strongly condemned this dangerous practice. Although the most effective solution to
this problem would be a national ban on the use of non-therapeutic antibiotics in agricul-
ture, the U.S. Congress has been unable to successfully pass such a measure. However, this
issue is of sufficient gravity that, since the federal government has failed, the states have a
responsibility to discontinue this practice through a series of steps:

1. Initiate a statewide ban on the non-therapeutic use of antibiotics in livestock,

specifically those used in human medicine or antibiotics that can select for cross-
resistance to antimicrobials used in human medicine.
2. Tax meat products from antibiotic-enhanced livestock.
3. Produce a publicity campaign on the dangers of non-therapeutic antibiotic use.

Context of the Problem

Antibiotic-resistant strains of bacteria are becoming increasingly prevalent and
virulent, greatly reducing the options available to doctors and patients and causing the in-
creased use of ‘last-resort’ antibiotics. Antibiotics, by killing off “normal” bacteria, naturally
select for the rare bacterial strains with an inherent resistance to that antibiotic. Once the
antibiotic-sensitive strains have been eliminated, the resistant strains then become more
prevalent within the bacterial population. Over time, this can lead to greater incidences of
antibiotic-resistant infections. Exacerbating this problem are the similar mechanisms of
some antibiotics, the comparatively fast rate of bacterial mutation, and the ability of bac-
terial cells to transfer genetic material—genes that could code for antibiotic resistance—
to other bacterial cells.
Medical use of antibiotics is also a significant contributor to this growing
problem. By treating human beings with antibiotics, doctors are not only curing disease,
but also furthering the evolution of drug-resistant infections. This is, of course, no reason
to end the responsible treatment of human disease with antibiotics. However, the use of
antibiotics in agriculture is an equally common practice, which serves to prevent infection
and promote growth, leading to gains of approximately five percent in feed efficiency.1
This practice is also believed to induce the development of antibiotic-resistant bacteria
that can infect human beings, as shown by the preponderance of studies demonstrating

61
a correlation between the use of antibiotics on livestock and the genesis of antibiotic-
resistant bacteria in humans.
For example, between 1983 and 1990, nourseothricin was used in East Germany
as a non-therapeutic growth enhancer. Before 1983, the resistance of enterobacteriaceae
such as E. coli and Salmonella was negligible. However, by 1985, resistant strains of
bacteria were found in meat products and the intestines of pigs. Within five years, this
resistance had spread to E. coli harbored in the intestines of local citizens and to bacterial
species of the genus Shigella, which are only present on human beings.2
More examples can be seen even in the United States. A study by the New
England Journal of Medicine traces the outbreak of a strain of Salmonella newport that
was resistant to three types of antibiotics including chlortetracycline. By using a genetic
marker that characterized this particular strain of multi-resistant bacteria, the source of
the infection was traced to contaminated beef from cattle that had been administered
non-therapeutic doses of the antibiotic chlortetracycline. Additional samples of the resis-
tant strain were also found in animals and people at a nearby dairy farm.3
The link between agricultural use and antibiotic resistance can also be seen when
comparing cases in Europe and the United States. In the U.S., vanomycin-resistant bac-
teria is a growing problem; but in this case, vanomycin use in human medicine is consid-
ered the cause, in part because it is very difficult to culture vanomycin-resistant bacteria
from healthy individuals in the United States. In Europe, where a similar antibiotic called
avoparcin (not vanomycin) is licensed for non-therapeutic use on livestock, vancomycin-
resistant bacteria of multiple strains have been commonly found in healthy individuals,
poultry, swine, and even raw sewage, suggesting that populations of vanomycin-resistant
bacteria arise through avoparcin’s use.4
There are a number of different ways that antibiotic resistance has been trans-
mitted between animals and humans. While some antibiotics used on livestock are not
used in medicine, many have the same basic molecular mechanisms as some medicinal
antibiotics. Thus, bacteria that gain resistance to antibiotics used on livestock also gain
resistance to those used on people. When livestock become hosts of antibiotic-resistant
bacteria, the bacteria can be transferred to workers handling the animals themselves or to
any of the food products made from the animals. At the end of this chain, the consumer
can be exposed by the consumption of those products. Even more worrisome are the
many environmental reservoirs of antibiotic contamination that have been found. When
antibiotics are fed to livestock, they often fail to metabolize and instead simply pass into
the animals’ feces. Livestock waste is then sprayed onto fields as a fertilizer or dumped for
disposal, where it then sinks into the groundwater supply or runs off into nearby bodies
of water when it rains. Because of this, many areas have trace amounts of antibiotics in
surface and ground waters.5,6 The concern is that these stocks of antibiotic-contaminated
water can become breeding grounds for multi-drug resistant bacteria, leading to the
transfer of antibiotic-resistant genes to many different types of bacteria. Indeed, studies
have discovered antibiotic-resistant genes identical to those from swine waste lagoons in
the bacteria of the lagoon’s surrounding groundwater.7

Critique of Current Policy and Policy Recommendations

Currently, the use of antibiotics in agriculture is moderately regulated. Since
1998, the Food and Drug Administration has seriously considered the potential for
resistance generation through antibiotics administered to livestock. To be approved for

62
agricultural use, new drugs must be approved by the FDA using a system to determine
the potential risk of its agricultural use. However, this system does not apply to antibiotics
already being used in agriculture. The United States has taken some steps towards a more
responsible policy; in 2005, fluoroquinolones and glycopeptides were banned in livestock
because of their contribution to antibiotic-resistant bacteria in humans.8 These policies,
however, pale in comparison to scientific recommendations and to comparable measures
in Europe. On January 1, 2006, the European Union banned the use of all antibiotics
for growth promotion in livestock. Prior to this, Sweden had led the way by banning the
use of antibiotics for growth promotion in 1986.9 The U.S. Congress, though it has seen
similar bills proposed, has yet to pass any such measures.
While a national policy would produce the greatest benefit, circumstances have
left the responsibility to address this issue to the states. As a state with a significant
agricultural industry, Michigan should instate a ban on all non-therapeutic antibiotic us-
age in livestock. Since those closest to the farming industry are often those first affected
by antibiotic-resistant bacteria, this policy will directly benefit Michigan farmers. More
generally, because antibiotic contamination in waterways is often traceable to a nearby
livestock farm, the waterways in Michigan will benefit from the decreased levels of anti-
biotic contamination and resistance that follows.
The economic results of such a ban may be more controversial. In Sweden, the
ban has resulted in improved animal husbandry practices as well as sustained levels of
productivity and profitability. Denmark, which also instituted a ban on antimicrobial
growth promoters, experienced similar results.10 However, it is quite feasible that Mich-
igan farmers, when faced with a ban on a long-standing agricultural tool, will be at a com-
petitive disadvantage against out-of-state producers. Thus, steps must be taken to level the
field. Such measures could include a gradual phase-out of antibiotic use coupled with a
subsidy to farmers who decrease antibiotic use faster than required by law. Additionally,
meat products of antibiotic-enhanced livestock from out of state could be subject to a
sales tax, both to assist Michigan farmers and to internalize the negative externalities of
antibiotic use. (The levels and details of such a subsidy or tax are beyond the scope of this
paper and would need to be determined by detailed cost-benefit analyses.)
Finally, a public service campaign similar to those aimed at cigarettes and alcohol
could be used on the antibiotic-treated meat products. The degree of action against any
problem is often intimately linked with public awareness. To accomplish this, a label
warning about the dangers of antibiotic use in livestock and the treatment status of the
meat product could be included on all products from antibiotic-enhanced livestock,
thus encouraging consumers to purchase the locally raised products. This again benefits
the Michigan farmers disadvantaged by state regulations. Ultimately, the provisions of
this policy would become defunct. As the policy could not effect a universal decrease in
antibiotic-resistance , the goal is the adoption by other states or the federal government
of a similar policy, thus negating the need for extra taxes. Only then will a truly effective
solution be found.

Conclusion
Antibiotic-resistant bacteria is a significant medical problem. The non-thera-
peutic use of antibiotics in animals contributes greatly to this problem by selecting for
antibiotic-resistant bacteria, releasing low levels of antibiotics into the environment, and
contributing to the genetic transfer of antibiotic resistance among different bacterial
species. Because the United States government has not taken sufficient action, a three-
63
pronged plan at the state level is needed in order to demonstrate leadership through
responsible action. There must first be a ban on all non-therapeutic use on livestock of
antibiotics that are used in human medicine or those that can select for cross-resistance
to antimicrobials used in human medicine. Then, to ease the burden of this restriction on
Michigan farmers, a subsidy for over-compliant Michigan farmers will be financed by a
tax on all antibiotic-enhanced meat products sold in the state. These products will also
bear a label describing their detrimental effect upon the environment and public health.
Together, these steps will raise greater awareness of the problem of non-therapeutic anti-
biotic use in livestock, and catalyze appropriate nation-wide legislation.

References
1. Swedish Ministry of Agriculture. “Antimicrobial Feed Additives.” Swedish Government
Official Report. 1997.
2. Wolfgang Witte, “Animal Use in Husbandry and Resistance Development in Human
Infections.” FEMS Microbiol. Lett. 15 (1994): 23-31
3. Holmberg SD, Osterholm MT, Senger KA, Cohen ML. “Drug-resistant Salmonella from
animals fed antimicrobials.” N Engl J Med. 311 (1984): 617–622.
4. Shea, Katherine, Committee on Environmental Health, and Committee on Infectious Dis-
eases, “Nontherapeutic Use of Antimicrobial Agents in Animal Agriculture: Implications
for Pediatrics.” Pediatrics 114 (2004): 862-868.
5. Meyer MT, Kolpin DW, Bumgarner JE, Varns JL, Daughtridge JV. “Occurrence of antibi-
otics in surface and ground water near confined animal feeding operations and waste water
treatment plants using radioimmunoassay and liquid chromatography/electrospray mass
spectrometry” Presented at the 219th meeting of the American Chemical Society; March
26–30, 2000; San Francisco, CA.
6. Jon Bonne, “Livestock Antibiotics found in Wateways,” MSNBC, October 25, 2004. U.S.
News, Environment.
7. Chee-Sanford, JC, RI Aminov, IJ Krapac, N Garriques-Jeanjean, and RI Mackie. “Occur-
rence and Diversity of Tetracycline Resistance Genes in Lagoons and Groundwater Under-
lying Swine Production Facilities.” Appl Environ Microbiol. 67 (2001):1494-502.
8. Food and Drug Administration Center for Veterinary Medicine, “Human-use Antibiotics
in Livestock Production,” http://www.fda.gov/cvm/HRESP106_157.htm.
9. Union of Concerned Scientists, “European Union Bans Antibiotics for Growth Promo-
tion,” http://www.ucsusa.org/food_and_environment/antibiotics_and_food/european-
union-ban.html.
10. Shea 2004

64
 Examining the Effects
Of Atrazine in the Great Lakes
By Scott Reid
Environmental Policy Center, University of Michigan

Executive Summary
The herbicide atrazine poses a considerable carcinogenic and endocrine-
disrupting threat to both Great Lakes wildlife and to the humans exposed to it. For all
its demonstrated ill effects, atrazine has been shown to increase crop yield by only a few
percentage points. Despite being outlawed in all European Union member states, where
atrazine is actually produced, it continues to be the most heavily used herbicide in the US,
at a rate of eighty million pounds per year. This note outlines some of the toxicological
effects of atrazine, examines social justice implications, and provides policy recommenda-
tions regarding this chemical.

Endocrine Disruptive Effects

The name “endocrine disruptor” is given to chemicals that interfere with the
normal function of the endocrine system, which delivers essential chemical signals
throughout the body to carry on homeostatic processes.1 Atrazine is an endocrine disrup-
tor that mimics the female sex hormone estrogen and blocks the production of the male
sex hormone testosterone. In male amphibians, it has the effect of “chemical castration”
at concentrations as low as 0.1 parts per billion. For reference, 0.1 ppb is one thirtieth
of the concentration that the EPA considers safe in drinking water - 3 ppb.2 Male frogs
exposed to atrazine at these low concentrations grew ovaries or became hermaphrodites.
Similar demasculinizing effects, such as decreased sperm count, were also observed in fish,
other amphibians, reptiles, and mammals.3 These findings are relevant to human health
because animal models are used as accepted predictors for responses in people.
Aside from its negative effect on frogs, atrazine exposure has caused reproductive
cancers such as prostate cancer in male rodents and breast cancer in female rodents.4 It
also impairs immune function, increases susceptibility to disease, and increases the rate of
pregnancy loss. Surviving offspring of exposed rodents often exhibited retarded develop-
ment. As a result, atrazine can impact several generations simply by being in contact with
one individual. Atrazine also effects non sex hormones of the body by including increas-
ing levels of corticoid stress hormones, with the end result of impairing immune func-
tion.5 Atrazine thus reduces the body’s ability to fight viral infections, bacterial infections,
and cancer.

Social Justice Implications

In assessing the costs and benefits of atrazine, one must also consider the dis-
proportionate effects that it has on various human populations. Logically, those who live
downstream from major agricultural areas have a higher concentration of atrazine in their
drinking water due to runoff from the crop fields. However, this level of atrazine is still
low in comparison to the amount farm workers may be exposed to during the direct ap-
plication of the chemical.
Undocumented workers are often disproportionately affected by harmful expo-

65
sure to atrazine. Frequently exploited to perform hazardous work without knowledge of
the effects, especially in agriculture-dominant states such as California. Several reports
show that those who work in contact with this and other pesticides and herbicides have
exposure at many times the normal rate. In a Syngenta production plant, men exposed
to atrazine developed prostate cancer at 8.4 times the rate of unexposed workers.7 Based
on the animal predictive models used, atrazine likely plays a role in decreased fertility,
increased abortion rates, and low birth weight, as well as many forms of cancer. These
exposure effects disproportionately affect current and future generations of the largely
Latino/a population that works with atrazine. Its developmental effects in humans have
not been well-documented, but mounting evidence from animal model testing suggests a
slew of obstacles to normal development.

Policy Recommendations
Atrazine is classified as a Restricted Use Pesticide, class III-slightly toxic and
may only be used by certified applicators.8 Aside from its agricultural uses on corn,
sugarcane, and sorghum, it is also used on such non-agricultural sites as golf courses, some
residential lawns, forests, ornamental trees, and recreational areas.9 In light of atrazine’s
demonstrated hazards, probable danger to humans, and increasingly negligible benefit
due to the evolution of antibiotic-resistant weeds, we should move straight into the risk
management phase in the following ways:
• Suspend the use of atrazine in the US indefinitely unless it is rigorously proven by
independent sources that it is harmless to humans.
• Identify at-risk groups such as children and field workers with high exposure rates.
• Ensure mutlilingual public access to statistics regarding pesticide and herbicide
levels in agricultural communities.
• Invest in researching safe alternatives to atrazine, including foregoing herbicide
use altogether.

Resources
1. Daniel Vallero, “Environmental endocrine disruptors”, in AccessScience@McGraw-Hill,
http://www.accessscience.com.proxy.lib.umich.edu, DOI 10.1036/1097-8542.YB041115
2. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Ground Water and Drink Water, Con-
sumer Factshee on Atrazine. http://www.epa.gov/safewater/contaminants/dw_contamfs/
atrazine.html
3. Hayes, T., “Welcome to the Revolution: Integrative Biology and Assessing the Impact of
Endocrine Disruptors on Environmental and Public Health.” J. Integrative Comp. Biol.,
2005. 45(2): p. 321-329
4. Pintér, A. and e. al, Long-term carcinogenicity bioassay of the herbicide atrazine in F344
rats. Neoplasm, 1980. 37: p. 533-544
5. Porter, W., J. Jaeger, and I. Carlson, Endocrine, immune, and behavioral effects of aldicarb
(carbamate), atrazine (triazine) and nitrate fertilizer mixtures at groundwater concentra-
tions. Toxicol. Industrial. Health, 1999. 15: p. 133-150.
6. Karrow, N., et al., Oral exposure to atrazine modulates cell-mediated immune function and
decreases host resistance to the B16F10 tumor model in female B6C3F1 mice. Toxicology,
2005. 209(1): p. 15-28.
7. Maclennan, P., et al., Cancer incidence among triazine herbicide manufacturing workers.
JOEM, 2002. 44(11): p. 1048-1058

66
8. Extension Toxicology Network, Oregon State University. http://extoxnet.orst.edu/pips/
atrazine.htm
9. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Atrazine Interim Reregistration Eligibil-
ity Decision Q&As, January 2003. http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/factsheets/atrazine.htm

67