Most of us here at Tufts can summarize our lives in a veritable laundry list of academic, social, athletic, religious and charity commitments. And there is a daily struggle to prioritize and re-prioritize all of these commitments so that we can maintain some semblance of a well-rounded, yet productive and fun life.
This series of articles seeks to answer the question "How do we behave sexually at Tufts, and how aware are we of the risks?" This article will look at how mothers who are also students balance their campus life with their home life.
Tufts sophomore Scott Merrick will have a hand in governing one of last week's swing states after being elected to the New Hampshire House of Representatives for the Second Congressional District of Coos County on Nov. 2.
Since Apple first introduced the iPod in October 2001, the small white cords hanging from the ears of passersby have become ubiquitous. According to a July Newsweek cover story, more than three million people own an iPod, and competitors have had little luck so far against the combined force of Apple's mp3 player and its music organizing software, iTunes. The young adult demographic is a major player in the iPod trend: a survey conducted recently by securities firm Piper Jaffray & Co. found that 16 percent of teens own iPods, and that another 24 percent have plans to purchase one within the following year. The commercials advertising the device have become equally well known, featuring new music and a simple theme of bright backgrounds, silhouetted dancing figures and those little white strings leading to the earbuds. These campaigns have been successful enough to be recognizable, in and of themselves, as a part of the iPod culture. They have reached this level because of "smart marketing, vision and taste" on the part of Apple, said Associate Professor of Sociology James Ennis. Ennis went on to explain that "the key is the integration with iTunes." iTunes, the partner to the iPod, is a music organizing and sharing tool that has proliferated throughout the Internet (Every student interviewed who owns an iPod uses iTunes). Such a sudden cultural phenomenon is rare but explainable. According to Newsweek's article, music is very intertwined with people's emotions, "and the purchase of something that opens up one's entire music collection ... makes for an intense relationship." Tufts Associate Professor of Anthropology David Guss said that the iPod is so successful because it "empower[s] people to become more than simply passive consumers. iPod and other systems create new circuitries in which consumers are also producers." By Guss's definition, then, many Tufts students are indeed both consumers and producers. "Most of my friends have them," freshman Ben Brooks said of iPods. Adding credence to Guss's analysis, many students employ iPods as updated, personalized CD players, taking pride in their ability to produce their own music repertoires -whether through iTunes or other means. "If there's a new album I want, I'll get that from the iTunes store," sophomore Abena Agyemang said. "Otherwise, I get it from my old CDs." Old CD collections serve as a popular source for music on the iPod, enabling students to legally copy their favorite CDs into the iPod's memory. "I get most of my music from my friends," sophomore Stacey Watkins said. "I burn it onto data CDs [and copy to my iPod from those], and my friends send me music through [instant messaging] too." One venue that won't be supplying budget-conscious iPod owners with music is Tufts' recently announced partnership with CDigix, which will not supply students with free music for their iPods; in order to transfer music to portable listening devices like the iPod, students will have to pay. Many college students have integrated their iPods into the fabric of their everyday routines. "I use it mostly on the way to the gym and on my way to classes," said freshman Cynthia McMurry, one of many students who take their iPods to the gym for workouts. Graduate student Jessica Davis said that she has had her iPod since April and uses it "mostly for exercising." Other students use their iPods to fill spaces between classes or while traveling. "I use mine while I'm studying or when I'm going somewhere on the T," Agyemang said. "Most often, I have mine on in my car," said senior Jason Freedman, who has the FM transmitter accessory to use in his car The iPod's cultural resonance has been felt on other campuses besides Tufts. According to the Chronicle of Higher Education, Duke University gave new iPods to every incoming student in the Class of 2008 this fall. The cost of the iPod is a big deterrent-the iPod mini is the cheapest option and costs $249. Fletcher student Kristen Zimmerman said that she'd love to have one but that the only thing stopping her was the cost. Others received one as a gift, like sophomore Leticia Frazao. "My parents got it for me for Christmas," she said, after she researched her options and told her parents she wanted one. Why do some students prefer the iPod? "It's cuter than the other one I looked at," Agyemang said. Others said that they simply did not do any research into their other options. About half of the students interviewed, however, did buy the iPod for themselves. "I bought mine myself," Lowenstein said, but after only "minimal research." "I bought mine myself," freshman Nicki Sobecki agreed. "I did research through my friends, just by asking around," she added. Out of those students who do not own iPods, many are not aware of the other, cheaper brands. Others, however, defy the cultural trend: they simply do not want an mp3 player. "I never seriously thought about buying them," Brooks said. Sophomore Laura Crook agreed. "I've never really researched them, but I've never really had the desire to get one," she said.
I'd like to respond to Michael Schrimpf's article "How Republicans Feel" (Nov. 8). As a Massachusetts liberal, I'd like to thank Mr. Schrimpf for his articulate defense of a conservative national agenda. While I may disagree with many of the policies he champions, they are a reflection of different priorities and are not without merit. I hesitate to use the word "stupid" to refer to those who helped reelect our president, but I won't deny that many Kerry supporters question the judgment of the Bush supporters around them. Mr. Schrimpf seems to believe that this attitude stems from a difference of opinion on issues. He attempts to defend his choice by defending his belief in traditional conservative values. What confuses many Kerry supporters is how those who voted for the president fail to identify the disconnect between President Bush and these same conservative values. Are record deficits a conservative value? Is misleading our nation into war a conservative value? Is the dismantling of the first amendment a conservative value? Are no-bid contracts a conservative value? Is imprisonment without trial a conservative value? Is fighting against a 9-11 commission a conservative value? Lastly, Mr. Shrimpf may personally feel that marriage should only be between a man and a woman, but wouldn't the conservative view be to let the states legislate on the issue? Though some items on the president's agenda are truly conservative, I find it appalling that for these initiatives, supporters are willing to endure the slow erosion of checks and balances and the not-so-slow onset of corruption. Many will claim that as a Clinton supporter, I was willing to endure the erosion of values for the agenda I supported. While I too was appalled at President Clinton's behavior, I make a mighty distinction between sexual indiscretion and misleading a nation into war. When U.S. soldiers lay down their life, justification must be clear, moving and, above all, honest. I shudder at the mention of aluminum tubes or yellow-cake. I don't expect Mr. Shrimpf to suddenly reverse his position, but I do want to make it clear that Kerry supporters do not think Bush supporters are "stupid" because they disagree about issues. We are saddened that they might not realize what the man they elected actually stands for. We are terrified that they might.John HuggEN '05
Tufts remains on the cusp of adopting a need-blind admissions policy after administrators discussed the remaining steps to be taken last Saturday at the Board of Trustees' November meeting. Dean of Admissions Lee Coffin and University President Larry Bacow met at the Babson College Executive Conference Center to discuss Tufts' current need-sensitive policy, which takes into account applicants' ability to pay but commits to meet all accepted students' demonstrated need. Need-blind schools accept qualified applicants regardless of their ability to pay. "Financial aid will be one of our two highest priorities in the next capital campaign - the other being support for faculty," Bacow said. "Need-blind admissions will ensure access to a Tufts education for all," Bacow said. "It will enrich the learning environment by encouraging and supporting the very best students to attend Tufts regardless of their ability to pay." Tufts Community Union Senate Trustee Representative Chike Aguh, who attended some of the meetings this past weekend, said trustees were very supportive of moving toward need-blind admissions. "I felt that the meetings were incredibly productive, and I was heartened by the trustees' near unanimous belief that need-blind admissions is the way Tufts needs to go," he said. Bacow and Coffin said the University does not currently have the funding for need-blind admissions, however. Even after raising $600 million in the Tufts Tomorrow campaign, which ended in 2002, Bacow said Tufts is still under-endowed. Need-blind admissions have been on Tufts' priority list for at least two years - the Tufts Task Force on Undergraduate Education identified a long- term commitment to need-blind admission as early as December 2002. "The trustees are hoping to raise the money for us to be need-blind through fundraising in the next capital campaign," Aguh said. "This money would allow us to be able to afford need-blind admissions. Money is the only thing that is keeping Tufts locked into need-sensitive admissions." Many of the schools Tufts competes with for students have already implemented need-blind admissions policies, including Boston College, Bowdoin College, Cornell, Dartmouth, Georgetown, MIT, Northwestern and the University of Pennsylvania. "Personally, I feel that it is imperative for the University to become need-blind in its admissions process," Aguh said. "By not doing so, the University cannot get the best and the brightest. And when we don't get them, someone else does, and we suffer from a competitive disadvantage because of it." Bacow said there are simply not enough full-paying students coming from the top 10 percent of their class with high SAT scores to go around. According to Mark J. Mitchell, vice president of the Financial Aid Services Team of the National Association of Independent Schools, "schools face a delicate balance between meeting their enrollment goals and staying within the constraints of a limited financial aid budget." Bacow expressed concern this weekend that the alumni-giving rate is slightly lower than he would like it to be. He said he would earmark some funds for scholarships but that there are currently not enough available. Bacow said the Tufts community needs extensive alumni outreach. "This year's financial aid was lower than usual because in the previous year, so many students who were offered aid accepted," according to junior Senator Athena Bogis. Students are generally supportive of the initiative to adopt need-blind policies. "Students benefit the most when they are exposed to diverse viewpoints, beliefs and backgrounds," senior Phil Hummel said. "The best way for Tufts to foster this kind of environment would be to create a class of students from a variety of socioeconomic backgrounds." Freshman Leslie Stephenson agrees. "There are so many awesome kids who are missing out on Tufts because of our need-sensitive policy. We're missing out on them too." Tufts administrators hope to eventually provide need-blind admission for both international and domestic students, though the former are a secondary priority right now. The University currently offers no aid for international students. "The goal is to have need-blind admissions for everyone," Aguh said, "but we will not know if that is feasible until the dollars are raised."
With the recent successes of Rage Against the Machine/Soundgarden hybrid Audioslave and Tool/Smashing Pumpkins m?©lange A Perfect Circle, supergroups are a hot commodity. The latest entry in the amalgamation canon (this time, Stone Temple Pilots plus Guns n' Roses), Velvet Revolver brings its grunge-tinged heavy metal blend to Worcester tonight, touring in support of their new album, "Contraband." A warning to all those fans of old-school Stone Temple Pilots or Guns n' Roses: Velvet Revolver's "Contraband" is no "Use Your Illusion" (either I or II) or "Core." With the all-star cast that this band boasts and the multi-platinum albums sitting behind it, the issue cannot really be avoided: they can do better. Velvet Revolver consists of STP vocalist Scott Weiland, the ex-Guns n' Roses trio of guitarist Slash, bassist Duff McCagan and drummer Matt Sorum, and second guitarist Dave Kushner. To be fair, it is great to see that Weiland is still alive and kicking after rehab (yes, again), McCagan has recovered from his exploding liver and Slash is still going at those solos. "Contraband" also provides a quick fix for fans, given that the in-the-works GNR album "Chinese Democracy" is turning out to be more mythical than imminent and STP's last was a best-of album, "Thank You." "Contraband" gives us a whiff of revitalized hard rock. Most of the tracks are of the head-banging variety, fast and hard-hitting from beginning to end. "Do It For The Kids" kicks off with Weiland screaming "Went too fast I'm out of luck and I don't even give a f**k," accompanied by Kushner's speedy fuzz guitar. Sorum opens "Illegal I Song" with an adrenalized drum roll, and the track continues with fast and furious riffing. The album is relentless in delivering pounding, throbbing tunes, all beautifully topped off with Slash's classic guitar solos. If solid hard rock reminiscent of 80s hair metal is your cup of tea, then "Contraband" is the album for you. The punk attitude is still very much intact in Weiland's lyrics. There's a good old rail against the "system" in "Big Machine:" "All tied up to a big machine/I got houses/Got cars/I got a wife/I got kids/Got money in the bank/Get away without borders/I'm a slave, New World Order...," and many a seething indictment on the filth of society, as Weiland chants in "Sucker Train Blues:" "Somebody raped my tapeworm abortion/Come on motherf**kers and deliver the cow/Brain and body melting while there's roaches multiplying/It's the alien infection it's the coming of Christ..." It's just unfortunate that there's a bit too much formula and not enough volatility. The two token power ballads of the album - "Fall to Pieces" and "You Got No Right" - offer lyrics that are touching in their raw, simple sadness but provide nothing inspiring musically. "Fall to Pieces" immediately calls to mind "Sweet Child O' Mine" but falls short of that tune's former glory, and it's not just Axl Rose's high-pitched yowl that is missing. While "Slither" was chosen as the album's single, any of the other tracks could just as easily have represented the consistent grinding and hammering sound of "Contraband." Weiland's vocals also lack explosiveness. While his trademark aggressive bark compliments Kushner's rhythm guitar, his voice comes across as a monotonous chant in several of the tracks. For those familiar with old STP favorites like "Purple" or "Tiny Music," it seems like his vocals are not hitting the full range of sound or emotion that he is capable of. Admittedly, after a few listens, it does catch on. However, while it's great to see these old pros doing what they do so well, there is much fresh ground to be crossed, if only they would step away from their comfort zones. If the professionalism of the musicians makes the CD a bit stale, they make up for it in the live show: Velvet Revolver puts on a famously rambunctious show, in which band members careen around the stage, rocking every bit as hard live as they do on their album.
It's not the end of the world as we know it. It's the end of the world as we want it. That's the lesson the Kerry supporters will have to deal with over the next few years. The shock of the Bush reelection depressed a significant proportion of the Tufts community, including me. The visions liberals and moderates had of their country and its place in the world were shattered by President Bush's 3.5 million voter margin of victory. The world we see and yearn for will not be realized, at least not for the near future. From the election results on the national and state levels, it is clear that the majority of Americans do not want homosexuals to marry, and they believe their commander in chief should legislate with his faith. These are the facts that are presented to the "blue states," and we cannot change them. Instead of blaming anyone in particular, we have to step back and explore the mindset in which these Bush supporters live. A CNN exit poll revealed that 22 percent chose "moral values" as the most important issue to voters; of those respondents, 80 percent voted for Bush. These "moral values" are fascinating when seen through a cultural lens. Want to know how Bush won? Take a look at some of the successful movies, books and television. They reveal the impressive growth of the Religious Right and the evangelical Christians; they are no longer a fringe group. These are consumers whose lifestyles are powered by their deep faith, and what was previously a niche business catering to a small portion of the population has exploded into a multi-billion dollar industry. In movies, "The Passion of the Christ" earned more than $370 million in theaters nationwide, placing it third on the list of total box office receipts for 2004. Mel Gibson's violent vision of the crucifixion of Jesus Christ was astoundingly popular among church groups and families who flocked to the theaters in droves. The film sold more than four million DVDs on its release date and estimates for the film's total DVD gross were upwards of $400 million. In books, Jerry B. Jenkins and Tim LaHaye's "Left Behind" series have sold more than 62 million copies; the 12th and last volume, "Glorious Appearing," sold two million copies before its publication this past March. Based on the content of the Book of Revelations, the "Left Behind" books are placed in the context of today's troubled world. They center on the arrival of the Antichrist and his eventual seven-year reign over humanity, known to Christians as the Tribulation. The final installment signaled the second coming of Jesus Christ, followed by the final battle of Armageddon and the Judgment. The success of these novels is not surprising, considering that, according to a June 2002 Time/CNN poll, 59 percent of Americans believe the prophecies in the Book of Revelations will come true, and 17 percent believe the Rapture will happen in their lifetime. In television, the penetration of God into our society is clearest when looking at last season's ratings surprise, "Joan of Arcadia." Nestled in the family-friendly 8 p.m. timeslot, "Arcadia" centers on a high-school student, Joan, who receives pointers on life straight from God, whose messages are delivered by way of a variety of human forms. For a population that believes that God oversees their daily lives, the concept of God being "one of us," to quote the Joan Osborne song and show theme, can be understandably comforting. The show's success reached new heights this past spring with its victory at the People's Choice Awards for "Favorite Television New Dramatic Series" and its Emmy nomination for "Outstanding Drama Series." Over the past five years or so, ever since the last months of the Clinton Administration, pundits and social commentators have often joked that Jed Bartlet, President of the United States on "The West Wing," would make a great candidate. It seems that the 48 percent of the disaffected electorate went to President Bartlet for solace, as the series copped its highest ratings in over a year. On this past Wednesday, the day Kerry conceded the election, 13.8 million viewers tuned in to watch the President's staff broker a Middle East peace agreement with a recalcitrant Republican Congress. Perhaps NBC and John Wells made a mistake in ending the Bartlet administration a year early, as was announced over the summer. Since taking over for show creator Aaron Sorkin, Wells has cashed in on each opportunity to change the program from an inspiring diamond in the rough into a melodramatic hunk of cubic zirconium. Its ratings had been faltering since the change in management, but its sudden upswing this past week is notable. During his campaign, Senator Kerry was everything that Martin Sheen, as President Bartlet, was not. Sheen plays a commander in chief with a strong passion for leadership, with a captivating array of oratorical skills. So now that Democrats don't have a real candidate to stump for, they turn to the next best thing: a fictional president on a television show. While I hate to admit it, Robert Novak is right. "America is a conservative country" has been the columnist's mantra this past week on "Crossfire," and I firmly believe that he is right. In order to change the world, which should be the hope of any idealistic college student, one has to realize the world he or she has been given. The voters of Ohio and the rest of the "red states" have given us, liberal America, a world in which religious, moral values are more important than our country's war on terrorism and economy. We didn't beat them, but that doesn't mean we have to join them in supporting our President. Support the troops and support the equally important values of liberal America. Stand up for your beliefs, but be sure not to denigrate those of the other half of the country. The future will only be bleak if you allow it to be bleak. As John F. Kennedy said, "We should not let our fears hold us back from pursuing our hopes."
Lynn Steger is excited about writing her senior thesis. A political science major, she decided to also be an English major this year just so she could take English classes and write her thesis: Virginia Woolf and Death. Tufts University does not have a thesis requirement. Students are free to write one if they wish, but none are obliged to. In International Relations Professor Malik Mufti's opinion, Steger's enthusiasm is one of the key reasons Tufts' thesis policy is a good one. "There's nothing worse than writing a thesis just because you have to write a thesis," Mufti said. "I'm not convinced that everyone should have to write a thesis." "I don't think that a senior thesis is for everyone," Political Science Department Head Vikki Sullivan said. "First, students need to have a subject to which they are passionately devoted. Second, they have to be able to work independently without constant supervision. Third, they have to be highly motivated. Without these elements, the senior thesis can be a less than gratifying experience." Sullivan noted several occasions where theses were not finished, and added that the department was trying to improve that record. The benefits of writing a thesis are varied. For some, like Steger, a thesis is a good opportunity to expand an area of passionate interest. Steger said that writing her thesis is a great opportunity to "bounce ideas off of someone." In addition to the academic benefits, some people feel that theses look good on resum?©s. However, Director of Career Services Jean Papalia cautions against blind adherence to this view. "A thesis would be one of many variables [that would reflect a candidate's strengths]," she said. Papalia also stressed that whether a thesis is an asset to a student's resume depends on the position the applicant is aiming for. Dean of Undergraduate Affairs James Glaser said that a thesis is "especially important for students considering graduate school and students who have a deep interest in a discipline and wish to pursue their coursework to the next level." Some colleges, such as Bates College and Princeton University, have written thesis requirements. Bates student Hisa Abe is happy with her school's requirement. "I think it will give me something to research more fully and at least then I'll have a goal to work towards my four years here," Abe said. Despite the benefits of a required thesis, most departments at Tufts said they have never considered making it mandatory. According to former department chair David Garman, there are roughly 150 to 200 economics majors each year but generally only 170 faculty members in the department. Of all the economics majors, seven are writing theses this year. "Because of the potential advising crunch, economics has never seriously considered requiring a thesis of all senior majors," Garman said. "[It] is too much to ask in addition to a faculty member's regular work load." Glaser said that a mandatory thesis had been discussed, but that "there is general agreement that the experience should be for those who are motivated to do it." He added that the administration hopes to increase the number of students who write a thesis each year. Glaser also estimated that in the past several years, between 60 and 85 students have received thesis honors. The thesis honors program has benefited students writing theses within the Political Science department. With 10 seniors writing theses, the department has twice as many students as the previous year. Sullivan credits the increase to the new thesis honors program, in which students meet once a week to "discuss issues surrounding research and writing, present drafts of their own workand critique those of their fellow thesis writers." "At Tufts, it's really important to get the process going before senior year," senior Melissa Diracles said. "A lot of seniors get stuck because they were abroad and weren't able to get advisors." Although Steger had no trouble finding advisors, other students have had difficulty with their proposals. "I thought about writing a thesis," senior and history major Ilona Solomon said. "But it was really hard to get anyone to help me." "It's a frustrating process to get readers and follow professors around," Diracles said. "There was no one there to help me." For those students who don't wish to write a thesis, there are plenty of alternatives. Tufts offers students the option of doing an independent research project, and many students choose internships or become involved in performances and organizations. "There are other 'capstones' to one's college education," Glaser said.
Scientists and health experts around the world have a better understanding of a disease-causing parasite and potential bioterrorism agent thanks to research recently completed by members of the Cummings School of Veterinary Medicine. The work decoded the genome of Cryptosporidium hominis, a water-borne parasite that thrives in the intestines of infected humans, which the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) have classified as a potential bioterrorist agent. Director of Tufts' Division of Infectious Disease Saul Tzipori, PhD, and Associate Professor of the Department of Biomedical Sciences directed the project. The parasite, which can be acquired by drinking impure water, causes symptoms including vomiting, stomach cramps, weight loss and fever. Although healthy people usually recover from the disease, it can be dangerous for people with weak immune systems or those living in under-developed countries. "[The parasite] is often life-threatening in people with HIV/AIDS or in malnourished children," Tzipori said. "There is no effective treatment against it." Cryptosporidium proved very difficult to work with, making laboratory tests nearly impossible to conduct. In 2000, the human form of the parasite, dubbed TU502, was extracted from a Ugandan child and isolated by members of Tzipori and Widmer's team. Researchers from Tufts, along with scientists from Minnesota University and the Commonwealth University of Virginia, were then able to sequence the parasite's genome. The sequencing was completed and published in the journal Nature on Oct. 28. "The sequencing of the genome will help determine the underlying mechanisms of Cryptosporidium's unusual resistance to antimicrobial agents," Tzipori said. "We are confident that the genome will allow us to identify key biological characteristics that might help explain the difference between parasites that infect humans and animals, and provide the necessary information to place this microorganism in the correct spot on the evolutionary tree," Tzipori said. Cryptosporidium can be found in soil, food, human feces and contaminated water. It cannot be killed by chlorine or iodine, making modern water purification ineffective in killing the parasite. For this reason, the CDC declared the bacteria a possible bioterrorism agent. The sequencing "now puts us in a better position ... to identify possible drug and vaccine targets," Widemer said. Decoding the organism's genomic sequence gives scientists the ability to analyze how it operates on a biological level. For example, scientists working with Cryptosporidium may discover that a specific sequence of DNA can be neutralized with a high concentration of a certain chemical, allowing the development of a drug to treat victims of the bacteria. But that task may prove extremely difficult, as genomes are made up of billions of individual sequences. It often takes years of painstaking work to break down, or sequence, the entire strand. Other groundbreaking work in sequencing has provided insights into the genomes of many organisms, including those of humans and monkeys.
Students searching for an off-campus house or apartment make decisions based on factors such as location and rent, but rarely do they check the law books. An illegal occupancy situation forced eight Tufts students living at 167 College Ave. to leave their house just over a month ago, however. The Somerville Inspectional Services visited the house and found it in violation of a city ordinance forbidding more than four unrelated people to reside in a single dwelling. A ninth student was also supposed to move out, but has delayed the move until the end of the semester. The students, who were living in a nine-bedroom apartment owned by Camillo Fodera, were forced to split into two groups and relocate to separate addresses. In Medford, the maximum amount of unrelated tenants allowed per dwelling is three. "I would have been more angry, but our landlord had [another] open five-person apartment" in which the displaced students were relocated, former 167 resident Ashton Lazarus said. "The city gave him an ultimatum, so we didn't officially get evicted." Because of the misunderstanding, Fodera kept each of the nine tenants' rent the same. Landlords often circumvent these local ordinances by creating multiple apartments within one house or by having only four tenants sign the lease. There were two apartments at 167 College Ave., one of which was occupied by Lazarus and his eight cohabitants. There were a total of 17 residents living in the house. Ignorance of city and state housing laws is commonplace among both landlords and student tenants around Tufts. One widely-believed myth across campus is the "brothel rule," under which the state supposedly bans houses containing more than six women to prevent them from functioning as brothels. While the "brothel rule" was repealed in 1984, the law forbidding more than four unrelated people to live together at the same address is still on the books and is enforced by Somerville's Office of Inspectional Services. "I didn't see the inspectors, but apparently they didn't need warrants," Lazarus said. "The trouble was that we never got to meet with the city." In the end, the relocation actually benefited Lazarus and his apartment-mates. "We ended up getting more square footage and rent is the same," he said. "I'm just happy to have a place to live in." Donna Rodriguez, off-campus housing coordinator for the Office of Residential Life and Learning, said Somerville's rule is archaic and infrequently enforced. She said inspectors check houses for more than four unrelated people only in extreme cases, and said the 17-resident house at 167 College Ave was an example of such a case. Lazarus said that he felt the city simply used the ordinance as an excuse to break up the house. "In the case of regular apartments, the city turns a blind eye," he said. "But last year, this house was a problem house," which Lazarus said led the inspectors to determine that "the occupancy was too high." While the risks of being caught may not be high, "one must be aware of the zoning laws," Rodriguez said. She warned students against landlords who request a single monthly rent check and a single signature on the lease. "It's important that everyone sign the lease," Rodriguez said. "It's to your benefit." With all tenants on the lease, the landlord will be held accountable for occupancy violations. But if only one person signs the lease, all others tenants can be evicted, she said. Massachusetts is not the only state to have such housing restrictions - students across the country have run into the similar problems. In Boulder, University of Colorado (CU) students must comply with a law prohibiting more than three unrelated persons from living together. CU sophomore and Housing Department employee Jeff Lovshin said that often, only three students sign leases for Boulder houses, even when more than three plan to live at the address. "One problem is that if people are evicted, the three remaining people are stuck with the lease," Lovshin said. Further, if someone not on the lease is hurt or killed by an in-house event such as a fire, the landlord is not held accountable.
As much as it may hurt a Tufts student to say it, the Williams College Ephs did something this weekend that they have never done in school history. Who would have thought it possible? The school capped off one of its most successful fall campaigns ever by sweeping all four NESCAC Playoff series this weekend. The Ephs hosted the volleyball and men's soccer postseasons, coming away victorious over Tufts and Middlebury, respectively. The women's soccer and field hockey teams traveled to host Middlebury for the championships, but that did not stop the Ephs as they defeated the Panthers in both championship games to claim the sweep. It was the fourth consecutive title for both the men's soccer and volleyball teams, with both squads shutting out all of their opponents over the course of the weekend. The men's soccer team, after starting 2-1 in the conference, went undefeated in the conference for the last two months of the season, including the playoffs, to earn the championship. The volleyball team cruised through its season as well, tallying a 13-0 conference record over the course of the season, including victories in two consecutive weekends against our beloved Jumbos. The title was the first in the books for the women's soccer team, who triumphed over Middlebury in 3-1 penalty kicks after playing to a 1-1 tie for 110 minutes of regulation. Appropriately enough, the field hockey team, who ousted Tufts in the semifinals, ended Middlebury's perfect season in the finals with a 4-3 overtime victory over the Panthers to win it all and regain the title the Panthers stripped from them last season. And thus ends the fall season for many of Tufts teams, and all there is for a Tufts student to say is: at least we have men's cross country.
Over the past couple of weeks, there has been a series of homophobic incidents on and around the Tufts campus. There have been reports of abrasive comments and the alleged assault of a gay student. To add insult to injury, the Tufts Republicans put on a program that, while it purported to offer an alternative view on same-sex marriage, in fact was nothing more than a presentation of homophobic opinions supported by either manipulated information or none at all. The Tufts campus is, in general, a safe place for LGBT students, but these incidents undermine that security. The fact that the majority of reported bias incidents both nationwide and on Tufts' campus are homophobic in nature, and that so many significant incidents occurred within a week, should worry more than the targeted students and their fellow LGBT members. This is an issue that is relevant to the entire Tufts community. Anyone who does not fit traditional gender norms may draw feelings of hatred to themselves or those around them, including friends, roommates and significant others. By dismissing bias incidents such as graffiti etched on white boards or an epithet flung during a drunken argument as isolated or insignificant, we set the groundwork for more violent actions by creating a campus tolerant of homophobia. Perhaps the most disturbing thing is the decision of the Tufts Republicans to bring speakers to campus who are blatantly homophobic. Two of the speakers merely spoke from opinion instead of engaging in the intellectual discourse that was advertised. The third speaker, Dr. John Diggs, based his presentation on a paper he published entitled "The Health Risks of Gay Sex" (available online at http://www.corporateresourcecouncil.org), in which he claims that gay men engage in promiscuity and other risky sexual behavior simply because they are gay. While he could have presented an argument that promiscuity and unprotected sex present public health risks, the fact that he chose to focus only on gay male sex reveals the overt, essentialist homophobia inherent in his work. Dr. Diggs agreed with the other speakers and even went so far as to claim that gay people do not exist, only "heterosexual people with homosexual problems." Contrary to what this forum showcased, it is possible to make a legitimate argument against same-sex marriage that is not grounded in bigotry. In fact, not all LGBT people are in favor of same-sex marriage. If Tufts Republicans wanted to engage in an intelligent discussion about same-sex marriage, they could have presented a program that represented several viewpoints and staged a debate. Instead, they sponsored a panel that perpetuated damaging myths about LGBT people, and gay men in particular. Students are often inclined to believe that Tufts is a place where this kind of hatred does not exist. But the recent events on campus prove that Tufts is this kind of place. Hatred is on Tufts' campus. We, as members of the community, must recognize and own this truth. Before these incidents, many queer students already walked around campus in a state of cautiousness. Wearing a rainbow pin on your bag or holding the hand of your significant other of your same sex are bold statements to make. These are actions LGBT students have no choice but to think about, but for the average straight student, holding someone's hand is a non-issue. For queer students, these actions may elicit violence or hate speech, but more commonly draw stares or muttered comments. While these responses leave the individual relatively unscathed, the cumulative effects of such actions can take a heavy psychological toll. We are not trying to silence anyone in expressing his or her political views. Dialogue is a vital part of learning, but when views are expressed through personal attacks (and we do feel that the opinions presented by the panelists personally targeted queer students), they damage any possibility for the open exchange of ideas that characterizes productive discussion. We believe that homophobia and other forms of bias are rooted in ignorance, and it is only through an open exchange of ideas that we can combat that ignorance. With the passage of 11 state constitutional amendments to ban same-sex marriage across the country this election, it is clear that this is a relevant debate to be having, regardless of your opinion on the issue. However, we must foster open debate, not attack each other as individuals. The Bias Response Team is committed to ending hatred and ignorance on campus through productive dialogue. Please join us at an upcoming open forum to discuss bias and its effects on campus. Details of the event will be posted on Tuftslife.com as soon as they are finalized.Sarah Sahn and Alex Weissman are Peer Educators on the Bias Response Team. They are both seniors majoring in American Studies.
The second seven took the field for the women's cross country team on Saturday at the Eastern College Athletic Conference (ECAC) Div. III Cross Country Championships. Senior Katie Mason (20th, 24:03) led the Jumbos to a fourth place finish with sophomore Jenny Torpey (22th, 24:07) right behind on the Tufts Farm Course in Grafton, Massachusetts. "The team worked really well together," Torpey said. "Everyone just had amazing races. I think the smallest [personal record] was thirty seconds. Everyone just busted out." At the Jumbo Invitational in September, Torpey ran the 5,000-meter course in 25:01, while Mason finished in 24:32, as both improved their personal records at Grafton by significant times. Torpey improved her time from September by 54 seconds. "It was a good race for me. We were ready for it," Torpey said. "We were really psyched because we knew we could do really well. We had a goal and we knew we could accomplish it. We did it more for the team than for ourselves." Junior Arielle Aaronsen (29th, 24:19) and sophomores Samantha Moland (35th, 24:37) and Angie Lee (36th, 24:42) formed a strong middle pack for the Jumbos. The duo of freshman Ana Hoyos (54th, 25:02) and senior Emily Pfiel (55th, 25:05) rounded out the Tufts team. "Everyone on the team ran [personal records] for Grafton except Pfiel," coach Kristen Morwick said. "It was a great team effort. They ran great, everybody. All of them. To finish fourth was fantastic. We're really pleased with the outcome." Torpey and Mason maintained position throughout the race. Hoyos ran with the duo, but dropped back as the race progressed. "The three that really came out were Arielle, Sam and Angie," Morwick said. "They started a lot further back and moved way up over the course of the race. I couldn't really ask for more. They were fantastic." With a split of 1:02, the Jumbos, with 130 points, were able to hold off the U.S. Coast Guard Academy (132) and Colby College (138) for the fourth place finish, the highest finish for the Jumbos at the ECACs in Tufts history. Coast Guard raced its top seven runners, led by freshman Joellen Arons' first place individual finish. Yet the Jumbos still held them off in the team standings and fended off the challenge Colby presented. "We thought we'd be duking it out with Colby for a fourth or fifth spot if you take Coast Guard's top seven out," Morwick added. NESCAC rivals Williams (24 points), Middlebury (48) and Amherst (95) ran away with the meet for first, second and third, respectively. Williams put five runners in the top 10, with four runners finishing in the 5-8 spots in an incredible display of depth. Freshman Caitlin Higgins led the Ephs with a second place individual finish. "[Higgins] was in their top seven all season but had a couple bad races," Morwick said. "[Higgins and freshman Mallory Harlin, who finished fifth] were six and seven at McGill when we raced them. Middlebury and Williams are the top two teams in the nation. They're pretty deep teams." Tri-captains Mason and Pfiel had strong finishes to their cross country careers. "It was really nice for the two seniors, Mason and Pfiel, to finish cross country on such a high note," Morwick said. "Especially considering where Pfiel came from. She literally didn't run a step all summer until the middle of September.
Despite having one of its most successful seasons in team history, the volleyball team will not be advancing to the NCAA Tournament starting next weekend. The Jumbos, who finished second in both the NESCAC and the New England region to athletics juggernaut Williams College, were denied an at-large bid by the NCAA tournament despite finishing the season with a 28-6 record overall and a 9-1 mark in the NESCAC. "We beat a lot of teams that are going to NCAA's for New England, so it's a little disappointing that we weren't recognized for an at-large bid," senior co-captain Emily Macy said. By virtue of winning the NESCAC and being the top ranked team in region, the Ephs will host the New England Regional with the winner advancing to the Elite Eight of the NCAA Div. III National Tournament. Because they compete in weaker conferences than the NESCAC, teams such as Bridgewater State, Endicott, and Emmanuel, all teams that Tufts handily defeated during the season, will be competing at the regional tournament against Williams. According to coach Cora Thompson, the Ephs should roll through the competition into the Elite Eight. "The only legit teams are Springfield and Williams, and we beat Springfield as well," Thompson said. "As long as Williams plays consistently they will easily advance to the Elite Eight." However, if Tufts had upset Williams in the NESCAC finals, they would have earned the number one seed in the region and Williams would have received an at-large bid into NCAA's, due to the fact that they were nationally ranked (albeit 24th out of 25) all season. "Out of frustration I was trying to get the Williams coach to throw the game so we both could go," Thompson said. Up until four years ago, a committee of coaches in each region determined which teams would make it to the regional tournament. The top six teams in New England would advance, and the winner of the tournament would advance to the Elite Eight. The decision would be based purely on a team's rank in New England, which was determined by the committee of coaches based on win/loss percentage and strength of schedule, the same way the regional rankings are determined today. However, four years ago, the NCAA decided to change the way teams could make it to the National Tournament in order to give more opportunities to the smaller schools of Division III to contend for the national title. As it stands now, every team that wins its conference receives at automatic qualifier into regionals, and the NCAA, in a decision based solely on national ranking, gives out a select number of at-large bids to deserving teams in the country. Based on this method, schools such as Tufts and its New England compatriots generally get squeezed by this process, because they are much more talented than small schools that win their conferences, but are never viewed in the national spotlight. "The NESCAC is by far the toughest conference in New England," Thompson said. "Last year, seven NESCAC teams finished in the top 10 in New England, but with the new system, there is only one team that represents the conference at NCAAs." Thompson understands the NCAA's reasoning behind giving every conference an equal chance, but contends that small schools that make it to the national tournament lose easily in the first round, almost wasting a bid that a better team in a better conference should get. "I understand why they made the change, and for little schools, it benefits them in that they get a chance to advance to the tournament," Thompson said. "But they all get creamed in the first round and it just waters down the competition." Thompson also believes that reverting back to the old format would provide for a much more exciting regional tournament, especially this year with the six teams being Williams, Tufts, Coast Guard, Springfield, and MIT. "A regional tournament with the top six teams in New England would be an absolute bloodbath," Thompson said. "It would be by far the best and most competitive regional tournament in the nation. But as it stands now, Williams will most likely roll through the other teams." In addition, the NCAA also reserves one at-large bid for independent schools (schools that don't belong to any conference) in select regions, with Mt. Ida College receiving that bid this season. The NCAA matched up Mt. Ida against seventh ranked La Verne College, and according to Thompson, essentially wasted a bid because La Verne will have no trouble with Mt. Ida. "The average height on Mt. Ida is 5'6," Thompson said. "That match will be over in 30 minutes. The scores will be something like 30-2 or maybe max 30-7, and Mt. Ida will only score on La Verne serving errors." Despite the Jumbos' obvious disappointment with the abrupt end to their season, the squad certainly will not let the lack of a trip to NCAA's take away from all they accomplished this year. "When I came as a freshman, Tufts Volleyball was a mediocre program," Macy said. "In past years, we were a decent team but never a contender for the conference or the national title. To help lead this program in a new direction and bring it to a new level in a new direction is one of the proudest things I've ever accomplished." "This team broke all sorts of records and expectations, I couldn't ask for better season," Thompson said. "Everything that kept happening was just icing on the cake for us."
Most players in the NFL probably didn't have to worry about doing terribly well on their midterms during their journeys through the collegiate world. Well, here at Tufts, midterms are for everyone, even our star athletes, and in the spirit of fairness (and probably bitterness) "Inside the NFL" is giving its midseason report. It's clich?©, but it has to be done. MVPs: In the NFC, it's got to be Tiki Barber of the New York Giants. The numbers are astounding. Through nine weeks, Barber has rushed for 820 yards and eight touchdowns. He leads the team in receiving as well, with 31 receptions for 411 yards and a score. His 1,231 yards from scrimmage easily lead the league, but what's most astounding is what he's meant for the Giants. Despite let downs, anyone who said that the Giants would be 5-3 at this point in the season, and in place for a possible playoff run, would be tossed in the loony bin. Barber's performance, highlighted by a conspicuous lack of fumbles, has been the key to the team's success. Of course Minnesotans might have something to say about Daunte Culpepper and the freakish numbers he's been putting up for the Minnesota Vikings. Still, last week's loss to the Giants showed how vulnerable the Vikes are without Randy Moss. Culpepper's great, but he hasn't done what Barber has. Terrell Owens has been amazing for the Philadelphia Eagles and deserves a nod, but he has Donovan McNabb throwing him the ball. Barber's got no help on the Giants' offense. As for the AFC, you might want to sit down before you read this. Drew Brees. Yes, Drew Brees is not only still alive but actually still in the employment of an NFL franchise. And not only that, but Brees has led the San Diego Chargers to a 6-3 record. After the Chargers drafted Phillip Rivers with their de facto first pick of the draft, Brees was probably getting ready for some intense Canadian Football action, eh. But something happened: Brees started the season when Rivers held out, and lo and behold, given a great running game and franchise tight end Antonio Gates, Brees has turned into a stud. Brees is now on pace for 3,300 yards, 32 touchdowns and just five picks. Talk about a resurrection. Manning and Brady get their usual mentions in this category, as does New York Jets revival project Curtis Martin, who now seems a shoo in for his tenth-straight 1,000 yard season. But none of these guys have done what Brees has for their teams or themselves. Coach of the Year: Bill Cowher of the Pittsburgh Steelers. No one can nay-say anymore. After shellacking the New England Patriots in Week 8, the new steel curtain smothered the next undefeated team in its path, dominating the Eagles on Sunday in every facet of the game. When Cowher spoke about bringing hard-nosed, run-it-up the gut football back to Pittsburgh at the beginning of the year, it was tough to believe him. The combination of Deuce Staley and Tommy Maddox wasn't exactly fear-inspiring. Enter rookie Ben Rothlisberger and it seems that Cowher has made all the right moves with this team, molding what now appears to be a Super Bowl favorite. Extra recognition should be paid to the Steelers' front office, who passed on top two drafted quarterbacks Rivers and Eli Manning. Rookie of the Year: Rothlisberger, hands down. Since starting in Week 3, Rothlisberger's been 6-0 with a quarterback rating of 105.2. Not since Dan Marino has a rookie quarterback shown such incredible poise, pocket presence and playmaking ability. One sign of Rothlisberger's maturity may be that for all of his success, its easy to envision a media frenzy over the guy, but he's kept very grounded throughout his young career. Roy Williams has been a stud for the Detroit Lions, but his injuries take him out of the running. It's pretty clear, though, that Williams will be the star of the Lions' offense for years to come. Most Improved Golf Game: err ... not the most traditional award, but nonetheless the one that Miami Dolphins head coach Dave Wannstedt has in the bag. As unusual as it may be, there's a distinct possibility that Wannstedt could be fired in the middle of this season, giving him plenty of time to work on the old nine iron hack. It really is a pretty raw deal for the Miami coach, who had built a team around Ricky Williams only to have his stud running back quit football to get high. College students everywhere give a half-smile and a knowing sigh of approval for Ricky, but that probably won't give Wannstedt any consolation when he's checking the want ads in a few weeks.
Last Wednesday marked a difficult day for many of us. Tuesday night was a close and painful loss, and it certainly made me pretty depressed. I know that there are many of us across the country who feel helpless, frustrated and scared for our country. I can't even seriously think about the next four years right now. It would be very easy for us to admit defeat, roll over and let today's victors walk all over us. It would be easy to become disgusted with the political process and with our nation as a whole. It would be even easier to become disengaged and not participate in our democracy. But we must not do this. Rather than become depressed, we must look at the good that came out of the election. First, more Americans voted Tuesday than in any election since 1968. Whether we agree with their opinions or not, that is quite a statistic and says a lot for our democracy. The greatest voter mobilization effort in our nation's history was successful, and 60 percent of Americans went to the polls. That doesn't sound like a whole lot of people, but compared to our history, it is. Many of you are now wondering what it says about our country if, with more Americans voting than ever before, we still elected George W. Bush. The fact is that, once again Bush was elected by a narrow majority of the country. Essentially, he won by 130,000 votes in Ohio, out of more than 115 million votes cast in the country. That's less than .1 percent. On the other hand, our campaign, in which I know many of you were involved, got more Democrats to the polls then ever before. We got the youth involved in politics once again. We garnered almost 56 million votes. We brought millions of people out to vote who had never done so before. We showed the world that, despite what he says and does, Bush does not speak for the whole country. We did outstandingly. They did a little bit better. As my dad told me last Wednesday morning, "You supported a candidate and did your best. There's a lot to be said for that." There really is a lot to be said for doing what we all have for the past months. Back when Kerry won the nomination, when the Bush-Cheney team announced multi-million dollar attack ads, we began mobilizing. We didn't stop until the election, and along the way we helped to unite our party like never before. Let's keep that momentum going. Let's not only concentrate on the Presidency; let's support candidates up and down the ticket. Let's be happy for people like Melissa Bean, a progressive from Illinois, who just got elected to the U.S. House. Marty Walz, another progressive, got 75 percent of the vote to win a seat in the Massachusetts House. Barack Obama is now a senator from Illinois, and Ken Salazar defeated beer mogul Pete Coors in Colorado. Montana (Montana!) now has a Democratic Governor. Democracy for America helped defeat Republicans across the board. There were many more similar victories, but to count them all would take forever. Parts of the election really sucked. But other parts set the undertone for the future. After the Republicans lost overwhelmingly to LBJ in 1964, their party began an effort to build support from the bottom up. They began writing books about their philosophies, forming think tanks and talking about what it meant to be a Republican. We have begun a similar process. The men and women elected will set us up for real change in the future. I look to people like 34-year-old Rep. Harold Ford of Tennessee, who I heard speak at the Kerry rally, to lead us in the future. I expect our party to do some soul-searching in the coming weeks and months, which might not be such a bad thing. I'm confident that once we really find out what it means to be a Democrat, we'll be able to make real change in this country. In the meantime, we must not stop fighting. We must continue to challenge Bush whenever he tries to push forward dangerous and damaging legislation, as I'm sure he will. It may not be a fun fight, and it may not be easy, but it is necessary. We will lay the groundwork for the future so that, when we look back in a few years, we will see Nov. 2, 2004 as the night in which we lost the White House but put into place the leaders of the future. We must continue the work we've done this summer. We must continue to sign petitions, march in the streets, unite our party and support those who will support us. We must give up a night out once or twice a year in exchange for a membership in the ACLU, Planned Parenthood or the Sierra Club. When we get e-mails from MoveOn, we must do what they ask rather than reading them and deleting them. We should write to Sens. Kerry and Edwards, thanking them for the time and effort they've put into this campaign and most of all, for their vision. We must try to convince our family and friends to see the light, even if they will not listen to us. We must even run for office ourselves. We cannot stop until we've brought the people of this country the things they deserve. As Dr. King once said, "Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter." We know the things in which we believe matter. Even though we may not be in the majority right now, we must continue to work so that one day we can show the world the true power of democracy. I was lucky enough to see activist/musician Carole King perform last week. One of her lyrics said, "If you lead/I will follow." Working together, we will be the future leaders of this country. I have faith in, and love, all of you. We have lost, but we are not defeated.Mickey Leibner is a sophomore who has not yet declared a major.
Both an article and an editorial yesterday incorrectly referred to a TCU Senate discussion on the Boston Herald's distribution on campus. The Senate is attempting to minimize the Herald's visibility and its current monopoly status - preferably through getting another major publication delivered freely. According to TCU President Dave Baumwoll, the Senate is not considering banning or preventing the Herald from being delivered at Tufts.
The news that a group of students was evicted from a Somerville house seems to be a sign of Somerville occasionally enforcing its city ordinance, which forbids more than four unrelated people to reside in a single dwelling. This is unfair to Tufts students and Somerville residents alike. If Somerville is to have an occupancy ordinance, it should enforce it at all times. If the city is going to ignore it in most cases, the ordinance should be wiped from the books, as it is unfair for occupants to suddenly find themselves subject to a law rarely used. The law has its intentions in the right place. Housing ordinances are made to keep the occupants safe, and student apartments have infamously had problems following these rules. Even though the unrelated occupancy ordinance seems anachronistic, it does address an understandable concern: fire safety must be nearly impossible to enforce when 17 students live in a typically-sized Somerville house, as they did at 167 College Ave. Somerville is not gaining any respect for its rules, however, by sporadically enforcing this housing ordinance. If it only imposes this ordinance to houses that also have noise violations, it will appear that Somerville is targeting problem houses. Landlords and students may feel that they can break occupancy laws, so long as they keep quiet and not attract attention. This current approach to ordinance enforcement is neither increasing safety in student residences nor boosting the City of Somerville's standing in the eyes of students. The city must find a way to publicize its housing ordinances before students move into an overcrowded house. Currently, both students and landlords are ignorant of city and state housing ordinances. Most students have only heard rumors of the infamous "brothel law," which was repealed in 1984. It is too bad that off-campus students continue to not read or follow city housing ordinances before they move in. Residential Life and Learning's Off-Campus Housing Resource Center Web site has made great strides in the past year and provides students with much more relevant information than it had in the past. But more could be done, especially with the full list of relevant housing ordinances. Additionally, landlords must be held accountable if they break laws when they lease apartments. The landlord of 167 College Ave. must have been aware that he was breaking the Somerville housing ordinance when he allowed 17 people to live in a single abode. By allowing so many students to live together, he was putting their safety at risk in order to gain more rent. The City of Somerville should pursue this matter. If landlords get away with taking advantage of ignorant students, it simply encourages a future pushing of boundaries in the future in the name of profit. It is clear, however, that Somerville's occupancy ordinances are no longer realistic to maintain. Simply restricting the number of unrelated occupants at four does not account for the variety of apartment layouts and the realities of off-campus living. The law should be tied to the size of the space. This will ensure the safety of the residents while not appearing archaic and inflexible. Whether or not the residents of 167 College Ave. knew about the ordinance before does not matter; now, they must move in the middle of the semester. They were lucky that their landlord had extra properties for them to move into, but the next residents Somerville inspects might not be so lucky. Since it seems embarrassingly apparent that a fire that killed a student has not shocked students into making sure their houses meet all the applicable housing standards, maybe the threat of being evicted will.
About the only good news for Democrats coming out of the elections a week ago is that Republicans still do not have enough senators to block a filibuster by the Democrats. At least 60 senators must vote to block a filibuster, which is an effort by a group of senators (generally partisan) to prevent a bill from passing by organizing extended debate or speeches. Thus, any pro-choice advocate concerned about President Bush nominating conservatives who could overturn the Supreme Court's 1973 Roe v. Wade decision should not worry at the moment. Yet after the 2006 Senate elections, the right for a woman to choose whether or not to have an abortion may no longer exist. To begin, two justices, Chief Justice William Rehnquist, who is ailing from thyroid cancer, and Justice John Paul Stevens, who is 84, will probably step down before the end of Bush's second term. As a result, Bush will have the opportunity to nominate at least two people. Given the fact that he is pro-life and has a record of nominating pro-life, staunch conservatives for positions in the U.S Court of Appeals, pro-life nominees for the Supreme Court would hardly be a surprise. The second issue has been the recent controversy surrounding Republican Senator Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, who backs abortion rights. As one of the few pro-choice Republicans, he is a glimmer of hope to abortion-rights advocates who worry about the fate of Roe v Wade. However, Specter, who is in line to head the Senate Judiciary Committee, pledged Sunday not to stall the President's judicial nominees, even if they oppose abortion rights. As head of the Judiciary Committee, the senator would have the power to schedule hearings, set up committee votes and make the process of appointing a justice as easy or as hard as he wants. If Specter lives up to his comments and makes the judicial appointment process a smooth one, even for pro-life nominees, then it will pose a huge problem to abortion-rights advocates. The biggest issue at stake concerning the future of Roe v. Wade will be the results of the 2006 Senate races. There will be 33 Senate elections in 2006, of which 17 seats are currently held by Democrats, 15 by Republicans and one by an independent. Given the seemingly conservative trend in this country, evidenced to the reelection of Bush and net addition of four Republican senators, there is a distinct possibility that the Republicans could gain enough senators to reach the 60-plateau for blocking filibusters. The 2006 Senate races in California, West Virginia, New York, Wisconsin, New Mexico, North Dakota and Florida, all states which are not overwhelmingly Democratic and have a Democratic senator currently in power, will likely be highly contested by Republicans. Thus, the results of the 2006 Senate elections will be the most critical to the future of Roe v. Wade. If Republicans gain enough senators to prevent a filibuster by the Democrats while Bush has the opportunity to nominate justices with Arlen Specter as head of the Senate Judiciary Committee, the right for a woman to choose will probably be lost.Stephan Vitvitsky is a junior majoring in Political Science and Economics.
