BINGHAMTON REVIEW
Copy
Business
Cover
Dear Readers,
From the Editor
Iguess election season came early, if recent events are to be believed: free and fair elections for the Bing Review E-board have been conducted, I’ve interviewed Lisa O’Keefe, Republican candidate for NYS Assembly district 123 (that’s ours, if you’re too busy seasoning your churro to care), and Binghamton College Republicans conducted a mock Presidential election on campus with… surprising results.
If politics isn’t your game, we have a great selection of other genres: Barbara Zavala continues her story of fleeing from Honduras back home to the U.S., Angelo DiTocco punnily excoriates elementary math education, and the mysterious AJW defends the romantic comedy genre from the haters. I really like this issue, and I hope you do too. Let us know in the readership survey below…
Our Mission
Binghamton Review is a non-partisan, student-run news magazine founded in 1987 at Binghamton University. A true liberal arts education expands a student’s horizons and opens one’s mind to a vast array of divergent perspectives. The mark of true maturity is being able to engage with these perspectives rationally while maintaining one’s own convictions. In that spirit, we seek to promote the free and open exchange of ideas and offer alternative viewpoints not normally found on campus. We stand against dogma in all of its forms, both on campus and beyond. We believe in the tenents of free expression and believe all sudents should have a voice on campus to convey their thoughts. Finally, we understand that mutual respect is a necessary component of any prosperous society. We strive to inform, engage with, and perhaps even amuse our readers in carrying out this mission.
Views expressed by writers do not necessarily represent the views of the publication as a whole.
Crossing the Border Part 2: Calling the Coyotes
To recap my previous article, bureaucracy was bureau-crazy. I returned to my home country of Honduras to finalize my application for citizenship in the United States. This application was rejected on a technicality, and if I had stayed in Honduras waiting for an I-35—my ticket for re-entry into the U.S.—to be approved, it would’ve taken at least 7-8 months, likely longer due to COVID. On our very first night in my Honduran childhood home, gang members broke in, pointed a gun at me, and demanded my mom give them the deed to the house. That night, we knew that the safest thing we could do was to be completely and totally gone from the situation. If we called 911, the phone would ring to both places: the police station and the cellphone of the drug lord who monitors these spots, ensuring that the global drug trafficking trade never stops. It would’ve been me, in the middle of the night (madrugada), against the world’s number one organized crime industry. All my life I thought that safety was only 3 phone taps away: 9,1,1. Now, I realize there is no true safety anywhere unless the cop is standing right next to you (and isn’t corrupt themselves).
So, at 6am, we finished calling our dad. He was hell-bent on getting his daughter home. We grabbed our backpacks after collecting the tossed pieces of clothing, and the pieces of hearts, and waited for my aunt to pick us up. She got us, we went to her house, and we waited until 9 am to leave the city, blending in with the traffic. (The gangs keep an eye on who goes in and out.)
I remember feeling emotionally dead during the 3 hour drive out of San Pedro Sula. All of a sudden we arrived at a gas station, where my mom and I would officially be suspended from everything we ever knew, and implicitly trust these now-hired “coyotes”—border smugglers—with our lives. The truck we were getting into was white, and the back row was a tight fit. A tall person would’ve easily broken a knee and a shoulder just getting in. The clothes I packed for two weeks in America were now my only clothing on this trip. It was a gray day, I was wearing fake Converse from Costco. The last thing my aunt told me was, “try to take it like a vacation! Just a very exotic, wild excavation!” I just looked at the ground and hoped the trip would only take two weeks (like the coyote promised), and I was already imagining my home. The plan was to drive up the sides of Honduras’ mountains until we reached the Guatemalan border, and so we did.
The terrain was muddy and it was all dirt road. There were shallow rivers that we traversed frequently. There was a small patch where the mud was too loose, and someone’s car didn’t have the capacity to pull through. These coyotes knew the risk that the truck would get stuck, too, but plowed ahead. We got lucky.
We were halfway there when we saw the soldiers on the pick-up truck. When we crossed the actual border from Honduras into Guatemala, I remember being absolutely shocked that there were no American soldiers (who would have sent us back immediately). It made me realize that nothing is stopping
By Barbara Alexandra Zavala Pinto
the soldiers from letting as many of these caravans go as they want. These soldiers looked like a few young men wearing all black. They accepted a bribe from my coyote, which was probably around 200 lempiras, or 10 USD. Driving on the side of the mountain kind of felt like driving up Bear Mountain, and the car feels like it might fall off the side of the road; the wheels felt as if they hung off the edge. After we crossed the border, the terrain suddenly shifted to low valley. The roads were so rural that shallow rivers one-to-three inches deep were fairly frequent. The road was not smooth. When we’d hit bumps, my head would almost hit the top of the car, and the seat was a hard rubber like suede.
Picture of my Coyote, whose name is Henry Paz. He was well-humored generally, but stern while he was working. The coyotes would communicate through Whatsapp, constantly sending each other voice messages that expired after one play. Never skipping any beats. Never stuttering, nobody was allowed to make a mistake.
The terrain made the trip physically exhausting, despite us sitting the whole time. Still, next thing I knew, we were in Guatemala, where we arrived at a hotel above a restaurant. Guatemala had a colorful palette, full of the most naturalistic primary colors. The mountains were green and tall. The advertisements were in Spanish, and saturated. Seeing the police on the streets riding in the backs of trucks was very common, with their guns in their hands. The coyotes were friends with the owners of a bed and breakfast type restaurant, thus allowing our stay. When I saw where I was staying, I noticed the room was an L-shape, with the bathroom in a corner; maybe the whole square footage was no more than a hundred, and two beds. There was a small A/C, but no hot water. There were small brown ants on my bed, and the walls were a bright gaudy green.
I slept with my red iPhone 8 by my side—the only thing that made my life feel normal. Henry Paz’s part of the job was done when we got to Guatemala. He drove back to Honduras, switching us off to a new coyote. When I woke up, my mom was already up and at it. I went outside, and I found her and the coyote talking
about our next moves. Today we were going to cross the Guatemala-Mexico border. There was some worry about that border closing due to COVID, and the police were presumably extra cautious and predatory. For breakfast, I had a small packaged loaf of bread, and coffee with white sugar in a styrofoam cup. While I was eating, I took pictures from the balcony. I took pictures of the cops, I felt like I was testing them—they didn’t know my situation from the balcony.
My gaudy green room in Guatemala, and the police presence outside. The bed was a tight fit: wall to wall. It would have felt cozy, if it weren’t for the ants. The police’s presence emitted the feeling of prevailing violence, they seemed to be ready for action to arise at any time. I was tired when I woke up. March 11, 2020 7:25 AM. Los Amates, Guatemala
Nobody ever told me any real details. Sure, I knew we were going to take a bus to traverse Guatemala, but where, when, and how much the ticket cost was never shared with me. The bus ticket was a mere piece of paper with confusing numbers and labels. Still, my mom and I got on the bus, which was definitely no Greyhound-comfort vehicle. The glass panes did not fully close, leaving us with no AC, only fresh air (and it was still quite hot). For curtains, two ropes ran along the length of the bus, with pieces of blue fabric running through them, some of those pieces tattered and dancing in the wind. The seats were blue and cushioned as well, with some of their foam exposed, of course. There were electrical plugs by the seats, but to be honest, I forgot if it had a USB port for charging, and if it did, it probably wouldn’t have worked. I absorbed the display of Guatemala before me. I couldn’t have my phone out or it might draw the wrong kind of attention and get stolen. I wanted to take pictures but I could only do so sparingly. It was hot and there were people getting on and off. The dust from outside was breezing through the bus. It smelled like linen and dry petrichor.
A woman selling food and candles came up to the side of the combi, making a living for herself. She was humble and kind. I didn’t purchase any because I wasn’t hungry. She had a woven basket that she pulled up to the window outside of the combi while it was stuck in traffic going 2 mph. A man bought peanuts.
They looked delicious, but I had only one bottle of water with me, and I didn’t want to dry my mouth by eating sugary sweets. The combi barely had any functioning A/C, but I was able to stretch my legs and lay down on the seat next to me. When the scenery of the city and the mountains was over, we reached the plains of farmland and trees. At that point, I was on my phone the entire time. Also, all the temporary passengers got off, and the bus now only carried my mom and me, and other immigrants like us.
We drove the entire day, I was tired. It was only the beginning.
After many hours, we stopped at a deli where I took a picture of 5 quetzales. It was 6:13PM. It was my first time seeing this money. I daydreamed about my favorite songs. I read 1984 a little more. We were riding in a fried out combi, but this track was almost all dirt road and we drove beside a plethora of farms. Many signs in Spanish. I took pictures of views, my favorite things to see because they could be memorialized.
Five Quetzales, the currency of Guatemala. Currently roughly equivalent to sixty-five U.S. cents. I used it to buy chips.
I don’t remember how many I.D. checks there were on the Guatemala bus before we got off, but definitely more than zero. They were so awful and so routine, I must’ve suppressed the memory of the first one because I don’t remember how it went other than how they always go: an immigration officer gets on the bus, yells for everyone to demonstrate ID. If you don’t have one, you will be asked to step off the bus—it is an unspoken walk of shame. Those were the worst. More on those later…
Finally, we arrived at the border of Mexico, and the longest leg of our journey began…
Sunset over Guatemala, seen before I arrived at the border of Mexico.
Honestly,
I
think this country had the bluest sky.
The State of Israel-Palestine Dialogue On Campus, Part II
My previous article created a timeline of events pertaining to the Israel-Palestine debate on campus, up to the February 14th Peace Quad protest. It was there that I interviewed my opposing sources for the article: Saul Hakim of the Binghamton University Zionist Organization (BUZO) and a local Palestinian organizer who asked to remain anonymous. This article aims to expand this timeline to the present and give a final verdict on the “state of Israel-Palestine dialogue on campus.” I once again deeply thank my sources for their time and clarifications as I muddle through the many questions this conflict raises.
The February 14th “Palestine Day Moratorium” Protest
Organized by the Binghamton Solidarity Committee, a loose coalition of local and student groups, the protest brought in organizers from as far as the Democratic Socialists of Northeast Pennsylvania to the Peace Quad of Binghamton University in support of Palestine. According to Saul Hakim, BUZO’s decision to silently counterprotest this event was due to the anonymity of the committee, call for divestment, and also Julie Ha’s editorial in Pipe Dream, “Sexual trauma does not justify further violence in Palestine.”
I was present at this protest—much of it, at least. The following were my observations:
The two sides faced one another on the Peace Quad. Facing north, the pro-Palestinian side stood in a loose arrangement on the left, mainly dressed in red. Some made speeches with megaphones. Some were planned, others were impromptu, according to my anonymous pro-Palestinian source. Mainly, however, the protest saw activists chanting “Revolution is the only solution,” “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free,” and “I believe that we will win.”
BUZO members, meanwhile, stood in a much more rigid line, maintaining silence. The dress code was largely blue and white, some wearing faux-blood stains—referencing the “Sexual trauma” described in Ha’s editorial. An older counterprotestor with a megaphone and draped in the Israeli flag did not observe BUZO’s silence, shouting chants such as “release the hostages.” Hakim told me that this man had no affiliation with the group.
Near sunset, each protest broke. Both returned to the Union where I met both of my sources, interviewing them separately.
Saul Hakim largely refused to comment on broad political issues such as the upcoming presidential elections. He maintained his refusal to comment on Molinaro’s call to ban SJP, though he did suggest that any group promoting Boycott, Divest, Sanction “warrants a thorough examination” on account of its “inherently antisemitic undertones and the obstruction it poses to peace.” He further contended that Israel is not committing genocide in Gaza, dismissing the rhetoric as an appalling appropriation of the Holocaust’s imagery. When asked his opinion on the chants employed in the protests, especially “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free,” Hakim told me, “In my view, these slogans, at their most
By Arthur O’Sullivan
benign, are misguided, and at their worst, they dangerously verge on advocating violence, ethnic cleansing, or even genocide.” He likewise maintained that a two-state solution is possible, calling the status-quo in the region “unacceptable.” He cited BUZO’s co-sponsorship of Hillel’s February 15th “Two Truths, One Land” event as evidence of his faith in the two-state solution. He still noted the diversity of belief within BUZO, as well as globally, on what the most feasible path to peace looks like.
My interview with the anonymous activist for Palestine happened next. I was introduced by “Frankie from Scranton,” a Democratic Socialist field organizer, to a group of leading student-protestors. One person spoke principally, with the rest adding supplementary commentary. Unlike Hakim, the group was willing to speak at length about broad issues, tentatively endorsing the Green Party for the Presidential elections, describing the two mainstream parties as unacceptable for Palestine, and most other issues. When asked whether Israel was committing genocide in Gaza, I referred to the 84-page South African brief to the International Court of Justice, alleging that Israeli rhetoric and actions obviously constitute genocide. Upon asking when this “genocide” began, I was told that Israel’s actions are not necessarily contained to one genocide. Instead, they argued that incidents such as “Project Cast Lead,” alleged use of versions of the “Dahiya” and “Hannibal Doctrines” in this war, and the destruction of cultural objects, buildings, orange and olive trees all indicate a “pattern of ethnic cleansing” against Palestinians. They cited many other things, but I can not include them here. Finally, when asked about the viability of a two-state solution, I was told that it was irrelevant. Even if it were possible, the creation of “two ethnostates” would be immoral, and I was asked rhetorically whether Jews would be more safe surrounded by other hostile ethnostates.
Continuing the Timeline
The next day, February 15th, Hillel held an event titled “Two Truths, One Land,” featuring an Orthodox Rabbi Hanan Schlesinger, a settler in the West Bank, and Palestinian peace activist Noor A’wad, a former refugee from the West Bank. The two are involved in the organization “Roots,” an activist group which attempts to encourage dialogue between local Israelis and Palestinians. From what I could gather from each speaker’s speech, the titular “two truths” on this one land are that the Israeli and Palestinian perspectives are ostensibly built on erasing the other, creating the intractable conflict seen today. Rabbi Schlesinger described the group as “not political, but principled.” He nevertheless maintained that as a practical matter, Israeli settlements in the West Bank ought to be opposed. Saul Hakim largely agreed with the sentiments expressed, emphasizing that there is truth in both perspectives, and that grappling with difficult realities is necessary for peace. My anonymous Palestinian source took a different position, telling me, “I decided not to go. I do not be-
lieve that the event was objective; anecdotal narratives are not a replacement for material analysis.”
On February 27th, a group of activists initiated the “hard launch” of SUNY Boycott, Divest, Sanction (SUNY BDS). This was not without controversy. By February 25th, two days before the “hard launch,” the actual SUNY system had sent a cease and desist letter to the organization for copyright infringement on their name. This came in the wake of a months-long New York Post inquiry, which described SUNY BDS as a “rouge anti-Israel SUNY group.”
On March 5th, the Post followed up with an article titled “SUNY Binghamton students fear flagship school has become ‘perfect target’ for antisemitism.” The paper notes multiple allegations of threats, such as “We tried our best to put you in Auschwitz” and “History will judge Hitler as a hero.” It also noted other incidents described in my previous timeline: Jacob Wisnock’s “Israel is worse than Nazi Germany” comment, protestors’ calls for an “intifada,” Lecture Hall 5 being plastered with pro-Palestinian posters right before a BUZO speaker event there, and Julie Ha’s original editorial on the “debunked” claims of sexual violence in Palestine.
Things remained quiet until March 25th, when “Israel Apartheid Week” began in Binghamton. This involved an array of events and protests from Monday to Friday.
March 26th, the “Day of Action” for SUNY BDS, saw the most activity. For our university, it saw the Binghamton Solidarity Committee protest in front of the University Downtown Center. According to the Facebook event, affiliated groups ranged from the BU Feminist Collective to the Northeast Pennsylvania Democratic Socialists to an “unnamed group of communists with a cat logo” [sic].
There, protestors called for Binghamton’s divestment from Israeli institutions. My anonymous pro-Palestinian source tells me that an aggressive girl videotaped her and her friend, trying to catch them saying something incriminating without much success.
The following day, March 27th, the Latin American Student Union and SJP gave away Palestinian flags in front of the library. This attracted some debate. I personally saw an intense discussion taking place between those at the Palestinian table and two girls with an Israeli flag. I was told that these girls engaged “in hopes of ‘enlightening’ us on the wrongness of our views, our ‘delusional/not fully informed’ perspective; their intention as far as I can perceive was about changing our minds and/or shaming us.” I was likewise told that although the discussion was intense, and even sometimes hostile and defensive, the conversation didn’t seem aggressive from my pro-Palestine source’s point of view. Yet the argument seemed ultimately fruitless. As my source said, “I engaged in that dialogue with no intention or belief in changing minds; if 40,000 dead in six months does not give you pause, then who am I to give you pause?”
Finally, on April 10th (the day of publication), the New Yiddish Bund of Binghamton is calling for support for Gaza and a permanent cease-fire in the Binghamton City Council. That same day, BUZO and Hillel will be hosting Shye Weinstein, a survivor of the October 7th attack, to speak on campus. This magazine, being produced on April 4th, is not aware of the City Council’s final decision nor the results of Weinstein’s speaking
Conclusion - The Prospects of Peace
After writing almost four thousand words describing the recent history of the Israel-Palestine issue on campus, I have left only a few hundred words for analysis. Of course, this is not nearly enough room to evaluate the merits of each side’s arguments as they pertain to the region. I know that saying “it’s complicated” when discussing the conflict is rightfully dismissed as gauche. Nevertheless, it’s complicated.
Though not as bad as other colleges described in a previous article, I hope that I have demonstrated that Binghamton’s activism is still pathological. Whether it’s pro-Israel students shouting down or harassing protestors, or the numerous outrageous statements and actions from the pro-Palestinian side that reach national and international news, this university’s climate is dreadful for discussion. Still, I do not want to “both sides” this too much: I believe that one group has done worse than the other.
I came into this article with a pro-Israel bias. Despite this, my pro-Palestianian source is correct in saying that 40,000 dead must give anyone pause. The day I write this, Israeli airstrikes killed seven aid workers from the World Central Kitchen. If there were ever a time to persuade people like me of the Palestinian cause, it would be now. Bear this in mind when I contend that the current activism for Palestine is actively making things worse— for both the cause and for the campus as a whole—even more so the most aggravating pro-Israel activists I have described.
Pro-Israel activism on campus is generally restrained, upholding silence, not cooperating with fringe organizations, and not commenting on far-afield political issues. Although the worst of pro-Israel activists break from these principles, leadership in BUZO and other groups do not let them speak for the cause as a whole. Contrast this with recent pro-Palestinine activism: anyone could and would speak for everyone, allowing all sorts of explosive, alienating sentiments to be issued (“Intifada!,” “Worse than Nazi Germany,” “Claims of sexual violence debunked” etc.). This is not to mention the fringe organizations, namely communists, which have been free to speak at and for these protests.
You might still dismiss this as “both sides” nonsense. So what if the Palestinian cause is “alienating” to my sheltered Western feelings? If Israel is committing genocide, than everyone must unite against it. But there’s the rub: it’s incumbent on the Palestinian cause—the accusers—to demonstrate the “obviousness” of this genocide. This involves more than throwing contested buzzwords around and demanding that one unquestioningly read an 87-page legal brief. This involves laser-focused activism and “managing the message” at all events. In this, the cause as a whole has failed.
Although I spent so many words on the February 14th protest, I found that the “Two Truths, One Land” event of the following day much more revealing. I agree with my pro-Palestine source that “anecdotal narratives are not a replacement for material analysis,” and I hardly found the central claim—that one must be “100% pro-Israel” and “100% pro-Palestine”—to be meaningful, much less persuasive. Still, I agree most with Saul’s interpretation, that it is only through authentic, productive dialogue that peace can be achieved. But if our campus is any indication, that kind of dialogue is a long way off.
An Interview with Lisa O’Keefe, NYS Assembly Candidate
In case you haven’t noticed, it’s an election year. Before the federal drama of a Biden-Trump rematch consumes us this fall, I’d like to draw student attention to more local races. I did the same in Happy Medium last fall for Binghamton’s city council race, Johnson City’s mayoral race, and Broome County’s District Attorney race. This year, we turn our eyes to Albany, where elections for NYS assembly will impact everyone at this university. To that end, I have interviewed the main candidates for our assembly district (123): the Republican Lisa O’Keefe, and incumbent Democrat Donna Lupardo. O’Keefe will make her case in this issue, and Lupardo in the next. In doing this, I hope to encourage at least a modicum of local political knowledge and engagement at Binghamton University. Even if you don’t vote, it’s important to know who’s representing you and their potential impact on your lives at this university.
Let’s start with a brief introduction: What’s your background in Broome County, and why are you running in this district specifically?
I moved to Binghamton in 5th grade when my father, career Air Force, volunteered for Vietnam. My parents chose Binghamton because they were born and raised here and wanted us to grow and prosper in this thriving community.
In my teens, I worked on various campaigns including one election where the Democrats and Republicans allowed me to simultaneously work on a campaign from each of their headquarters. Both sides knew that negative and self-serving politics has no place in government. To make for a better place to live, a candidate needs to go beyond their party and represent the people.
Later, I became a Broome Legislative Intern and County Executive for the Day. I graduated from Broome and SUNY Oswego with a degree in Political Science and became a Senate Session Assistant, where I crafted a bill to protect child actors that is still in effect to this day.
My background in Broome also includes me working for WICZ-TV, having 2 magazines to promote this area and being a community organizer.
I am running because each one of us must be a dynamic partner for the solution to make this a better place to live. Teamwork is essential to conquer any problem with emphasis focused on the best overall effective solution. This was how I conducted myself when I was elected to office in Connecticut and how I will conduct myself when I win this election.
Of note, I had moved outside this area to Connecticut due to my work and my marriage, but when my husband died I made the choice to come back here. I could have moved anywhere but I chose Binghamton because it is home. When I returned I was saddened to find that this area had changed: it still had the beautiful landscapes and caring residents, businesses and students who were fully dedicated to helping shape this area and we still had the innovation that we have always been known for, but this area failed to keep up with the needs of any thriving community.
By Arthur O’Sullivan
It stopped being the “Valley of Opportunity” and this void became filled with so many negatives that I knew I had to step up to the plate.
My opponent has had 20 years in office. Failure to thrive stems from elected officials’ actions and mis-actions. Now is the time for a new set of eyes—a new way of doing things. Now is the time to make for a positive change.
Why are you interested in the state assembly, as opposed to other offices?
One should only run for office if there is a need. This office has made missteps and inactions that have made victims of us all. My efforts, based on my proven practical experience, will afford the constituents of my district better and more focused government activities to resolve problems which focus negatively on us in the state in general and on the 123rd district in particular.
Why should students be interested in the state assembly race? More specifically, what tangible benefits would your office bring to Binghamton University, SUNY Broome etc., if elected?
Students should be interested in all races. It is their voice that matters; it is their voice that elected officials are mandated to represent. In the Assembly, I will play a critical role in education based on my experience as a teacher. Where others look to cut the education budget in areas such as special education, or shifting money to wealthy neighborhoods rather than where it needs to be used, I do not. Students are our future. We need to provide them with the tools and resources to be successful in life. This means not only equipping schools with the educational resources, but also providing for safe learning environments free of asbestos and lead. And it involves listening—listening not only to the administrators and teachers but to the students as well. It is from open communication that the needs that schools and students have will be achieved.
Finally, all races afford students visibility. Even though the students are visible to the eye, their needs and them as people are not seen. I understand the sacrifices the students make to afford their studies, their internships, and their strong sense of volunteerism in this community—all without any compensation. I see you and I know that as you help campaigns, it is just one more way that others will see you as well. Never allow yourself to be invisible. Work every day at making others see you and what you bring to this community and this world.
What sets you apart from other candidates, both Democrat and Republican—past and present?
I am one of you. I’m not a career politician nor a person of wealth. I’m the average person who wants to do good in my part of the world. Isn’t that what all of us want? Some, because of power or position, forget that basic fact. It’s with that fact that I have never stood on party lines and will never put special interests above the needs of the people. As simple as this sounds it is
a more novel approach to modern government—an approach I hope will catch on.
What reforms (if any) do you intend to make to the office of Assembly District 123, if elected?
When COVID hit and people lost their jobs and businesses closed their doors, State legislators voted themselves a 29% raise. They are now the highest-paid state legislature in the nation— plus they can hold another job. The practice of having an employee set their own raises at whatever level and whenever they want is wrong. We, the people, are the employer and the state legislators are our employees. We hire them through our vote. Raises for state legislatures should be voted on by the people at the polls.
To ensure money is spent in the best interest of the taxpayers, I would mandate a cap on discretionary funds with full transparency and accountability to prevent waste, distortion of priorities and corruption. The 2024 Executive budget proposal appropriates $14.8 billion in discretionary funds where only the Governor and State legislature can decide where, when and how the money is to be spent and without any public scrutiny.
I would rid us of using taxpayer dollars to fund political races. Our state legislature passed a bill allowing those running for Assembly $175,000 of taxpayer dollars to pay for political activities. This results in higher taxes. Taxpayer dollars should only be used on goods and services that provide benefit to the people and not provide benefit to a political candidate.
What obstacles do you expect to encounter, both in this race and in your office, if elected? How do you plan to deal with them?
I am approaching this race from the point of view of change. Psychologists recognize that humans have a preference for familiarity and will resist change even if it’s profoundly positive. For example, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 faced significant opposition from many even though it advanced greater equity—a greater good created because of change. Let’s apply this to my race. We have an incumbent who has been in office for 20 years. During this period, we have seen this area change from being known as the Valley of Opportunity to being known as the county with the second highest poverty rate in NYS. Yet, this gradual and consistent decline under her watch has seen her narrowly hold onto office because of the natural tendency for people to resist change. But the tides are about to change. People are now standing up to say they want more—they demand more. I will educate them on the issues and present to them the bills in their entirety so they can form their own opinion. That is how a democracy works. Give people the information. Then, at the polls, if they agree with the issues I stand on, they will vote for me. This belief in people is how I approached my race when I won overwhelmingly and it is how I am approaching my race now. I will be the voice of the people and I will give them the resources they need to make educated decisions in this partnership.
The other change I represent is that I am not a party person. There are people who vote straight based on party alone. And there are elected officials who vote in support of a bill only if it is introduced by their own party members. Both of these actions are a disservice. I believe in voting for the person and not for the party. When I was in elected office I voted based on my constituents’ needs and not my party’s demands. Although this is the intent of our democratic process—to elect people who truly will be
our voice in government—it is more common for some in office to represent the interests of their party and special interest groups. I will not do that. I am only running to save this state and our corner of it. Because of my hard stand, I am running a grassroots campaign. I know where my allegiance is owed and it is owed to the people.
Is there any specific legislation, proposed either by yourself or your colleagues, that you are enthusiastic about? If so, why should students be interested in this legislation?
Soft-on-crime legislation lets criminals like Isaac Rodriquez out without bail to commit 56 more violent crimes before his court date for the first offense, or where those who have committed heinous crimes are given the names and home addresses of all witnesses to their crime 35 days after being released, and well before their court date. I will introduce legislation to get rid of these bills and propose legislation founded on research, statistics and proven methodologies to keep us safe. And I will propose legislation that prevents crime from happening in the first place.
Specifically, I will propose legislation to increase our mental health and substance abuse resources, reduce the abuse of elderly by making home health care aids mandated reporters and by offering a 24/7 three digit hotline for them, advance education needs, help the veterans, economy and more to move us forward.
Republicans have remained a minority party in the NYS Assembly for decades, and that’s unlikely to change. What impact do you think your office will have without a partisan majority?
While Republicans may not hold the majority in the State Legislature, they have been successful in introducing bills that have become law. This happens when legislation is based on the true needs of the people. Republicans also wield influence through negotiation and strategic alliances to advance the interests of their constituents. And remember that an elected official is the voice of the people. By interacting with their constituents, they can raise the individual voices to a larger audience that has the power to make the positive changes needed. They can raise awareness for important issues and mobilize support for needed issues. And they can provide the oversight and accountability that is needed with a two-party system that affords healthy debate to more fully understand issues and revise legislation to provide maximum benefit.
If your candidacy fails, how might you continue to press your agenda, both in this district and New York in general?
Failing is not an option. New York has been labeled a “mega loser state” by Shark Tank’s Kevin O’Leary and other investors who are leaving to other states. There are empty office buildings and vacant homes littering the entire state. The mass exodus by those from all demographics is being driven by crime, taxes, crashing economy and lack of affordability, jobs and livability. We can’t even keep the brilliant minds that graduate from Binghamton University. This human bleed is expected to increase in coming months if we do not make a positive change founded on sound, effective legislation and spending being allocated on the services and programs we need. Make no mistake about it: the clock is ticking. We are at the eleventh hour. The time is now to educate the voters and win this election to save our state.
TRUMP WINS MOCK ELECTION AT BINGHAMTON UNIVERSITY
By Logan Blakeslee
The implausible has become reality at our beloved Binghamton University. Not since Truman beat Dewey has this college been so thoroughly shaken to its core. Donald J. Trump proved victorious during the campus mock election held on March 18, 2024. It is this humble author’s opinion that these results reveal the hopes and reservations held by the larger student body, despite the relatively small sample size. Younger voters have made their dissatisfaction with the Biden administration known, and that could make all the difference come November.
One fellow wrote in “Harvey Stenger” and we should all be glad that Mr. Stenger did not receive more votes than this, lest his ego expand to the outer cosmos.
torate in a landslide, considering the overwhelming registration advantage that Democrats have over Republicans at Binghamton University and other SUNY schools. Around campus there have been posters recruiting students into the Robert F. Kennedy Jr. campaign, but I initially regarded them as unimportant and somewhat desperate. How wrong I was! One of the more interesting conclusions from this mock election is that Kennedy is doing remarkably well among younger voters, strengthening the notion that his campaign is a spoiler for Biden.
I was introduced to the idea of a campus mock election by the Leadership Institute during their Youth Leadership School, which was hosted in San Antonio, TX from March 8-11, 2024. The organizers behind the conference explained how to conduct a typical mock election and the College Republicans chapter at Binghamton followed the steps as closely as possible, with some limitations due to time or budget constraints. Informal assistance was given by the university’s Center for Civic Engagement. I extend my gratitude to their office for printing the mock ballots and lending the materials for voter registration at the event.
I ran the table (generously loaned out by the Student Association office) on the spine walkway from noon to 4 PM, just outside the main entrance to the University Union. Temperatures were frigid throughout the day and I regrettably caught a cold by the end of it. Still, the success of the mock election warmed my spirits and showed me how much college students care about national issues, as well as the quality of their government. I extend my infinite gratitude to the fellow members of College Republicans and College Libertarians who assisted me in running the table during the mock election, and who faced the extreme cold with patriotic resilience.
Around campus there have been posters recruiting students into the Robert F. Kennedy Jr. campaign, but I initially regarded them as unimportant and somewhat desperate. How wrong I was!
Initially, fifty ballots were printed and a decent selection of cookies, chips, and cupcakes were offered in exchange for completing one. Care was taken to ensure that people did not vote multiple times, either to skew the final tally or acquire more delectable goods. Around 2:30 PM, the supply of ballots ran dry and ten more had to be printed to meet the demand. While some visitors were enthusiastic about their preferred candidate, most participants I spoke with (which was only a small handful) voiced their concern of having a rematch between Biden and Trump. It was anticipated that Biden would carry the student elec-
Another conclusion that I drew was that the ongoing conflict between Israel and Palestine hurts Biden with the student vote almost as much as a third-party candidate. Young progressives and liberals are refusing to support an administration that is slow to advocate for a ceasefire. Although Kennedy is staunchly pro-Israel, the power of a protest vote cannot go ignored. Similarly, no-faith voters achieved the third highest tally as they selected “None of the Above’’ as their preferred candidate. These votes represent constituents who were either actively opposed or just ambivalent towards all candidates.
The write-in results also had a strong showing, but there was a wide variation in whom people selected for president on this line. Lots of students simply wrote in their own name, but a small few chose Nikki Haley or Ron DeSantis, indicating that dissidents still exist in the conservative sphere of influence. One fellow wrote in “Harvey Stenger” and we should all be glad that Mr. Stenger did not receive more votes than this, lest his ego expand to the outer cosmos.
Disappointingly (to me), Libertarian Chase Oliver received zero votes and the two other third-party candidates, Jill Stein and Cornel West, only did marginally better. Given the fact that Stein and West are both very ideologically progressive, it is safe to say that their bids are detrimental—if only slightly—to Biden’s reelection chances. Trump has his work cut out for him, but certain things work in his favor. Inflation remains a lingering issue for the country and Democrats are failing in their effort to convince Americans that the economy is booming. Gas prices are another thorn in the Democrats’ side.
Despite a cavalcade of logistical problems in the Republican National Committee and Trump’s ongoing battles in court, he is the frontrunner of the general election, both nationally and at Binghamton University. I never imagined that I would be able to write a sentence like that. Time will tell if Trump will harness the MBGA (Make Binghamton Great Again) energy and campaign more aggressively for college-educated voters, the same crowd that helped deliver victory to Joe Biden in 2020. The mock election, I believe, hints that Republicans can make a viable bid for the student vote and actually win it.
Two graphs are attached below which demonstrate how the votes were distributed among the candidates, including raw numbers and percentages. Oliver is excluded due to not earning a single vote; Libertarians everywhere are still seething. The simple breakdown is as follows:
Donald Trump (Republican): 14
Joe Biden (Democratic): 13
None of the Above: 11
Robert Kennedy Jr. (Independent): 9
Write-in: 8
Jill Stein (Green): 3
Cornel West (Independent): 1
Chase Oliver (Libertarian): 0
Total: 59
The Horrors of Minute Math
By Angelo DiTocco
Many adults long to experience the joys of being a child again. There were no bills to pay, no appointments to make, and no worries about politics or economics. But I’m not quite as nostalgic for the past. There might not have been anything wrong with how my parents raised me, but I still see my childhood as an era characterized by extremely early bedtimes, dinners I hated eating, and little-to-no control over where I went. And although higher education may be riddled with difficult labs and useless gen-eds, I still think elementary school was worse. Some parts of it were just so irrational that they almost drove me insane.
A particularly frustrating part of my early education was an exercise known as “Minute Math.” As its name might suggest, this was a type of workrsheet we were periodically given and told to try to finish in under a minute. The worksheet contained 30 multiplication problems with factors up to 12 (or 30 division problems with quotients and divisors up to 12). This meant that in order to complete the challenge, you would have to spend an average of under 2 seconds on each problem. Note that the calculation used to determine that number, 60 divided by 30, was not a problem you could get in Minute Math. That should give you an idea of how unhelpful it was in the long run I have always been ahead of the curve when it comes to math, but at the time, I didn’t have the necessary speed to finish every problem in under a minute. I would always fall a bit short, maybe completing 20 or 25 problems before time ran out. This rate would still be good enough for anyone in future grades using multiplication or division as an intermediate step in higher-level computations. However, I was under the impression that I wouldn’t truly be good at math unless I could beat the time challenge. I don’t have any proof that my teachers actually implied this—it could have just been a delusion that I created myself. Nevertheless, I wasn’t happy with my results. So I tried again and again, going through all the worksheets my teacher gave me and then going online to print out my own. I got through 26 problems, then 27, then 28. After several attempts, I was able to finish all 30 problems in under a minute, and I was finally satisfied with the product of my efforts. But the underlying problems in elementary math education remained.
Doing math as a kid was more of a chore than a learning process, at least for me. It seemed like each new topic I learned would be repeated infinitely, and moving on to topics that were actually interesting was not an option until we were absolute masters of the basics. Even variations as simple as adding the ¢ symbol at the end of each two-digit number had dozens of extra homework assignments associated with them (funny enough, doing math with amounts strictly under a dollar is basically useless now because of how bad the economy has gotten, but that’s a tangent for another day). This level of repetition is practically unseen in higher education, where each new topic is given several days at most.
The boring and repetitive nature of elementary math education can be blamed on a number of factors. It could be due
to overworked teachers not having enough time to figure out how to properly pace their lessons, or it could be mandated by state governments who aren’t quite on the same wavelength as educators. Whatever the reason may be, the current system is causing problems for students later down the line. Not only is it turning off students from taking higher-level math classes they might be easily capable of, but the focus on speed could be causing them to mistakenly think they have ADHD or other learning disabilities.
The way I see it, there’s really no need for students to be forced to have a perfect memory of basic arithmetic problems that can be accessed at lightning-fast speeds. In secondary math education, lessons on how to find the values of more advanced functions such as square roots and sines by hand are nowhere to be seen. Methods do exist for doing so, but students are instead just taught the greater purposes of these functions, including what they represent and what they can be used for. We’re then allowed to use calculators to actually compute these values (before calculators were invented, our ancestors did this with massive lookup tables). And in most science classes, students are given reference tables with all the relevant formulas and numerical data, as they’re really being evaluated on their understanding of the concepts.
So why not allow elementary-schoolers to hold on to their multiplication tables or use four-function calculators while they move on to more interesting topics like basic algebra and geometry? Not only will this proposition allow students to understand the point of learning math when calculators exist, but they’ll eventually become more acquainted with the basic operations anyway as they gain experience using them in more complex calculations.
There wasn’t anything truly horrific about Minute Math as the title might have implied; it was really just a fraction of the many issues that plague today’s society. Still, it’s a prime example of what’s wrong with elementary math education as a whole. It easily shows that too much emphasis is put on pure memorization and speed rather than on actual understanding and application of the underlying concepts. Luckily, the education system is variable, so I can only hope that my future children will be spending their time on something orders of magnitude more useful than repeatedly trying to solve 30 math problems in 60 seconds.
In Defense of 27 Dresses
By AJW
My love for the romantic comedy is similar to how most people feel about a beloved childhood pet, but not everyone shares my enthusiasm. Perhaps it’s because they didn’t grow up with them, or maybe they’re viewing them through the same lens as something more critically acclaimed. To me, it seems most people’s discontentment with the genre comes from the fact that they’re cheesy, predictable, with no purpose or heart. I recommend these people watch any Fast and the Furious movie for comparison. There are 12 to choose from.
27 Dresses follows a young Katherine Heigl obsessed with weddings, and her model-like little sister who gets everything she wants. Heigl has been in 27 weddings as a bridesmaid, and does not appreciate the comments people make about how she likes to spend her time. She’s in love with her philanthropic boss, who is in turn instantly-in-love with her younger sister. They get engaged within two weeks and take over Heigl’s dream of getting married in the same way their mother was (in the Central Park boathouse, wearing the same gown). Heigl’s obsession with a certain wedding vows columnist turns to a nightmare when he is intrigued by her after meeting at a wedding where she traveled back and forth between that one and another where she was also a bridesmaid, paying a taxi driver to drive between the two as she swaps dresses in the backseat. The columnist covers the sister’s wedding as a way to learn more about Heigl, culminating in him writing a story exposing her wedding fetish—though by this point they’ve essentially fallen in love. Over the course of the film the sister turns into a bridezilla while Heigl is in anguish planning the wedding of the man of her dreams. She breaks down at their engagement party, showing a slideshow of all the lies the sister has told her boss. Happy ending eventually ensues for all.
character who is a full-grown adult capable of understanding why she spends her time as she does, and a love interest who is becoming less cynical about the idea of marriage as time goes on… Yes! Everyone should end up alone and finding new hobbies they surely just had a hidden, off-screen interest in the whole time.
Or, are they suggesting that this movie shouldn’t exist at all? This, I think, would be even more ridiculous. Imagine saying watching someone hope to marry their crush and help people have an enjoyable wedding day is worse material than, say, the multiple several minutes long uninterrupted shootouts in Heat
Who doesn’t want Ryan Reynolds to confess his great secret love to you in a mansion in Alaska? Or Matthew McConaughey chasing down your taxi, forgiving you for lying?
Romantic comedies are not some great-kept secret of film greatness, or made as a way to send an important life message to their audiences. The reason they’re almost synonymous with Hallmark is because they exist just to make you feel good. Who doesn’t want Ryan Reynolds to confess his great secret love to you in a mansion in Alaska? Or Matthew McConaughey chasing down your taxi, forgiving you for lying?
27
Dresses might be corny and pointless, but it’s also not trying to be anything else.
Personally, I wouldn’t dare watch Mission Impossible and try to find a deeper meaning than Tom Cruise runs good.
And come on! The love interest is James Marsden of Prince Charming Enchanted fame. It’s not that serious.
In the reviews about this film it seems to come down to many people claiming the point of the film is to tell young women that their greatest aspiration in life should be to get married. I would like to reiterate at this point that this is a romantic comedy, a genre known to end in happy endings, which in our society often means a big wedding. In addition to this, the closest people around Heigl consistently show disapproval for her way of thinking so single-mindedly on weddings. And come on! The love interest is James Marsden of Prince Charming Enchanted fame. It’s not that serious.
I wonder what they think a better ending would be? A movie where every scene is plagued by weddings, a main
The obsession with making your favorite things out to be better than they are is truly pointless, because no one wins. Things don’t need to be great to be your favorite. The Office is not some comedy miracle, it’s an average television show that millions of people have watched and loved. It’s made to be familiar and relatable, and that’s why people find it so great, not because it’s actually groundbreaking. Gilmore Girls, another staple of 21st century media, is essentially visual comfort food. Soft lighting, low-risk drama, junk food being the only thing consumed in every episode. And yet, one of these series is held as an important and unique facet of current media, and the other a sequential chick-flick. Neither of these have to be better or worse than the other to be beloved.
27 Dresses might be corny and pointless, but it’s also not trying to be anything else. Personally, I wouldn’t dare watch Mission Impossible and try to find a deeper meaning than Tom Cruise runs good. Imagine having the worst week of your life: Your partner has broken up with you, your parents said something cruel, you failed your chem test. You want to do something passive. You want to stuff your face with grease and sugar and ignore all human contact – what are you watching? Because I am not watching The Revenant
BIG CORPORATION GIVES $ TO SCHOOL TO FUND AI RESEARCH
By Calan Ibrahim
(Headline so vague and in CAPS you feel a certain way without reading further)
On March 26th, Bloomberg L.P. co-founder and Binghamton Alum Tom Secunda pledged to donate 5 million dollars to Binghamton University to help “to attract, recruit and retain tech talent, creating a pipeline for students to participate in the artificial intelligence economy of the future.” This is all in line and contingent on the passing of Governor Hochul’s Empire AI Initiative in the 2025 NY state budget.
Tom Secunda, Binghamton’s multi-million dollar donor for AI research..
According to the governor’s website, “(Empire AI) will create and launch a state-of-the-art artificial intelligence computing center in Upstate New York to be used by New York’s leading institutions to promote responsible research and development, create jobs, and unlock AI opportunities focused on public good.” This will be done via a consortium of public and private actors, including New York’s top public research institutions and private ones such as The Simons Foundation, a private community of scientists who intend to advance research through computational methods.
Hochul intends the program to bridge the gap between large technology companies, who currently control a fair share of the capital in AI development, and the smaller private operations such as public-interest groups, researchers, and small companies who are currently being left for scraps. All of this will be funded by over $400 million dollars in private and public investment. This includes $275 million from the state in grants and other funding plus $125 million through private contributions, such as Mr. Secunda’s.
Secunda’s donation would bolster Binghamton’s already robust AI research and development which vary from protecting power systems from malicious attacks or developing a robotic seeing-eye dog for the blind. According to State Senator
Webb, another Bing Alum, this would “help Binghamton University build a pipeline for students to participate in artificial intelligence and bolster economic development and job creation in the Southern Tier.” The senator’s comments about economic development are indicative of the wider intention of Hochul’s program which, in addition to evening the playing field in AI development, intends to attract companies such as Micron and TTM Technologies to make New York a hub for semiconductor research and manufacturing. Upstate New York used to be a hub for industry and tech with companies such as Kodak in Rochester or IBM close by in Endicott. Due to a multitude of reasons such as a transforming fossil fuel-based economy and poor policy decisions that incentivized many businesses to congregate in larger urban centers, these efforts are especially important in the precarious times we face with China threatening the majority of global semiconductor production with their hostile behavior towards Taiwan and the efforts of the Biden administration to address a potential recession amidst the widening wealth divide in this country.
Along with all of this, Hochul ordered the Office of Information Technology Services to create a novel AI Policy to be followed by this consortium. Reading through the policy, Hochul’s efforts are incredibly noble in ensuring that while she does not want to go full Luddite and shun the technology entirely, she intends any use of AI to be monitored by a human body that will make any final decisions when it’s used, and constantly adapt their policies to keep up with the ever-increasing speed at which the technology develops. These guidelines cover all fields from data privacy to copyright infringement through generative art.
I believe Hochul’s program is the perfect amount of government intervention in an emerging field such as this. She intends to get her foot in the door to ensure people like Mark Zuckerberg and Elon Musk don’t set the precedent for the development of this technology. Now, please do not conflate that last sentence with me wanting the development of this technology to be an exclusive big-brother-esque government monopoly. Clearly, her program intends to leave space for innovation from ALL sectors of the market. While I wouldn’t consider myself a blue-haired glue sniffing socialist when it comes to the federal government’s role in the economy, it is absolutely important that the state act as nothing more than a simple mediator to ensure that the antitrust ghost of Teddy Roosevelt doesn’t damn us to Hell for pretending that entirely trusting the development of this technology with an ego-driven shitposter and a potential lizard is really the way for a bright, holistic, future.
