November 12, 2018 by The Daily Princetonian

Founded 1876 daily since 1892 online since 1998

Monday November 12, 2018 vol. CXLII no. 99

Twitter: @princetonian Facebook: The Daily Princetonian YouTube: The Daily Princetonian Instagram: @dailyprincetonian

{ www.dailyprincetonian.com }

U . A F FA I R S

Five hospitalized after bus crashes en route to Bulldogs football game By Linh Nguyen Senior Writer

At around 10 a.m. on Saturday, Nov. 10, a Coach USA bus transporting University students to the Princeton versus Yale football game crashed into a building in West Haven, Conn., approximately 10 minutes from New Haven. At least six ambulances were requested and a total of five individuals, including the driver, were transported to the hospital directly from the scene of the accident. The driver was the last to be extricated from the bus. Leonela Serrano ’22, one of the four students hospitalized immediately, recounted her experience upon the bus’s collision with the building. “I remember that things got bumpy and we were continuing to go,” Serrano said. “And I remember the impact and feeling glass rain over me.” Serrano noted that she was discharged from the Yale New Haven Hospital “within the next hour, hour and a half.” Deputy Dean of Undergraduate Students Thomas Dunne confirmed in an email to The Daily Princetonian that the driver was discharged on the same day.

A University statement affirmed that the four students suffered minor injuries that were identified immediately on the scene. However, at least two other students sought medical care upon returning to campus. Chris Gliwa ’21 recalled the medical inspections of each student immediately after being evacuated from the bus. “Everyone formed a line and doctors from Yale Medical checked us out,” Gliwa said. “Initially, I felt fine, but it was definitely because of the adrenaline rush.” According to the medical practitioner whom Gliwa visited at InFocus Urgent Care in West Windsor Township, Gliwa developed spasmodic torticollis, a neurological movement disorder, as a result of the accident. Daisy Torres ’22 said that when a “wooden ledge crashed through the window,” she immediately put her hand up to protect her face, causing her hands to be “covered in glass.” “I was a bit reluctant to go to the hospital during my time at West Haven because I just wasn’t feeling that bad, but McCosh wanted to make sure I was good,” said Torres, who also hit her head

TOWN

COURTESY OF CHRIS GLIWA ’21

The Coach USA bus crashed into an Anderson Glass Company building in West Haven, CT.

on the ceiling of the bus. Torres went to Princeton Medical Center Saturday night at 11 p.m. and was discharged two hours later. Fox 61 reported that the accident was believed to be a result of brake failure. Every student interviewed by the ‘Prince’ reported the same “bumpy” sensation as the bus hurtled down the side road. “The bus was moving up and

down really fast and I heard people screaming,” said Karen Gan ’22. According to @ctnewsalert on Twitter, the bus crashed “in the vicinity of the Campbell Ave. offramp to I-95.” WTNH reported that the bus crashed into a building belonging to the Anderson Glass Company, an auto glass company in West Haven. Gliwa said that the employees

in the adjacent building, which was unscathed, ran out to help despite the fact that “there were live wires everywhere.” The commercial buses were arranged by the Undergraduate Student Government to provide transportation for students to the football game at 12:30 p.m. After the bus accident, some students opted to take the train back to the University instead of riding another Coach USA bus. “My friends and I took a train back,” Gan said. “We just didn’t feel safe getting on the bus.” Torres, who rode back with Gan, echoed her sentiments and noted her newfound discomfort with Coach USA. “I don’t think I’m scarred for life,” Torres said. “But in the near future, I don’t see myself getting on a Coach USA bus again.” During the weekly USG meeting that took place on Sunday at 8 p.m., Dunne stated that the University would continue to use Coach USA buses, at the very least for the USG-sponsored Thanksgiving buses. “From a safety perspective, I think that it’s important not to take one isolated incident and extrapolate it out that somehow it’s not a safe option,” Dunne said.

ON CAMPUS

Report: Fatal Panera Columbia professor Hirsch discusses shooting was justified drinking culture, toxic masculinity By David Veldran and Sarah Warman Hirschfield Contributor and Associate News and Video Editor

On Nov. 9, the two members of the New Jersey State Police SWAT unit who fatally shot Scott L. Mielentz at the Nassau Street Panera Bread last March were cleared of wrongdoing. The New Jersey Attorney General’s office released a report on Friday justifying the use of deadly force. The office analyzed video captured on the restaurant’s surveillance system, some of which has been released to the public, and it interviewed the parties involved. It detailed the four-hour standoff between Mielentz and authorities and concluded that the officers were not at fault in their decision to shoot Mielentz. “An officer may use deadly force in New Jersey when the officer reasonably believes it is immediately necessary to protect the officer or another person from imminent danger of death or serious bodily harm,” the report said. According to the report, the officers believed that Mielentz was armed with a real gun, although it was later found that Mielentz had only a BB gun. After repeatedly ignoring requests that he drop his weapon, Mielentz told officers

to, “Shoot me, just shoot me.” The SWAT team “offered him food and spoke sympathetically about his problems in order to establish a rapport” according to the report. After asking if they could help him in any way, he responded, “Yes, shoot me.” Officers described Mielentz’s behavior as “erratic” and “irrational.” Several times throughout the encounter, Mielentz pointed his gun at the officers and at himself. Mielentz refused to give up the weapon, even as crisis negotiators attempted to diffuse the situation, and instead, according to the officers involved, he became “increasingly agitated.” Trooper William Kerstetter and Trooper Joseph Trogani of the New Jersey State Police SWAT unit eventually fired at Mielentz, after he pointed his gun at them and began counting down from five. This caused the officers to believe they were in imminent danger. The report was prompted by the Attorney General’s Independent Prosecutor Directive, which requires the Attorney General to investigate incidents that involve the use of deadly force. Because of its conclusion, the case will not be presented to a grand jury for further review.

By Marie-Rose Sheinerman Staff Writer

“Drinking is a big part of heterosexual students’ strategies to accrue sexual experiences,” said Dr. Jennifer Hirsch ’88, professor of sociomedical sciences at Columbia University. In a talk hosted by the Global Health Colloquium on Friday, Hirsch spoke about the sociological implications of college drinking culture on the pervasiveness of whiteness and toxic masculinity. Hirsch is the co-director of the Columbia Population Research Center and the deputy chair of doctoral studies for the Department of Sociomedical Studies. Her talk centered on her most recent research project, the Sexual Health Initiative to Foster Transformation (SHIFT). She worked with a sample size of 144 undergraduates at Columbia, conducting in-depth interviews. The focus of Hirsch’s research was freshman fall, a time in a young adult’s life that she characterized as both “very exciting and socially painful.”

MARIE-ROSE SHEINERMAN :: THE DAILY PRINCETONIAN

Dr. Jennifer Hirsch discussed the role of drinking and the pervasiveness of toxic masculinity on college campuses.

“Drinking plays an important role in settling in,” she said. “Alcohol acts as a social lubricant, helping to manage anxiety about making friends and creating shared experiences.” According to Hirsch, drunken encounters between students often result in enduring and profound

connections. “Students form deep bonds or even find true love while holding back the hair of a vomiting friend or arguing over whether a friend needs an ambulance or just some water and a ride home.” What Hirsch finds troubling, however, is the exSee HIRSCH page 2

S T U D E N T A F FA I R S

USG considers Campbell Hall additional bathroom referendum Contributor

Undergraduate Student Government discussed a referendum on Campbell Hall bathrooms, the upcoming bonfire, and the Thanksgiving buses in its weekly meeting on Nov. 11. Parliamentarian Jonah

Hyman ’20 introduced a referendum that would call upon the administration to consider the installation of an additional bathroom on the upper f loors of the Campbell Hall, following the multiple sanitary issues in the last few years. Currently, residents of the third f loor must walk down

four f loors to get to a bathroom. The referendum would be put to vote in the Winter 2018 elections, as long as the Senate approves the ballot language and sponsor Alex Cavoli ’20 gathers signatures from 10 percent of the student body. “I would argue that these

are some of the worst sanitary conditions on campus,” Cavoli said. “These bathrooms are severely overused, and they’re really far away which encourages gross habits on the upper f loors.” “Not that it’s necessarily specific to this case, but I think that a lot of unsani-

In Opinion

Today on Campus

Columnist Morgan Lucey argues the federal government should be held responsible for environmental issues, and senior columnist Jessica Nyquist recommends changes to Princeton’s mentorship process PAGE 4

8:30 a.m.: A Veterans Day observance will be held, with guest speakers, an invocation, and music to commemorate the holiday. University Chapel

tary conditions on campus are only existent because people are acting like animals,” Social Committee Chair Liam Glass ’19 added. U-Councilor Rachel Hazan ’21 also noted that the conversion of Whitman College rooms in the former Writing Center into See USG page 3

WEATHER

By Jacob Gerrish

HIGH

51˚

LOW

28˚

Partly Cloudy chance of rain:

10 percent

page 2

The Daily Princetonian

Monday November 12, 2018

Hirsch: Sources of social currency are unequally distributed by age HIRSCH

Continued from page 1

.............

tent to which this drinking culture is riddled with toxic power structures. “What a student perceives to be the general Columbia drinking culture is often only his experience as a wealthy white man,” she said. Furthermore, Hirsch described alcohol as the primary catalyst for sexual experiences. To illustrate, Hirsch cited a few of her case studies. One female student, according to her, admitted, “I only have the courage to hook up [with men] when drunk.” Another Columbia female student said, “It’s really challenging to meet men organically on this campus; the only f lirtatious interactions I’ve had have been while intoxicated.” During Q&A, in response to a question about what makes this generation uniquely unable to mediate social interaction without alcohol, Hirsch insisted that “this generation” isn’t unique at all. The problem, according to Hirsch, lies not with the students but with the adults’ exoticization of their behavior, which in reality is not so different from their own. Many adults regularly go to bars after work to meet people, for example. Allocation of power in terms of controlling party spaces contributes another layer to the problem. “An unintended consequence of the Minimum Legal Drinking Age is that freshmen have to venture into space controlled by upperclassmen, usually men,” said Hirsch, alluding to fraternity organizations. “Two precious sources of social currency – alcohol and spaces to party without get-

ting into trouble – are unequally distributed by age, ” Hirsch continued. Women’s drinking practices, Hirsch found, often have an “emulative quality.” Drinking contributes to building the image of a “chill, fratty, sexy girl,” an image that’s often crucial in women’s sense of belonging in friendship groups and on campus. When asked to provide a specific measure a university could take to undermine this culture, Hirsch recommended providing spaces for underclassman women to host parties, citing Rice University and Haverford College as institutions where similar measures have been taken. Even among first-years, though, Hirsch found disparities of access. “White wealthy students are the ones most likely to arrive to campus already in possession of fake IDs, and thus access to alcohol,” she said. Further, she noted, Greek letter organizations tend to be associated with bingedrinking only when they are white men’s Greek letter organizations. Historically black colleges have lower rates of binge-drinking than white ones. Hirsch concluded the lecture by ref lecting on the breadth of reasons for undergraduate drinking: party drinking, sexual shamerelated drinking, loneliness, and drinking to make friends, among others. University policy in addressing drinking ought to account for this variety, according to Hirsch. The lunchtime lecture, entitled “The Toxic Campus Brew: Whiteness, Masculinity, Drinking Laws, Stress and Shame,” took place on Nov. 9 at 12 p.m. in Robertson Hall, Bowl 1.

Princeton to face Maryland on Nov. 16 FIELD HOCKEY Continued from page 6

.............

Tigers’ third shot, senior fullback Elise Wong teed the ball in to Julianna Tornetta, who faked a shot, but then slipped a no-look pass behind her back to junior fullback Maddie Bacskai, whose perfect touch sent the ball to the back of the net. Princeton would outshoot the Cavaliers 8–0 in the second half and come away with a 2–1 victory, making this the third straight year that Princeton has eliminated Virginia in the NCAA Tournament. All this set the Tigers up with a revenge date against Harvard in the quarterfinals on Sunday. The weather Sunday was classic for a fall day in New Jersey — sunny, but a brisk 46 degrees — and the game would prove to be a classic, too. The crowd filled a sold out Bedford Stadium and kept the energy up during an aggressive but scoreless first half. Harvard’s Kathleen Young got her team on the board first, with just seven minutes gone in the second half. The Crimson’s strong passing play was on display as Princeton fought to maintain possession of the ball. The Tigers’ breakthrough came at the 11:34 mark, as Roth earned a penalty stroke. Julianna Tornetta lined up to take it, and played a perfect shot just to the left of the Harvard goalie. The fast, aggressive play continued from there. Princeton received a corner and tried the same play that earned them the win over Virginia. That shot didn’t go through,

but thankfully another opportunity would arise. With just 5:09 left to play, Princeton lined up a corner, which Roth sent in to Wong, who then laid it up for Julianna Tornetta. Two touches and Tornetta tapped it over to Bacskai, who sent it home, hard off the backboard, for a 2–1 lead. Harvard immediately called a timeout, but wasn’t able to regroup. As the final horn sounded, the Tigers dropped their sticks and ran to celebrate with each other. Even head coach Carla Tagliente joined the mosh pit. “Since I’ve come here, I’ve been surrounded by great people,” said Tagliente. “It’s not just my accomplishment. I feel very lucky and privileged to work with the student-athletes that we have. I’m fortunate every day I’m here. We have a special group of players. I have the best job, just standing back and watching them achieve this.” Princeton will now travel to Louisville, Kentucky, to face second-seeded Maryland in the Final Four at Trager Stadium on Nov. 16. The Terrapins beat the Tigers 5–4 in double overtime back in September. Regardless, though, Princeton is now one step closer to its season-long goal, so plainly stated by junior fullback Carlotta von Gierke: “to win a National Championship.” No. 1 North Carolina and No. 12 Wake Forest remain on the other half of the bracket. The winners of these two semifinals will play on Nov. 18 for the right to be called 2018 National Champions.

Monday November 12, 2018

Senate approves budget requests for bonfire, Thanksgiving buses USG

Continued from page 1

.............

bathrooms during dorm renovations this past summer shows the feasibility of the referendum. With respect to the ballot question and the content of the resolution, the Senate decided to amend minor language and include more administrative bodies, such as the vice president of facilities and the vice president for university services, to which the resolution will be directed. The Senate approved the language of the referendum following the above revisions. ODUS Program Coordinator Ian Deas submitted a budget request of $5,000 to the Senate for the upcoming bonfire on Nov. 18 at 7:30 p.m. To pay the labor costs of building and guarding the wood pile during the day, the event will cost in total around $30,000–$35,000. Deas also talked about some guidelines for the event. “We definitely don’t want people throwing items into the bonfire,” Deas said. “Yeah, I’m referring to the ‘Yeet Ur Copy of Speak Freely into the Bonfire’ Facebook event.” The Senate unanimously voted to approve the bonfire budget request. Afterwards, Class of 2021

The Daily Princetonian

Senator Elizabeth Bailey ’21 and U-Councilor Aditya Shah ’21 introduced a budget proposal of $17,708 for the Thanksgiving buses — the same amount as last year. There will be five round-trip buses, with three to Washington, D.C., and two to Boston. Campus and Community Affairs Chair Caleb Visser ’20 raised concerns about the future use of Coach USA following the crash on Nov. 10. Deputy Dean of Undergraduate Students Thomas Dunne, however, responded that it would be challenging to find another vendor prior to Thanksgiving. “From a safety perspective, I think that it’s important not to take one isolated incident and extrapolate it out that somehow it’s not a safe option,” Dunne said. The Senate approved the budget request unanimously. The Senate further considered sending student body surveys out to gather feedback and increase the accountability of USG but tabled the discussion until the return of Director of Communications Tori Gorton ’21. The Senate voted to approve the consent agenda, confirming the appointments of Christina Wang ’22 and Jayson Badal ’22 to the Campus and Community Affairs Committee.

COURTESY OF BRAD SPICHER ’20

From left: Rachel Hazan ’21 and Isabella Faccone ’21 discuss proposed referenda at the USG meeting.

Watch our exclusive interview with High School SCOTUS’ blog founder, Anna Salvatore!

YouTube: The Daily Princetonian

page 3

Opinion

Monday November 12, 2018

page 4

{ www.dailyprincetonian.com }

Beyond Artificial Mentorship Jess Nyquist

Senior Colmnist

s a senior going through the postgraduate job application process, I feel an overwhelming feeling of under-preparedness. And I’m not alone — this is common among my peers. After thinking I have been taking the right steps to set myself up for success, I constantly feel like I have no idea what I’m doing and am not doing enough for post-graduation plans. Princeton boasts a slew of advisor and mentor resources to incoming students. From peer academic advisors to residential college advisors to university academic advisors, Princeton assigns both older students and professionals to first-years, in an effort to help guide their experience from the minute they set foot on campus. Yet, most students find their most impactful mentorship experiences only once they’ve met older students in a group or club, rather than in these assigned advisors. Even so, many first-year students do not have the opportunity to interact on a personal level with older students until their sophomore or even junior years. Princeton needs a new structured mentoring program based on shared interests and passions rather than random matching. Princeton’s model has the benefit of efficiently and conveniently matching first-year students to advisors by selecting on superficial terms — the major you preferred when you applied, the area you live in, your residential college. While this system provides advising quickly, it

usually fails to build meaningful relationships, ones in which students seek out this mentor for advice — career and academic — throughout their Princeton experience. While older peer advisors have always offered support and an open door, it is rare for a random match between students to align interests and goals in a way that the older student has relevant experience to offer specific tips to younger students. My most impactful mentors have been ones that were mutually selected and our relationship grew over time. For example, an older student I met on a team freshman year helped me through internship applications, course selection, and work-life balance for three years until she graduated. She was not assigned and she was in no way official, but the fact that we shared interests allowed her to point me in helpful directions based on her own trials. Similarly, the adult mentors I have found most helpful are those founded in mutual enthusiasm and shared academic interests. Compared to my University assigned advisors, my self-selected thesis advisors show interest and care for my work and my passions, building a mentor relationship on trust and respect. Because University advisors are often assigned many students, most peers I’ve spoken to do not have a relationship with this person beyond signing paperwork. My classmate, a senior in the Wilson School, told me that she had never even met her department advisor face-toface; all their communication took place over email. Career services offers oneon-one appointments, but from my experience using this resource, a 30 minute appointment (scheduled two weeks in advance) does not provide the guidance I was

hoping for. While the advisors have been quite helpful in editing resumes or cover letters, they have been less impactful with more abstract questions — what should I do next year? Should I consider graduate school? What job opportunities might I consider given my skill set? A short one-time appointment does not give the advisor the tools to understand your passions, interests, strengths, weaknesses, and goals in a manner deep enough to offer insightful guidance. In this way, effective mentorship demands more organic roots than a random match. In a mentor, we seek someone who takes a personal interest in us and our goals. The best mentors have experience with the specific choices we’re facing — whether it is understanding course requirements or internship opportunities or certain career paths — and can speak from their own trials and failures and those of their peers. And even further, it’s about knowing you and your abilities and aspirations and passions. Older Princeton students fill this role perfectly, but incoming students often do not interact or connect with older students on a personal level until later in their time at Princeton. While some clubs and extracurriculars provide opportunities to meet a mentor, many are less personal or involved and thus do not create this dynamic I imagine a mentorship system between first years and juniors — an optional University-wide big/little sibling program. The matching process could begin in the spring semester so that the younger student has some understanding of their academic and career interests and preferences. Mentors could be incentivized in various ways – a stipend for

2030

tashi treadway ’19 ..................................................

meals with their mentee or even pay per mentee. The process could involve meet and greets to select a mentor, and a highly personalized survey for students who do not meet a match in person. The survey would seek to match students based on major (or a few options first-years are considering) and perhaps early-career interests. While this matching would not be perfect, it would offer a structured mentorship program early in the Princeton experience with more substance than a random assignment. It would provide a better one-to-one experience, rather than a lopsided ratio of a single academic mentor for an entire group of students. Furthermore, the process would encourage more intimate relationships that continue for two years or even after the big sibling graduates, rather than ending after the course selection sheet has been signed. Looking back on my Princeton experience, there is so much I wish I had known. I wish I had known what classes to take and when to take different requirements. I wish I had understood how to seek out internships and think in the long term what would be beneficial to do each summer. I wish I had a better map of the options and opportunities out there. Princeton goes to great lengths to assure students have a network of guidance and support, and these efforts are so appreciated. But the University can do more to offer more personalized mentorship, cultivating tailored advice and a meaningful relationship between older and younger students. Jessica Nyquist is a senior concentrator in computer science from Houston, Texas. She can be reached at jnyquist@ princeton.edu.

vol. cxlii

editor-in-chief

Marcia Brown ’19 business manager

Ryan Gizzie ’19

BOARD OF TRUSTEES president Thomas E. Weber ’89 vice president Craig Bloom ’88 secretary Betsy L. Minkin ’77 treasurer Douglas J. Widmann ’90 trustees Francesca Barber David Baumgarten ’06 Kathleen Crown Gabriel Debenedetti ’12 Stephen Fuzesi ’00 Zachary A. Goldfarb ’05 Michael Grabell ’03 John Horan ’74 Joshua Katz Rick Klein ’98 James T. MacGregor ’66 Alexia Quadrani Marcelo Rochabrun ’15 Kavita Saini ’09 Richard W. Thaler, Jr. ’73 Abigail Williams ’14 trustees emeriti Gregory L. Diskant ’70 William R. Elfers ’71 Kathleen Kiely ’77 Jerry Raymond ’73 Michael E. Seger ’71 Annalyn Swan ’73 trustees ex officio Marcia Brown ’19 Ryan Gizzie ’19

142ND MANAGING BOARD managing editors Isabel Hsu ’19 Sam Parsons ’19 head news editor Claire Thornton ’19 associate news editors Allie Spensley ’20 Ariel Chen ’20 Ivy Truong ’21 associate news and film editor Sarah Warman Hirschfield ’20 head opinion editor Emily Erdos ’19 associate opinion editors Jon Ort ’21 Cy Watsky ’21 head sports editors David Xin ’19 Chris Murphy ’20 associate sports editors Miranda Hasty ’19 Jack Graham ’20 associate street editors Danielle Hoffman ’20 Lyric Perot ’20 digital operations manager Sarah Bowen ’20 chief copy editors Marina Latif ’19 Arthur Mateos ’19 Catherine Benedict ’20 head design editor Rachel Brill ’19 associate design editor Charlotte Adamo ’21 cartoons editor Tashi Treadway ’19 head photo editor Risa Gelles-Watnick ’21

NIGHT STAFF copy Wells Carson ’22 Helena Tenev ’19 Olivia Meyers ’21 Jade Olurin ’21 Claire Silberman ’22 Emma Treadway ’22 design Harsimran Makkad ’22

The Daily Princetonian is published daily except Saturday and Sunday from September through May and three times a week during January and May by The Daily Princetonian Publishing Company, Inc., 48 University Place, Princeton, N.J. 08540. Mailing address: P.O. Box 469, Princeton, N.J. 08542. Subscription rates: Mailed in the United States $175.00 per year, $90.00 per semester. Office hours: Sunday through Friday, 1:30 p.m. to 4:30 p.m. Telephones: Business: 609-375-8553; News and Editorial: 609-258-3632. For tips, email news@dailyprincetonian.com. Reproduction of any material in this newspaper without expressed permission of The Daily Princetonian Publishing Company, Inc., is strictly prohibited. Copyright 2014, The Daily Princetonian Publishing Company, Inc. POSTMASTER: Send address changes to The Daily Princetonian, P.O. Box 469, Princeton, N.J. 08542.

Opinion

Monday November 12, 2018

page 5

{ www.dailyprincetonian.com }

If the environment isn’t the government’s responsibility, whose is it? Morgan Lucey

Columnist

n a recent decision by the Supreme Court, our ability as students to call for change and have direct impact on environmental issues was upheld. This past Friday, the Supreme Court denied the Trump administration’s request to dismiss the Juliana vs. United States case. This case, brought by plaintiffs ranging from 10 to 21 years of age, alleges that the federal government has harmed living conditions for the citizens of Oregon by permitting the burning of fossil fuels, despite knowing what the negative effects would be. The plaintiffs have reasonably argued that the government’s prioritization of the fossil fuel industry over the environment is a direct violation of their constitutional rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, as these rights become less accessible in a declining environment. The federal government should respond to these demands by combating climate change through further regulations on the fossil fuel industry. Both the Obama and Trump administrations have re-

sponded by claiming that there is no legally precedented right to live in a clean environment. Further, the government has claimed that the suit calls for an unreasonable overhaul of the American energy system at the hand of the federal government, and worse, one that is demanded by a group of “21 children and youth” instead of higher authorities. They may be correct in stating that there is no legal precedent in the constitution for a right to a clean environment, but that can be explained by the fact that climate change sped up during the industrial revolution — after the Constitution was written. The founding fathers likely did not foresee oil rigs or cars when they sat down at the Philadelphia Convention. I am calling for courts to recognize this when further deliberation of Juliana occurs, forcing the federal government to put its citizens’ interests over the interests of big oil. The relationship between the lobbyists and the federal government is not one-sided, as the two must work together to come to agreements regarding policy and regulations. Just as the lobbyists can influence the government, the government can regulate the industry; perhaps this can be done in a way that is mutually beneficial through government

subsidization or international trade support. Juliana does not call for the federal government to radically change their mode of action — rather, because the plaintiffs see the government’s current mode simply as inactivity, it calls for the government to create new regulations on a relatively unrestrained industry. This is especially true given that the Trump administration is in the process of rolling back many Environmental Protection Agency regulations, including the Clean Power Act that serves to regulate carbon emissions from power plants and a crucial requirement that oil and gas companies report methane leaks. The federal government should recognize that it is every citizen’s right to reside in a healthy and sustainable environment. As college students, we are a part of that demographic of “21 children and youth”, demanding more consideration of the environment from our government is entirely reasonable, as we will directly experience the effects of an unregulated fossil fuel industry in the upcoming decades. The rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are being violated by the terrifying environmental changes we are facing. For one, the emission of PM2.5 from fossil fuels has a direct impact

on human respiratory and cardiovascular health, and even more long-term impacts on overall health. It is reasonable to characterize these impacts as a violation of the right to life and pursuit of happiness, when both would be difficult to achieve with severe health issues. The response by both the Trump and Obama administrations begs the following question — if it is unreasonable for the federal government to carry out the changes necessary to slow climate change, then into whose domain does this task fall? Some would argue that it is up to the state governments to regulate the fossil fuel industry, rather than the federal government. Though state administrations can attempt to mitigate some of the local effects of the fossil fuel industry, systematic change in the how the industry functions and what it prioritizes will not occur until national organizations, such as the EPA or National Institute of Health, step up to advocate for U.S. residents’ health and well-being. The same can be said to refute the idea that it is the responsibility of individuals to fight the negative effects of the fossil fuel industry. As residents of the United States, we can attempt to combat climate change through

many small efforts, such as eating less meat, avoiding cars in favor of bicycles, and recycling correctly. Even so, our individual impact on the environment pales in comparison to that of the fossil fuel industry. To combat that impact, a much more powerful force is necessary: this is where the federal government should step up. Of course, this may prove to be difficult given the fossil fuel industry’s influence on the government: fossil fuel lobbyists spent $370 million from 2000 to 2016 alone. This is ten times more than environmental advocate lobbyist groups spent in the same period. Without the same monetary access to influence over the federal government, residents (like the plaintiffs of Juliana) cannot be expected to combat the environmental impact. The Supreme Court’s refusal to dismiss Juliana vs. United States represents a recognition that the federal government should step up to prioritize the constitutional right to health and well-being through combating environmental pollution, regardless of what the fossil fuel lobby might think. Morgan Lucey is a senior neuroscience major from Scottsdale, Ariz. She can be reached at mslucey@princeton.edu.

To Vote or Not to Vote: The Ethics of Voting for an Unethical Democrat in the Era of Trump Hayley Siegel

Senior columnist

knew heading into last Tuesday’s midterms that the odds of electing a decent human being to public office were slim to none when the only choices for my state senator were Bob Hugin and Bob Menendez. The former — despite his insistence to the contrary — has financial ties to perhaps the most corrupt, morally reprehensible president in U.S. history. Meanwhile, the latter is best known for having been indicted on corruption charges, though his name is synonymous with a wide variety of scandals. As a first-time New Jersey voter this year, I faced a serious ethical dilemma when I stepped into the booth to cast my ballot. What did my vote even count toward if I truly believed that neither my party’s

candidate nor his opponent were worthy, based on their conduct and personal qualities, of being elected to the Senate? Looking back, there is something truly disappointing about the notion that even though I voted along party lines for Menendez as a Democrat, I only did so because I saw him as the lesser of two evils — the other evil being Trump, not even Hugin. And, given my deep disdain for the current administration, Menendez, simply by not being a Trump supporter, just barely scraped by the pretty low moral bar that I had set. By voting for Menendez, I voted against my better conscience. I voted disingenuously for an unfit individual who still does not represent my values and in whom I have little confidence to be a trustworthy legislator in the future. Frankly, the moral bankruptcy of both Bobs on the ballot contributed to my apathy towards voting by confirming that my vote was unethical at worst and meaningless at

best. Furthermore, it is hard to imagine how my vote will have any good effect whatsoever on improving the quality of individuals in the Senate, who are responsible for deciding on the moral-based laws that we must abide by. I wonder, would I have been better off not voting at all? Generally, whenever I am asked to make a political choice that affects others, I know that I have a normative duty to my fellow citizens to help elect morally upstanding lawmakers who have a genuine interest in improving the quality of life for all people. If I am impeded from doing so because I am limited in my choice of candidates, then it seems reasonable to think that there is no advantage to voting for either candidate. Taking this logic into account, I realize just how easy it might be for the average potential voter to willingly forfeit their democratic privilege and rationalize a decision not to vote, especially if they come to think that voting is ineffec-

tive. After all, the act of voting against Trump’s politics for any alternative can be — as in my case — still ironically antithetical to the realization of the goal of electing sincere, trustworthy politicians to office. In retrospect I, as I am sure a solid number of fellow New Jersey Democrats, consider the results of Tuesday’s election a loss for the very reason stated above. My biggest political concern for this election was always the moral character and capability of my elected officials, yet by voting, I enabled political corruption in one of the highest, most important offices of this nation. More than ever before I am aware of the power and significance that my vote has in such a polarized, partisan era of politics, and especially in such a close race as that which emerged between Menendez and Hugin. I’ve come to the conclusion that by voting simply for my party’s candidate, right now, I am not necessarily voting for them as an individual. Rather, I am contributing

man-power to the Democrats’ bulwark against the threat of a Republican-dominated government that will be more easily manipulated into carrying out the whims of Trump. In short, I fully recognize that I could not have afforded to not vote last Tuesday if I wanted to prevent at all costs a victory for Trumpism; having accomplished this goal, at present, I have no regrets and am satisfied that my vote for Menendez at least helped to propel the “blue wave”, no matter how minor it was. However, I still am perturbed by the moral hypocrisy underlying my vote. I only hope that in the next presidential election, I will not face the same ethical dilemma and will be able to vote with confidence for candidates whom I can trust and rely on to represent my values. Hayley Siegel is a junior Philosophy concentrator from Princeton, N.J. She can be reached at hsiegel@princeton.edu.

Like what you see? Join the ‘Prince’! Email: join@dailyprincetonian.com

Monday November 12, 2018

Sports

page 6

{ www.dailyprincetonian.com } FOOTBALL

Football overwhelms Yale 59–43 to clinch Ivy Title, first bonfire since 2013 By Jack Graham and Chris Murphy

Associate and Head Sports Editors

On a cold, windy, and even snowy Saturday afternoon at the Yale Bowl, Princeton picked off Yale — literally — to clinch a share of the 2018 Ivy League title and the first bonfire since 2013. Three Princeton players rushed for more than 100 yards, the defense forced four interceptions, as Princeton cruised to a 59–43 win over Yale, the highest score ever for the two teams in their historic rivalry. One might have wondered whether Princeton would be ready for the game after an emotional and gritty win over Dartmouth. They answered that concern quickly as sophomore running back Collin Eaddy scored rushing touchdowns on the first two Princeton offensive plays with an interception by sophomore linebacker Jeremiah Tyler in between. 54 seconds in, the Tigers were already up 14–0. “I told my son, [Eaddy] was going to have 150 yards rushing today,” said Princeton head coach Bob Surace ’90. “After the first play, I told [Collin]: halfway there.” As Yale drove the ball on the ensuing drive, the defense would stand tall again, forcing a pick. Ty-

ler tipped the pass by Yale quarterback Griffin O’Connor — making his second career start — and linebacker Tom Johnson came away with the interception. Just a few plays later junior Ryan Quigley burst up the middle and waltzed in for a 38 yard run. The best offense in the FCS was rolling on the ground and up 21–0 not even five minutes into the game. “They were so ready to walk into this historic stadium and play,” said Surace about his team’s fast start. “We had a really good gameplan, and we executed some plays.” The game was full of career performances for both teams. O’Connor, only a freshman, broke the single game Yale record for passing yards with 465, at times hitting seam routes with NFL quality precision. Had it not been for those early interceptions, this game may have been totally different. For the Tigers, making his first career start in place of the injured Charlie Volker, Eaddy had 265 yards and 3 touchdowns slicing through the defense and steamrolling defenders near the goalline. “The offensive line did incredible,” said Eaddy. “Nothing special by us, that was really all them.” Junior running back Ryan Quigley, who ran for 113 yards himself, agreed.

“All the credit to the O-line, we were just doing our jobs,” he said. “When the O-line makes holes like that, we’re just going to run as fast as we can.” Midway through the second quarter showed just how powerful — at times unstoppable — this offense could be. After being stopped on 3rd and goal, Surace didn’t hesitate to leave the offense out on the field. Naturally, he turned to senior quarterback John Lovett — perhaps the NCAA’s newest “Johnny Football.” Lovett took the QB power and walked in for the score, putting the Tigers up 35–7. It was the nineteenth straight game with a rushing touchdown for Lovett, tying an Ivy record. Later Lovett showed off his arm, hitting senior receiver Jesper Horsted on the deep post, with Horsted doing the rest to score. At halftime, Princeton held a commanding 42–14 lead. Yale opened the third quarter with some incredible catches, as the Bulldogs used the lack of a Princeton pass rush to stretch the field. O’Connor hit back to back plays of over 40 yards, one being an incredible catch by Yale receiver Reed Klubnik. After the Princeton traded a touchdown for a field goal, O’Connor drove the Bulldogs into Tiger territory again, hitting

Klubnik for 50 yards. But on 4th and 6, he could not find his receiver along the sideline and after video review, the play stood as an incomplete pass. In a game that even featured snow at one point, Yale refused to give in to the Ivy League’s best team. After another Lovett run to put the Tigers up 59–28 early in the 4th quarter, Yale buckled down on defense and made Princeton work to attain their title. O’Connor hit Klubnik on another seam route, and running back Alan Lamar plunged into the end zone for the first score. Three minutes later, O’Connor would hit Klubnik and his other receiver JP Shohfi for a two point conversion. Suddenly, this game was 59–43 and Princeton couldn’t seem to move the ball. “We didn’t get any pass rush,” Surace said about the defense’s second half struggles. “We’re going to have to go back and watch the video and see how we can be better this week” After Lovett was sacked with 4:42 to go, Yale had one more chance to score. However senior linebacker Mark Fossati came up with a clutch interception, giving the Tigers the ball back with four minutes to play. From there, the offensive line and running backs did their job, knocking Yale down and out for the count. Defense was certainly at a premium in this game, as the teams put up a combined 1129 yards in the game. However, Princeton won the game in the turnover battle, just another way this team has shown it is able to beat opponents. Yale’s freshman quarterback dazzled in his team’s near-comeback in the second half, but his four intercep-

tions proved too much to overcome. “It’s not just his arm strength and accuracy, it’s his poise and maturity,” said Surace in praise of O’Connor. Princeton deservedly clinched their twelfth Ivy League title exactly one year after Yale celebrated a title of their own in Princeton. They have a chance to clinch the League outright with a home game against Penn next Saturday. While will be no playoff games due to athletic rules set by the University, the Tigers with a win would finish undefeated and recognized as one of the best teams in the FCS. Before this game, they climbed up to eleventh in the NCAA FCS coaches poll; a statement win like today’s may be enough to move them into the top 10 for good. There is clearly still work to be done in the Princeton football season. Lovett will continue to drive defensive coordinators crazy, while the defense will look back on today as a learning opportunity. Princeton has cause to celebrate, but the team still has one more game to prepare for, next week’s finale against Penn. “It’s really hard to win an Ivy League title, and I know the work they’ve put into it,” Surace said. “Enjoy it today, but then tomorrow we’re back to work.” “It feels great,” Quigley added. “But we’re not really focused on the bonfire, we’re focused on Penn.” Yet today, the Tigers took care of business and have guaranteed to give Princeton’s campus something they’ve been anticipating since 2013: a bonfire. So start gathering that wood, because this is going to get exciting.

JACK GRAHAM :: THE DAILY PRINCETONIAN

Forcing four interceptions on defense, the Tigers head home with an Ivy League Title and the promise of the first bonfire in five years.

FIELD HOCKEY

Women’s field hockey heads to Final Four By Molly Milligan Staff Writer

On Sunday, No. 4 Princeton field hockey posted a dramatic comeback win over No. 6 Harvard to reach the NCAA Final Four. On Friday, the Tigers topped No. 13 Virginia as they played host to the NCAA Tournament’s early rounds. It will be Princeton’s second trip to the Final Four in three years. It was a drizzly fall Friday as the team began tournament play in front of an enthusiastic crowd. At the half, the score was 1–1 thanks to a goal by sophomore striker Clara Roth — her thirteenth of the season.

Tweet of the Day

Princeton’s offense came out strong in the second half, controlling the ball and slipping some long passes through the opposing team for breakaways, but the crowning moment of the game came with about 23 minutes left. As the referees reviewed a play, the Tigers gathered at midfield. The Tornetta sisters, Sophia, a senior striker, and Julianna, a sophomore midfielder, were first to talk. What they were drawing up was anyone’s guess. Princeton was granted the corner, but failed to come together on two consecutive attempts. On the See FIELD HOCKEY page 2

Stat of the Day

Eighth Final Four

Check us out on Twitter @princesports for live news and reports, and on Instagram @princetoniansports for photos!

“The Tigers are on fire! They beat Yale 59-43 and continue their undefeated streak! With wins over Harvard and Yale, the UniWith the comeback win over Harvard, versity will host the coveted BONFIRE on Cannon Green! Come Women’s field hockey advance to join us for a festive celebration on Sunday, Nov. 18 at 7:30 p.m.” their eighth final four appearance in Princeton Alumni (@princetonalumni) program history.