T H E HOFS T R A
HEMPSTEAD, NY VOLUME 86 ISSUE 3
CHRONICLE
Wednesday November 4, 2020
Special edition: Presidential Election 2020 NEWS
Inconclusive election night leaves presidential results up in the air
Robert Kinnaird / The Hofstra Chronicle
The 2020 presidential election ended in with states yet to declare a projected winner as absentee ballots and mail-in votes are still being counted.
By Marjorie Rogers ASSISTA N T N E W S E D I TO R
Voters have been on the edge of their seats for months leading up to the 2020 election, with political tensions intensifying across the country as the race entered its final stretch. Americans stood by to see the longawaited election results come in on the night of Tuesday, Nov. 3 hoping for some closure. However, election night did not provide voters with much of a conclusion to the heated presidential race as absentee ballots and mail-in votes are delaying the results. As of the end of election night, former Vice President Joe Biden led with 223 electoral votes and President Donald Trump trailed behind with 212, with 270 needed to secure the presidency. Results are still too close to call in eight states, including several key swing states such as Georgia, North Carolina and
Pennsylvania. “We’re caught in an election void,” said sophomore TV and film major Julia Hekimian. “I’ve
been feeling anxious on and off for the past couple of days.” Hekiman, an Arizona voter, said she was surprised by the
current vote count in her state. “Biden is surprisingly doing really well over there,” she said. “To see him leading pretty far ahead has been a pretty surprising twist.” As of election night, Biden had 53.2% of Arizona’s votes while Trump trailed behind with 45.5% according to the Associated Press’s election results. “There’s likely a higher level of red [votes] than there actually is because there [are] a lot more conservatives who went to vote in-person,” said sophomore political science major Sneha Prabhu, who cited mail-in ballots as a possible reason why many swing states’ current vote counts are leaning toward Trump. “The House votes are really upsetting though. For all the anger and motivation I saw on social media to pack the House and Senate with Democratic candidates, the current results are super concerning.” Prabhu also said she is concerned about the mental health of many Americans this week as election results slowly trickle in.
Photo courtesy of the Associated Press The Associated Press began releasing projected results of the 2020 presidential election on the evening of Tuesday, Nov. 3. The official results of the election will not be available until days or weeks post-election night due to an influx of absentee ballots and mail-in voting.
“There’s going to be a palpable air of stress wherever you go,” she said. Yelena Koos, a sophomore double major in music performance and psychology and a Texas voter, expressed similar concerns about mental health. “I come from a state that is currently undecided ... I am really anxious about seeing the outcome,” Koos said. Texas polled in favor of the Republican Party on election night, with 52.2% of reported votes for Trump and 46.4% of votes for Biden, but the results are not finalized. Koos said she has not been able to focus on her schoolwork due to stress caused by the election. “I am focusing on [the election] and devoting a lot more time to this than I should,” Koos said. “What’s the point of [writing] an essay if the country is going to fall apart tomorrow?” The political landscape in the United States has become increasingly hostile in recent months and incidents of alleged voter intimidation have been reported in swing states such as Texas, Florida and Pennsylvania, according to USA Today. Some people fear current political tensions will reach dangerous levels as the country waits for finalized election results in the coming weeks. “The nation is already so divided as is [and that’s] before we come to a conclusion,” Koos said. “I feel like we’re already kind of falling apart [as a country].”
NEWS
A2 •NOVEMBER 4, 2020
THE CHRONICLE
Civil rights plays a key role in 2020 election races 203 Student Center hofstrachronicle@gmail.com
Editors-in-Chief Melanie Haid Drashti Mehta
Managing Editor Gab Varano
Business Manager Robert Kinnaird
News Editor
Annemarie LePard
Assistant News Editors Ahjané Forbes Marjorie Rogers Samantha Sivert
A&E Editors
Victoria Bell Eleni Kothesakis
A&E Assistant Editor Jacob Huller Kat Salmon
Sports Editors
David Lazar Anthony Roberts
Assistant Sports Editor Mike Senatore
Features Editors Betty Araya Audra Nemirow
Assistant Features Editor Micaela Erickson
Op-Ed Editors
Visvajit Sriramrajan Daniel Cody Jessica Zhang
Assistant Op-Ed Editors Aja Ward Yashu Pericherla
Copy Chiefs
Elizabeth Turley Odessa Stork
Assistant Copy Chiefs Antonia Moffa Julia Razzante
Multimedia Editors Robert Kinnaird Adam Flash Talha Siddiqui
Social Media Team Elizabeth Turley Gab Varano Tori Licata Tino Pattigno Anthony Roberts
Editor-at-Large
Sarah Emily Baum The Chronicle is published onTuesdays during the academic year by the students of Hofstra University. The Chronicle is located in Room 203 Student Center, 200 Hofstra University, Hempstead, N.Y. 11549. Advertising and subscription rates may be obtained by calling (516) 463-6921. The Chronicle reserves the right to reject any submission, in accordance with our written policies. All advertising which may be considered fraudulent, misleading, libelous or offensive to the University community, The Chronicle or its advertisers may be refused. The products and opinions expressed within advertisement are not endorsed by The Chronicle or its staff.
By Victoria Bell ARTS AND ENTERTAI N M E N T E D I TO R
regarding his plans for Black communities is to minimize the overarching racial disparities in today’s society, such as wealth and income gaps. Biden also has visions of expanding highquality education, combating racial inequality in schools and investing to end racist health
This year’s historic outburst of protests, catapulted by the tragic murder of George Floyd, put the concern for racial justice and equality of Black Americans at the forefront of the 2020 presidential election. Though they come from opposing political parties, if elected, both President Donald Trump and former Vice President Joe Biden aim to assist Black communities throughout the next four years. Trump has notably claimed to have done more for the Black community than any other president, including Abraham Lincoln, who issued the Emancipation Proclamation. If reelected, Trump seeks to follow through with his A protest in support of Black Lives Matter. “Platinum Plan,” a near$500 billion investment care discrepancies. Additionally, to aid Black Americans. Goals improving access to voting and include developing three million granting equal voting protection new jobs and creating 500,000 for Black people is another top new Black-owned businesses, as priority for Biden’s campaign. well as improving education and healthcare for the Black comAlthough Trump and Biden’s munity. plans for Black Americans are Biden’s underlying message intended to be put forth on a
national scale, if put into action, these reforms can also have an impact on a local level. Long Island, one of the most segregated areas in the country, is known for its past racism against Black minorities. The town of Levittown, founded by William Levitt, was based heav-
of certain communities based on race or ethnicity, was outlawed under the 1968 Fair Housing Act, its long-term effects are still prevalent on Long Island, even today. This divide can be witnessed firsthand when crossing the border between Garden City and Hempstead. With the median household income at $171,750 and 92.1% of the population being white, Garden City shows significantly opposing statistics from its neighboring town, Hempstead, where 46.8% of residents are Black and the median household income is $62,347, according to the United States Census Bureau. This separation has also worked its way into schooling systems, with the Garden City public district Photo courtesy of Unsplash high school at a 100% rating and the Hempstead ily upon racist ideologies during public district high school at a the post-World War II era. While 20%rating. white veterans returning home Whether Trump or Biden to their families were welcome wins, the outcome of the to live in this new neighborpresidential election will decide hood, Black veterans were which aspects of racial issues turned away. Though this act of will be prioritized over the next redlining, a discriminatory prac- four years. tice rejecting services to people
Will Amy Coney Barrett challenge women’s reproductive rights?
By Madeline Armstrong S TAF F WRI T E R
After the passing of Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg in September, President Donald Trump nominated Amy Coney Barrett, former judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, to the Supreme Court. Barrett was confirmed by the U.S. Senate as an associate justice on Monday, Oct. 26, just one week before the general election, winning the Senate vote 52 to 48. “We have never had a Supreme Court nominee confirmed while an election was actu-
ally going on,” said William Schaefer, an adjunct professor of political science at Hofstra University, referencing the precedent set in 2016. Barrett’s confirmation security a conservative supermajority in the Supreme Court changing the balance from 5-4 to 6-3. “Substantively, obviously she brings a very conservative bend to the court, so we now have a 6-3 clear conservative majority on the court,” Schaefer said. “We now have a United States Senate and a United States Supreme Court which [are] ... out of sync with the nation.” This conservative shift in
the highest level of courts is a concern to some students. “There are a lot of high-profile cases that are on the docket and it’s concerning that ... one swing vote won’t be enough in cases anymore,” said Daria Valan, a senior philosophy major. “It will take at least two more conservative justices to vote in more liberal cases.” One notable case currently under scrutiny is Roe v. Wade, which addresses women’s reproductive rights. This landmark Supreme Court case, decided in 1973, ruled that a woman’s right to an abortion is protected under the Constitution. However, the
conservative majority in the Supreme Court could overturn the ruling, according to Schaefer. “It’s in a very tenuous position right now,” he said. “Even if [Chief] Justice Roberts doesn’t go along with it ... you have five votes on the Supreme Court right now to overturn Roe v. Wade.” Although Chief Justice John Roberts is a conservative, he has voted more liberally on several cases in the past. It is unclear whether he would vote to overturn Roe v. Wade, but many believe it is clear where Barrett
CONTINUED ON A4
THE CHRONICLE
NOVEMBER 4, 2020 • A3
NEWS
Voter fraud “very rare” despite President Trump’s claims
By Annemarie LePard NEW S E D I TO R
The 2020 election looked quite different than previous years due to the ongoing coronavirus pandemic. There was a massive shift to mail-in voting and absentee ballots, causing President Donald Trump to question the integrity of the United States’ elections for months. “This is going to be a fraud like you’ve never seen,” Trump said during the final presidential debate on Thursday, Oct. 22, claiming without evidence that mail-in voting is “ripe for fraud” and suggesting these ballots may be “manipulated,” according to the Associated Press. Five states – Washington, Oregon, Colorado, Utah and Hawaii – already conduct their elections through a mail-in process, and their elections have proved to be “safe and secure,” the Associated Press reported. “Voter fraud doesn’t exist,” said junior political science major Leilah Abelman. “If it does, it exists at rates so low as to be completely negligible. It’s being used mostly by the Republican Party as an excuse for voter suppression.” Voter fraud is rare in the United States. An analysis by the Brennan Center for Justice found Americans are more likely to be struck by lightning than to
commit voter fraud. “Extensive research reveals that fraud is very rare, voter impersonation is virtually nonexistent and many instances of alleged fraud are, in fact, mistakes by voters or administrators,” reads a statement on the Brennan Center website. “It simply could not and does not happen at the rate even approaching that which would be required to ‘rig’ an election.” To commit mail-in voting fraud, someone would have be “very creative,” just as they would to execute in-person voter fraud, according to associate political science professor Craig Burnett. “If it’s an absentee [ballot], you have to actually go and request it and then somehow know which day the absentee ballot is going to arrive at that person’s address to go steal it out of their mailbox,” he said. “And then you’d have to match their signature, [and] in some states, you have to get a witness, [who] would then be committing fraud.” In any given election, there are going to be a couple of cases where problems arise, but in Burnett’s experience there has not been “any more or less than [what] you would have in inperson voting fraud, which does occur, but it’s exceedingly low and quite frankly, most people
get caught.” The results of some elections have been taken all the way to the Supreme Court, like the presidential election of 2000 between Al Gore and George W. Bush. “I’m pretty much 100% expecting to see some kind of constitutional crisis,” said senior political science major Sarah Poirot in regard to the 2020 presidential election. “I absolutely think there’s going to be an issue this time especially because a lot of people are mailing
very long time, but it is fragile and statements like that really undermine the process.” “[Trump] is wanting to either throw out some of the votes or put in some type of measures that will suppress certain votes ... or he’s wanting to just not listen to the votes at all,” Abelman said. “All of that is very, very disruptive to democracy ... it’s very damaging to democracy.” The pandemic is expected to push back the release of full results in many key states. Only eight states expect to have at least 98% of “unofficial” results reported by noon on Wednesday, Nov. 4, and there are 22 states, including the District of Columbia, who allow postmarked ballots to arrive after Election Day, so the timing will depend on when voters return them, according to The New York Times. As of Sunday, Nov. 1, more than 93 million Americans had already mailed in their ballots or voted early in person, according to data compiled by the United States Elections Project. “State-by-state rules are different,” Burnett said. “Some states are allowed to start opening envelopes as they come in and start processing the votes.” The means of voting preference vary between the two parties. “[On Election Day],
“Democracy is fragile; we’ve had the luxury that we’ve been a very stable democracy for a very long time.” in ballots as opposed to voting in person this year for COVID safety reasons.” Voter fraud compromises America’s electoral integrity, which is key to democracy. Still, Trump has continued to spread falsehoods about the security of voting and misrepresent issues with mail-in ballots. “Claiming voter fraud is massive – and well before we’ve had an election – is irresponsible, and I would say that about anybody,” Burnett said. “Democracy is fragile, [and] we’ve had the luxury that we’ve been a very stable democracy for a
there is this sort of concern out there that it’s going to look like a Trump landslide because his voters are going to be more likely to turn out and vote on Election Day,” Burnett said. “Democrats tend to prefer voting by mail, [so] you’re going to see this sort of huge Trump surge as the polls close.” However, Democrats may gain ground as absentee votes are counted in the days after the election, according to The New York Times. The next president of the United States will most likely not be revealed on election night. “Of course, if it’s a landslide, then it’s fine [to claim victory], but if it’s close – for the health of democracy – we need to be patient,” Burnett said. “We will have a definitive answer within a week.” Others believe one week will not be enough time to confidently identify the next president. “We’re facing a very similar situation as we did in 2000 when the federal Supreme Court had to intercept state issues with voter recounts and things like that with mail-in ballots specifically,” Poirot said. “Considering the fact that I think that’s going to happen again ... I wouldn’t be surprised if it takes closer to the end of November or early December to find out who the president is, especially if it gets tangled up in legal stuff.”
Robert Kinnaird / The Hofstra Chronicle
A4 •NOVEMBER 4, 2020
NEWS
THE CHRONICLE
Concerns over Amy Swing state Pennsylvania may Coney Barrett decide 2020 presidential election confirmation
CONTINUED FROM A3
stands on the issue. “We know that Justice Barrett has been hostile to comprehensive health care through her judicial records and writings,” said Jacquelyn Marrero, director of media relations at the Planned Parenthood of Greater New York Action Fund. Even though she stated in her Senate confirmation hearings that she would enter each case without any preconceived notions, Barrett has made her stance on abortion clear in the past. In a Notre Dame Law School article, she stated her belief that abortion is “always immoral.” Emma DeSimone, a senior journalism and political science double major, believes having a woman with these opinions on the Supreme Court is “really disappointing, considering that it’s the highest judicial seat in court in America.” Other students shared DeSimone’s concerns. “She’s the only woman in the conservative bloc ... I think that’s really concerning because she could be seen as the voice for women,” Valan said. “To be a spokeswoman for women’s rights but seeming to advocate against women’s rights is a scary situation.” If Roe v. Wade is overturned, each individual state will dictate whether abortion is legal, illegal or partially restricted in the state. Schaefer believes that this could be problematic for women seeking abortions in more conservative states. “Women in New York State or Massachusetts have very little
to worry about,” Schaefer said, “but women in Mississippi or Oklahoma are in dire trouble ... with this new court.” Many are worried about this possibility as it relates to the larger future of women’s reproductive health. “If states outlaw abortion, they’re not really outlawing abortion, they’re outlawing safe abortion,” Valan said, noting that illegal and unsafe abortions were done before the passing of Roe v. Wade. Around seven million women are admitted to hospitals each year in developing countries as a result of unsafe abortions, according to a study done by the World Health Organization. “If people cannot access safe legal abortions, then that jeopardizes their constitutional human rights,” Marrero said. There is also concern about the fact that the issue of abortion is being revisited after already being mandated in the Constitution. “At this point in 2020, human rights shouldn’t be up for debate,” Valan said. DeSimone thinks that making abortion illegal is not the answer, instead suggesting that contraceptives and reproductive healthcare should be more affordable and accessible and that sex education classes should be more comprehensive. “There are more effective ways of limiting rates of abortion instead of just making it illegal,” she said. “The bottom line is people should have the right to decide what’s best for their bodies and for their futures,” Marrero said.
“The bottom line is people should have the right to decide what’s best for their bodies and their futures.”
By Antonia Moffa
A SSISTA N T C O PY C H IEF
The battleground states are key in deciding the 2020 presidential election. Experts project Pennsylvania will be one of the most important swing states in determining which candidate wins the election, alongside states like Wisconsin and Michigan. “The fact that my county, and cities like Philadelphia and Pittsburgh tend to lean blue, while the vast rural areas go red, definitely adds up to the state being a toss-up,” said Gabby Luftschein, a sophomore film major who lived in Bucks County, Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania has historically been considered a battleground state due to its demography. The state’s metropolitan areas of Philadelphia and Pittsburgh, also the most populous regions of Pennsylvania, have historically been Democratic strongholds. However, residents of the rural areas in the center and north of the state tend to hold conservative views and vote for Republicans. “I have noticed that Pennsylvania is very divided,” said Eliza Moseman, a junior double major in television studies and production and fine arts, from Hamburg, Pa. “There are parts of PA that are incredibly left-leaning and then there are places, like where I’m from, that are super [right-leaning].” Pennsylvania was one of the few key states that President Donald Trump won by a margin of less than two percent in 2016, and its 20 electoral college votes put him over the top to achieve victory, according to The Washington Post. Barack Obama won the state with 54.7% of the vote in 2008 and 52% of the vote in 2012. In a major upset, Trump was able to shift Pennsylvania just enough to the right, winning the state in 2016 over Hillary Clinton by only 0.7%. “During the 2016 election, I
was surprised when PA turned out to be a red state,” said Jenna Reda, a senior English, geography and global studies major from Hermitage, Pa. “We had gone blue for the previous few elections, and I assumed we would again.” Most current polls place former Vice President Joe Biden narrowly ahead of Trump in the Pennsylvania presidential race. Fifty-one percent of likely voters prefer Biden over the current president, according to a recent Quinnipiac University poll. “I could see Trump winning because I feel like a lot of people who supported him in 2016, but don’t anymore, simply won’t vote instead of voting for Biden,” Moseman said. Other students agreed there is a likelihood that Biden will win Pennsylvania. “Biden will win Pennsylvania based solely on younger voters,” said Ashlei Rivera, a senior marketing major from Buskill, Pa. “Younger voters have had enough and want to see the state become more progressive.” In Pennsylvania, voters between the ages of 18 and 29 have already cast more early votes than they did in the 2016 election. Nationally, 63% of young voters support Biden compared to 25% who support Trump, according to a Harvard Youth poll. “I think, and hope, Biden will take Pennsylvania,” Luftschein said. “I feel like so many of us avid leftists from PA are finally of voting age in this election.” “Younger voters are tired of how the state runs and it’s up to us to make the flip from a red state to blue [state],” Rivera said. Both presidential candidates spent significant time campaigning in Pennsylvania. Biden focused much of his energy in the remaining weeks before the election on flipping the state blue. On Monday, Oct. 26, he made a surprise visit to a campaign office in Chester, Pa. to give a brief speech that mostly
criticized the Trump administration’s COVID-19 response. Overall, Biden’s strategy has been to show supporters that he is taking the virus seriously by wearing a mask at all times and limiting attendance at in-person gatherings to only small numbers of people. Trump, aware of the razorthin margin by which he won Pennsylvania in 2016, has also campaigned in the state. On Monday, Oct. 26, he held a rally in Allentown, Pa., where he spoke to a crowd of thousands of mostly maskless supporters despite rising COVID-19 cases in the state and across the country. Trump’s lack of compliance with COVID-19 guidelines may be bolstering his support with people in Pennsylvania who have disapproved of state Governor Tom Wolf’s COVID-19 policies, an issue that has become divisive along party lines. “Because our Governor is a Democrat, a lot of people may vote Republican because I have seen so many ... disagreeing with his approach to COVID-19,” Moseman said. Over two million Pennsylvania residents had already voted as of Thursday, Oct. 29, taking advantage of ballot drop boxes across the state, prepaid return postage on ballots provided by the government and in-person early voting. However, Pennsylvania law does not allow election officials to open mail-in ballots until 7 a.m. on Election Day, and some counties have decided to wait until the polls close that night or even the next morning to begin processing ballots. The full results of the swing state’s presidential election, and by extension the national election, may not be known until many days after Tuesday, Nov. 3. “I know it could really go either way,” Luftschein said. “The only way [either side] can win is ultimately to make sure our voices are heard with our vote.”
THE CHRONICLE
NEWS
NOVEMBER 4, 2020 • A5
CATCH UP ON CREDITS DURING JANUARY SESSION 2021! Registration for January Session 2021* is currently open for all students! • Earn three credits in just two weeks (January 4-19, 2021) or three weeks (January 4-26, 2021)! • Choose from a variety of on-campus and online programs including 39 online undergraduate courses, from 31 different disciplines (24 that satisfy distribution requirements)! • Limited on-campus jobs will be available. • Dining facilities will be open in a limited capacity. Visit hofstra.edu/january or email january@hofstra.edu for more info. *Note: January Abroad 2021 has been canceled; updated information for any international programs will be provided as soon as possible. Additionally, the University will be closed January 18, 2021.
Ad_JanSess2021_HU_Chronicle.indd 1
10/15/20 10:13 AM
A6 • November 4, 2020
FEATURES
THE CHRONICLE
Students collaborate to produce LHSC’s Hofstra Votes LIVE
Adam Flash / The Hofstra Chronicle Regional Executive Producer Jason Siegel and Associate Line Producer Lauren Brill review the show’s rundown.
By Micaela Erickson ASSISTANT FEATURES EDITOR
An air of anxious excitement filled the halls of the Lawrence Herbert School of Communication Tuesday night. Professionally dressed students darted in and out of the building, donning their masks and event badges as they prepared for the big night ahead. Election Day was finally here, and Hofstra Votes LIVE was about to begin. Breaking news doesn’t stop for anyone, even during a pandemic. With nearly 200 students and faculty working together, both remotely and in person, the production was very different from the inaugural 2018 broadcast. Preparation for this highly anticipated event started at the beginning of the semester, and on Tuesday night, it was time to put all the hard work and long hours to the test. Student reporters, producers, anchors and crew members filled studios and classrooms, eager to deliver election updates throughout the night. Victoria Chong, a senior video and television production major and Hofstra Votes LIVE senior technical director, expressed her excitement for the event. “It’s really great for everyone to still be able to work together in a socially distant way despite the circumstances that we’re in,” Chong said. “It’s been a lot of
fun to kind of push the [School of Communication] to see what it’s technically capable of while
different alternative options for how to move things forward.” Though Hofstra Votes LIVE
ent majors, years and experience levels brings a diverse range of talent to the production. “We definitely have a lot of team members that are all different moving parts of this welloiled machine,” said senior video TV and film major and Hofstra Votes LIVE curtain raiser executive producer Nerys Muller. “It’s definitely a lot more challenging than people would think, but I wouldn’t have it any other way.” If there’s been any takeaway from other studio shows this semester, it’s that a good production is a safe production. Enforcing social distancing and mask wearing was a top priority for Hofstra Votes LIVE. Senior television production major and Hofstra Votes LIVE national executive producer, Julia Wachtel, explained how they’re working to keep people safe during the live production. “Everybody on air will be
“It’s really great for everyone to still be able to work together in a socially distant way despite the circumstances that we’re in.” making sure we’re not breaking any guidelines.” Though the pandemic brought about many challenges for this production, it also created a unique opportunity for resourceful and creative election coverage. With a mix of onsite reporters, local and national correspondents and even an anchor streaming in from Minnesota, the Hofstra Votes LIVE team has done the most to adapt to this difficult situation. “The challenges that we’ve had to face with social distancing and how we’re laying everything out has created a situation where the students have had to come up with a lot of creative solutions on their own,” said assistant journalism professor Nicole Clarity. “It’s a good skill to learn, especially in these times. If there is a silver lining to the difficulties of this process, it’s that it sort of forced them to be really creative and come up with all sorts of
has a number of faculty members involved, it is the students who truly brought this event to life. Having students from all differ-
really important to us because we want the crew and our anchors to feel safe, and I really don’t think [wearing masks] takes that much away from the actual broadcast.” As the clock ticked closer to the start of the broadcast at 8 p.m., the energy among Hofstra Votes LIVE participants only increased. “Everyone is just so excited to be here and wants to do everything they can to make the best broadcast possible,” said senior public relations major and social media team member Madie Mento. “Even since I got here at 2 p.m., it has been the most energizing experience.” Although the broadcast had a bit of a rocky start, the high points of Hofstra Votes LIVE outshined its lows. To put on an event of this caliber during normal times is a huge accomplishment, but it is even more impressive to execute amid COVID-19. Though the coming days will likely yield more concrete results, providing accurate election night coverage is essential to keeping communities informed, both on campus and across the country.
wearing masks. There is no one who’s not going to be wearing one,” Wachtel said. “This was
Adam Flash / The Hofstra Chronicle Student expert on climate change and social media team member Madie Mento prepares for her interview.
THE CHRONICLE
FEATURES
November 4, 2020 • A7
The Humans of Hofstra
By Le a h D e H a e mer STAFF WRITER
“
Nobody wanted this election. I don’t think this is anyone’s ideal ticket for either side, really … I have voted, I just got my absentee ballot on Saturday [Oct. 24] ... I haven’t really been engaged [in this election in other ways]. I’ve been sharing things, [and] I was very outspoken [about Massachusetts state elections]. Other than that, I’ve just been very vocal about ranked-choice voting, which is question two [on the ballot] in Massachusetts … I feel as if ranked-choice voting – while a little more complex than the electoral college that we have as a winner-takes-all system – is much more fair, not only to those who vote, but also to third party candidates, independent candidates, any candidate really outside of the two-party system that will benefit from ranked-choice voting. I don’t really know [how this election has affected me as a college student], because as a college student I kind of assume that everyone has a similar mentality … I do acknowledge that there are some younger people who do have conservative mindsets, but considering we are located in New York, I figure that it’s a mostly liberal political landscape here, so ... I don’t really feel the impact of this election on this campus, other than on everyone’s mental health. I believe that voting is a constitutional right given to every citizen, and I believe that it should be exercised at every opportunity. There is a systematic suppression of voters specifically in areas with minority voters. There is a lot of voter suppression, which makes it feel almost hopeless to vote in some regions in America. I was very concerned my absentee ballot would not arrive on time. But in reality, if I didn’t get it on time, I would not have headed home to vote, because I do live in Massachusetts, and Massachusetts is a very blue state. So no matter who I voted for, I would’ve felt like my vote just would not have counted as much. [This presidential election] is so exhausting. I’m tired. America’s tired. No matter who gets elected, I think America is still going to be tired. We’re going to be tired for another four years.
”
Thomas Doherty Leah DeHaemer / The Hofstra Chronicle
“
Alexis Marking Photo Courtesy of Alexis Marking
I worked with the Honors College to start a voting initiative in my county in New York state, and I’m the current president of our pre-law fraternity on campus, Phi Alpha Delta. I’m also a political science major, and I’m applying to law school right now. So, voting is very important. I actually, over the summer, worked for a woman running to be our state senator in the 45th district of New York. And I was basically her campaign coordinator, and for a lot of the summer I was one of her only full-time employees, so I ended up doing a lot of things that 21-year-olds don’t usually get the opportunity to do, which was really cool. If I wasn’t already passionate [about politics and the law], that [experience] definitely opened me up to it. … We have a lot of younger people who are coming out and voting, and I am very happy to see that, but traditionally young people don’t vote because we don’t really feel like we’re personally affected quite yet. We’re usually still stuck in like the intermediate stage of adulthood, and we’re just trying to figure things out, and we’re like barely paying taxes, and we’re not really contributing much aside from like drinking a lot of coffee and doing our best to survive through our first job or college or whatever. But we have the freshest perspective on everything, because we grew up in the environment that we are in, and we are a direct product of that environment. So people who are 75 are stuck in the environment that they grew up in, and they’re a product of that, so they’ve become out of touch sometimes ... and so if young people aren’t there to say, ‘No, this is actually what we want,’ then we end up having things happen. If not everybody steps forward and makes their voice heard, then the voices [become heard unequally], and things happen that wouldn’t have happened if everybody had had a say. Don’t just vote, make sure that you’re educated on who you’re voting for. But also, there are a lot of different rules with absentee ballots and mail-ins these days, especially from state-to-state, so before you vote please make sure that you are informed on what you need to do to make sure your vote counts.
”
Hofstra Votes Live provides nationwide coverage of the presidential and congressional elections produced by Hofstra students. This year, due to the coronavirus, the newsroom was organized carefully and the staff was masked for the entire night. Some students taking classes from home offered their time as regional correspondents, while students on campus managed the livestream and worked to produce coverage throughout the night of the 2020 election. Shooting wrapped up just after midnight, with the results of the Presidential Election still up in the air.
Photos by Adam Flash
Spread by Robert Kinnaird
A10 • November 4, 2020
FEATURES
THE CHRONICLE
Professor Spotlight: Rosanna Perotti’s pedagogy of listening
By Betty Araya FEATURES EDITOR
Rosanna Perotti, associate professor of political science at Hofstra University, began her career with an unexpected first passion: journalism. “I liked a lot of things, but I didn’t know what to major in because I sort of liked everything, and I thought, well, [if’] I’m a writer, I can write [about] everything,” Perotti said. After graduating with a bachelor’s degree from the University of Pennsylvania, she took a job as a reporter at a small paper in New Jersey. When deciding what her next step in academia would be, Perotti decided to go back the University of Pennsylvania to get her master’s in political science. After doing her Ph.D. thesis on immigration policy, she developed a love for the topic, the theories and most importantly teaching students. Political science, a field that is seldom static, requires constant adjustment. “My classes, like a lot of [political scientists’], require constant updating and
By Becca Lo Presti STAFF WRITER
Michelle Moran understands her clients more than most lawyers ever could. Moran, who graduated from Hofstra University’s Maurice A. Deane School of Law this spring, starts her new job as an immigration lawyer in a few days. There, she will assist people with the same immigration process that her family went through years ago. “I am actually an immigrant myself,” Moran said. “I saw all of the trials that [my family] had to go through, not only just with the legal system but also [culturally] ... that’s what did it for me. I need[ed] to be part of the change.” Moran is beginning her career as an immigration lawyer during one of the most anti-immigrant administrations in recent history. President Trump ran on an anti-immigrant platform in 2016 and has maintained this position
constant attention to the news,” she said. “The trends change, and we need to be able to address what’s happening. You also need to be able to address aspects of our system that nobody pays attention to until there’s a crisis, for instance, the Electoral College,” she continued, noting it as an area that is currently of great importance. Media and its relationship with the central government has been a source of controversy in recent years. As a journalist, Perotti has a deep insight on this topic. “I think I have an understanding of how to consume journalism that may be different from the man on the street,” Perotti explained. “In order to understand how to consume journalism, you have to understand that there are certain criteria that make things news.” Her understanding of how news is produced allows her to empathize with the media, while also seeking a comprehensive look at what is happening in society. This is the same wisdom she tries to instill in her students, while stressing the media’s role
as a watchdog over the government. “We can’t forget that what makes the system democratic are the checks that are put in place and were bolstered by the framers of our constitution,” Perotti said. These checks, Perotti explained, are the courts, the bureaucracy or “the experts who serve in the executive branch largely in making and evaluating policy” and the media. “We may not like what they’re doing. They may not sometimes even be saying the truth,” Perotti said. “But ... simply attacking the legitimacy of the press is attacking our democratic system. No ifs, ands or buts about that.” As this kind of divisiveness and polarization plagues our society, Perotti strives to keep it out of her classroom. “I have had heated discussions in my classes,” she said. “I try to steer the discussion back to divisions that we have about policy and not the emotional content, because I think that’s what universities are about.” “Universities are about trying
to talk about issues, but in a non-emotional way, [and] to look at the substantive content ... to attack the issues and not the people,” Perotti continued, explaining the root of her pedagogy. Another element of this unnecessary divide in political discourse is what Perotti describes as an unsophistication that prevents people from being able to break down the labels they give to one another. “There needs to be a set of issues or behaviors that are attached to that [label] to make for a productive conversation,” Perotti explained. “And I think that the classroom is a place for us to talk about that, but that requires a lot of patience.” “When you’re calling somebody a fascist, you need to follow that through by saying, ‘Look, you’re supporting positions that attack all of the safety checks that we have in a democratic system,’” Perotti continued, suggesting that people should understand the offensive behaviors and issue positions they reference before assigning someone an identity.
Academia is meant to be a place where people can comfortably share their ideas, and through this acceptance, shed any ignorance they may carry. “I try in my class to acknowledge that everybody has an opinion, or that everybody has partisanship or [a] set of positions on issues and to encourage respect between them,” Perotti said. Maintaining this level of respect, Perotti explained, can sometimes require one to listen to opinions they deeply disagree with. “I think what makes that easier is having exposure to a lot of types of people,” Perotti said. “Having a number, first of all, of crosscutting identities in your own world, and also maintaining friendships and connections into a number of different worlds.” Perotti maintains that through the empirical knowledge a classroom provides, and the compassion-driven conversation she encourages, students will gain a true understanding of the world around them – an understanding they can take with them wherever they go.
throughout his campaign for reelection. When reflecting on the impact of such strong anti-immigration sentiment in the United States, Moran acknowledges that it has affected her “mentally [and] emotionally; definitely in a negative way.” During her time at Hofstra Law School, Moran advocated for people directly impacted by the 2017 “zero-tolerance” policy that controversially led to the separation of families at the U.S. border. Through an internship at The Safe Passage Project, a nonprofit immigration legal services organization which provides free lawyers to refugee and immigrant children in the NYC area, Moran represented a young girl who was otherwise alone through the immigration process. “My client was six years old and she did not know where her parents were, where she was standing,” Moran said. “It was extreme to me ... that just took an emotional toll on me.”
Although the Trump administration eventually backtracked on their “zero-tolerance” approach, the more recent Migrant Protection Protocols still complicate the already-difficult immigration process. Through the Asylum Clinic at Hofstra Law, Moran represented LGBTQ+ clients affected by this protocol. One client, a transgender woman, “had to go wait in Mexico for her asylum interview and her asylum process.” During phone sessions, Moran’s client disclosed: “I’m being tortured here.” Moran worries about the impact of anti-immigration policies on LGBTQ+ individuals, a group of people who are already disproportionately targeted for their sexual orientation or gender identity. The recent confirmation of Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court also gives Moran much to think about. “Listening to her in the hearings ... it’s really sad.” Moran expressed the
conflicting sentiments that many women felt surrounding Barrett’s nomination and subsequent confirmation, saying: “I’m proud that [Barrett] is a woman, but she’s infringing on our rights.” Moran feels that Barrett will lean too heavily on her religious beliefs. “I’m no one to judge, but at the same time, as a Supreme Court judge, you’re working for the people ... You’re here to serve the people of your country,” she said. Moran is concerned that Barrett’s opposition to the Affordable Care Act, for example, could result in women paying more for health care and losing access to basic no-cost services, such as screening for diabetes and other common illnesses. According to Moran, “Regardless of who wins in the presidency, having a more conservative Supreme Court is really going to impact all of us.” Despite all that Moran has experienced, both in law school and in the current political
climate, there is a silver lining to her struggle. “As an immigrant myself and also as an immigration attorney now, in a positive way, it pushes me to want to do more.” She wants others to take a similar investment into public policy, advocacy and education, advising everyone to “really pay attention to what’s going on.” Moran believes that both now and in the future, “advocacy is going to be the main [way] things are going to be pushed in the law.” She notes that the separation of families at the U.S. border would have continued had there not been such a public outcry, and she hopes that people will remember that even grassroots movements can make changes at the legal level. Moran believes that if citizens stay engaged, they can even influence the Supreme Court.
Alumna Spotlight: Michelle Moran Defending immigrants in the Trump era
THE CHRONICLE
FEATURES
November 4, 2020 • A11
Warming up to climate science: Professor Jase Bernhardt explains the consequences of “global warming”
Photo Courtesy of Unsplash People on fragments of what was once a singular glacier.
By BettyAraya FEATURES EDITOR
Climate change has gotten a lot of attention recently on both sides of the aisle, as it is a broad topic that has many environmental, social and economic implications. It is often referred to as “global warming,” but this phrase is misleading. Jase Bernhardt, assistant professor of geology, environment and sustainability at Hofstra University, explains the distinction: “Climate refers to long-term weather patterns and conditions. It is not something that is observed day to day like a weather forecast, but data collected in thirty-year increments. “Global warming is sort of the initial term people use because the big impact of climate change is increasing temperatures overall globally,” said Bernhardt, who is developing research and coursework in climatology and meteorology. “But there’s a suite of impacts from climate change, not [just] temperatures.” Bernhardt explained that the climate is naturally changing all the time, but it has been happening at a far more rapid pace in recent decades. One of these changes is general increasing temperatures, and within this time, the new variable that scientists have observed is human impact.
“One really important aspect of this is the loss of ice mass in the Arctic, especially in glaciers across rural parts of the Arctic,” Bernhardt said. He explained that the melting ice is a “positive feedback cycle.” Bright colors reflect light, whereas darker surfaces absorb light. When the sun hits the bright ice, the ice is able to reflect it and remain cold. But as the Earth warms due to various influences, both human and natural, the ice melts rapidly, revealing the dark ocean water below. When the sun hits the revealed ocean water, the dark water absorbs the heat, causing the water surface to become warm and melt the ice further. Ice melting in the Arctic has a negative impact worldwide. As the ice melts, sea levels rise, and especially for coastal cities and small island nations, this leads to flooding. “And, of course, the majority of world’s population lives in entire coastal ocean locations. So, as a result, lots of people are vulnerable to the sea level rise,” Bernhardt explained. Rising sea levels are not only a concern for those directly impacted: Even land locked and wealthy nations may be forced to consider what they will do when flooding forces migration, for example. Another side effect of climate change is what Bernhardt refers to as a local consequence. Cities
tend to be warmer than surrounding rural and suburban areas, and this is because of “the vertical nature of cities,” meaning they are composed of tall buildings that can trap heat. “Also, there’s a paucity of water in cities. It’s mostly sidewalks, roads and buildings, things that can’t take in water,” Bernhardt said. The lack of water then impacts evaporation, which has a natural cooling effect. When sunlight, referred to as short-wave radiation, hits surfaces, it reflects back toward the sky in the form of long-wave radiation. Normally, long-wave radiation can go back into the atmosphere, trapped by some building and clouds, but it eventually escapes. However, in cities, long-wave radiation gets trapped in the skyscrapers and keeps the surrounding atmosphere warm. The lack of evaporation keeps cities warm during the day, and the buildings keep them warm at night. This will then lead people to turn up their air conditioning, which also negatively impacts the climate and poses yet another challenge: What about people who can’t afford this side effect of climate change? “There is also a justice issue as well as urban heat island effect,” Bernhardt said, elaborating on the social inequality aspect of this problem. As in most crises, low-income individuals are more vulnerable to climate change. Bernhardt’s views reflect the concerns of many environmentalists and scientists, who stress the disproportionate effects climate change will have on the Global South and poverty-stricken communities. He does not believe in drastic changes all at once, however. “You can just do a little bit to a lot of things; just think small changes to a lot of industries. Everyone bears a bit of the burden and I think it’s more palatable,” Bernhardt said. “And sort of a sad truth globally is sort of the irony that the countries that generally produce the most emissions, the big economies like the U.S., wealthier countries, Western Europe ... can
adapt more easily because maybe they have the money or people have the wealth to adapt, whereas countries like some of the small island nations and Oceania or parts of Africa or sub-Saharan countries are among the poorest in the world; those places are seeing some of the most amazing impacts,” he continued. In the last century, life expectancy has skyrocketed as health and medicine has made huge advancements, but Bernhardt noted that our vulnerability to extreme weather has plateaued as best. There is no way to stop a hurricane, for example, but he stressed that with the advancements society has made, it doesn’t have to be this way. To mitigate climate change and the resulting issues, legislation is needed. However, any legislation would have an economic impact. In recent years, climate change and how to address it has been viewed as part of the Democratic agenda, but Bernhardt said it has not always been that way, citing past efforts made by Nixon and George H.W Bush. Bernhardt explained that widespread denial of science is a recent development;
the American public’s response to COVID-19 has been another harmful example. As a society that values independence, he noted seeing trends of pushback among Americans in situations where a strong central government is required. Bernhardt doesn’t view the politicization of climate change as a partisan issue, but rather as a result of the American public’s general suspicion of science and the federal government. There are jarring differences between the different ways climate change is presented, but Bernhardt rejects the “doomsday” and partisan approach. More extreme hurricanes, wildfires, a rise in the tick population due to warmer weather and endangerment of many species are just some of the universal consequences of climate change, and climate science itself emulates this universality. No one will be spared from the ramifications of climate change, and although people may understand it differently or have different solutions to the problem, there needs to be unity in that truth.
Photo Courtesy of Unsplash Factory smoke being released into the atmosphere.
OP-ED
A12 • NOVEMBER 4, 2020
THE CHRONICLE
The views and opinions expressed in the Editorial section are those of the authors. They are not an endorsement of the views of The Chronicle or its staff. The Chronicle does not discriminate based on the opinions of the authors.
Electoral politics are a performative sham
By Visvajit Sriramrajan and Jessica Zhang
This election season, the battle between the Democratic and Republican parties for the so-called “soul of the nation” seems fiercer than ever. Both candidates promise to reclaim and restore the country’s alleged “former glory”, and the onus is put upon voters to align themselves with whichever vision they agree with the most. Disenfranchisement and ballot interference aside, the American people will choose a victor – someone who will put forth policies that will impact generations of Americans to come. However, those who are able to vote will be participating in a process that ensures that their voices do not actually bring about any real change. In a classic democratic model, citizens seeking change elect representatives who pass laws that cater to their constituents’ interests. In the modern day, corporate interests motivate
system, what is now known as the United States was established upon the lands of several Indigenous tribes. All non-Indigenous people in the Americas are settlers, making all nonIndigenous governance illegitimate and imposed forcefully and violently upon pre-existing livelihoods. Non-Indigenous
people in the U.S. may celebrate Indigenous People’s Day once a year, but they will never be able to fully understand and reckon with the fact that it is the very presence of settlers that has led to the disenfranchisement of the communities and ecosystems they occupy. From the colonial place names we use to identify the Indigenous lands we occupy to the concepts we appropriate, anti-Indigenousness is deeply entrenched in the American ethos. Such anti-Indigenousness extends beyond the borders of the continental U.S., with American hegemony being the leading force in toppling democracies around the world, from Korea to Bolivia. It was, after all, an unwavering belief in “manifest destiny” and baseless American exceptionalism that pushed the United States to seize lands in the Caribbean and Asia-Pacific as military bases, among other travesties. This November, regardless of the outcome, many things will
not improve. Workers will still be exploited. Indigenous people will still be deprived of their land and Black Americans will still be deprived of their rights. Central American, Palestinian, Syrian and Tamil refugees will continue to be denied asylum. The United States will continue to orchestrate coups d’etat in the Korean peninsula, Latin America and sub-Saharan Africa. The climate crisis will continue accelerating. No amount of voting for or against someone has stopped any of this from happening, and this year will be no different. The only way to fix America is to break the system – to break the Democratic and Republican parties alike.
mate. Harris is an attorney and senator from California who is pro-marriage equality, wants to combat climate change and has worked to defend immigrants’ rights. Harris is qualified for a vice presidential seat, but she has a very concerning criminal justice record that is hard to overlook. The self-proclaimed “top cop” is known for locking up over 1500 people for marijuana offenses, refusing to investigate certain police shootings and placing trans women in men’s prisons. A lot of people are choosing to disregard this information entirely; anything is better than that damn Cheeto in the White House. Women in politics (and particularly women of color) do deal with constant sexism both online and in real life. However, there seems to be this skewed
notion that women in politics are immune to doing wrong, and that any legitimate criticisms of their views or actions stem from misogyny. There are incredibly brilliant and strong women in politics who will help shape our future, but their gender identity alone isn’t what makes them more qualified or progressive. Alongside these brilliant women, there are also many who could set us back decades in terms of progress if they’re given too much power. Take a look at Amy Coney Barrett: she’s a prime example of this regression, and she was just confirmed to the Supreme Court. It’s dangerous to assume female politicians are less capable of committing the same heinous acts that their male counterparts do. It’s also misogynistic
to reduce the work of women in politics to nothing more than their ability to exist in a typically male-dominated space. Again, there are women in politics who will spark change, but having a woman in office is not the ultimate revolutionary act. Women in power can still cause harm. Women in power can still perpetuate violence against marginalized groups. Women in power can still maintain a watered-down version of the hatred and bigotry Trump promotes. There is still so much to be done.
nearly all legislation – from bills against terminating insurance premiums for healthcare and directing funding away from public transit in urban areas to the regulation of pharmaceutical drug prices and American foreign policy decisions in the Global South. To push legislation through, many corporations use political action committees (PACs), which are tax-exempt and are thereby able to channel money to causes with little to no governmental friction. While labor unions and non-profit organizations have established political action committees as well to fund their causes, the vast majority of the approximately 4,600 active PACs in the United States today were established by businesses and serve corporate interests. Super PACs take this concept one step further by abolishing acceptance limits on donations. It is for this reason, among others, that congestion pricing for personal vehicles in cities, the de-privatization of higher
education and affordable medicine remain distant despite years of worker-driven campaigns in favor of them. Neither the Republican nor the Democratic Party possesses the ability or desire to dismantle this hierarchical and capitalist system, because it is their lifeblood. As a means of funding this
ary Clinton to take office back in 2016, but we got four years of unabashed white nationalism instead. Trump’s presidency has brought all of the country’s problems even further into light, and they’ve been exacerbated by his COVID-19 response along with the recent resurgence of the Black Lives Matter movement. While Clinton might have handled the country’s pandemic response better, we would still be witnessing obscene instances of police brutality and racism with little done to combat it. A Clinton presidency would not have eradicated racism and bigotry from a nation built on white supremacy. Neither will a Biden/Harris ticket. It was arguably a huge milestone for Kamala Harris, a woman of color, to be picked as Joe Biden’s running
“Neither the Republican nor the Democratic Party possess the ability or desire to dismantle this hierarchical and capitalist system because it is their lifeblood.”
Visvajit Sriramrajan is a journalism major who writes about leftism in global movements. Jessica Zhang is a junior English major. They serve as Op-Ed editors for The Chronicle.
Girl power won’t save the United States
By Micaela Erickson “If Hillary had won, we’d all be at brunch right now!” “None of this would be happening if we had a woman in office!” Many liberals think statements like these are feminist “wins,” but that couldn’t be further from the truth. There are a lot of things wrong with this country, and these issues would not be resolved by simply electing a woman to a presidential or vice-presidential seat. Having a woman win a presidential or vice-presidential position in the U.S. would be groundbreaking, but it would likely result in little to no lasting systemic change. “Girl power” is not the savior this country thinks it is. A lot of people expected Hill-
Have an opinion? We want to hear it. Email us at huchronicle.op.ed@gmail.com
Micaela Erickson is a junior journalism major with a minor in civic engagement.
THE CHRONICLE
OP-ED
NOVEMBER 4, 2020 • A13
Progressives: Now is not the time to protest vote By Lauren Ballinger Former Vice President Joe Biden is not everyone’s first pick for president. During the first few primaries, Biden lost to Senator Bernie Sanders, one of the more progressive candidates on the ballot during the Democratic primaries. Biden won South Carolina and swept the board on Super Tuesday after multiple other candidates had dropped out of the race. The candidates who suspended their campaigns, including Pete Buttigieg and Amy Klobuchar, then put their support behind Biden. Moderate Democrats who supported Buttigieg and Klobuchar also put their support behind Biden because many of his policies and goals were similar to those candidates. The group that struggled with Biden’s win on Super Tuesday was mostly members of the Democratic party who supported more progressive politicians, including Sanders and Senator Elizabeth Warren. The reality now, however, is
that voting for Joe Biden is the only choice for progressive voters in this election. The argument is not that progressive voters cannot be upset that their candidate lost in the face of a complete DNC overhaul during the primaries. Moderate candidates suspending their campaign to consolidate support around Biden is understandably frustrating. However, this political move illustrates the fact that, at the current moment, strictly progressive politicians are going to be stopped from making it to the White House. According to a Wall Street Journal/NBC survey, two-thirds of respondents said that they would be uncomfortable with a socialist in office. Sanders is in fact a self-proclaimed democratic socialist. The Democratic party takes this discomfort with the idea of socialism and runs with it, offering up a moderate Democrat in place of Sanders for the past two elections. The reality is, whether or not you voted for a progressive candidate in the primary
elections, the only choice now is a moderate Democrat. While it may not be the first choice for many voters, it is a step in the right direction for more progressive policies. Furthermore, a lot of policies the Biden campaign has taken on are indeed similar
to progressive policy goals. For example, while Joe Biden said in the final debate that he does not support the Green New Deal, much of his own proposed environmental policy is similar to it in many ways. Both emphasize the importance of clean energy and create a plan for jobs that both come out of clean energy and those that may be negatively
affected by the transition to clean energy. Biden has also been endorsed by many environmental groups, including League of Conservation Voters and The BlueGreen Alliance. There are legitimate issues many voters have with voting for Biden. Indigenous voters have been questioning how productive voting for the lesser of two evils can be, as the process of voting itself is referred to as a “system rooted in colonial domination and exploitation” in an article on the website for Indigenous Action, an organization dedicated to Indigenous rights to land back reforms. Victims of sexual assault struggle with voting for either Donald Trump or Joe Biden, as both have sexual assault allegations against them. These are legitimate reasons not to vote, rooted in generational or personal trauma. However, if you are choosing not to vote because your specific candidate of choice isn’t on the ballot, or you
simply dislike the two-party system, that is unrealistic. If you are a progressive voter not voting or voting third party, it is essentially a vote against your own interests, especially when it comes to policies regarding issues such as healthcare and the environment. The power of politics does not end with voting for president. You can vote and advocate for local politicians or create petitions on policies to appear before the state, or maybe even make it onto a ballot in the future. You can protest or help with local community programs. The work to get progressive policies neither starts nor ends with Joe Biden – voting for him is just another part of the bigger picture. Even if Biden is not your first choice, right now he is the only choice. Lauren Ballinger is a sophomore journalism major interested in social justice and environmental issues.
Biden has no foreign policy plan – Trump does By Maxwell Clegg The 2020 election has been anything but predictable. From COVID-19 to the presidential debate, nothing is reminiscent of the past. One notable aspect of this election is that it is missing discussions of foreign policy. As a conservative who favors a world order in which America is active and leading, this worries me. Foreign policy is not something that should be overlooked, considering the stark differences between President Trump and former Vice President Biden. Biden likes to claim that American leadership needs to be restored abroad. However, despite what those on the left claim, Trump has been widely involved in directing of American interests abroad. Trump prefers a policy of “America First,” which some see as abandoning our allies. This alleged abandonment was most notable in his call for South Korea and Saudi Arabia
to repay America for our protection against regional threats. I do not see this as an abandonment of our allies, but merely an acceptance of the fact that American taxpayers subsidize these bases, and we should be compensated for it. Biden has claimed that he will work with our allies instead of against them, which he protests that Trump does. This slander is nothing more than a political move by Biden to convince people that Trump has ruined relationships with our most important allies. However, Biden and any educated voter knows that our allies depend on us. We set the standard and goals for the future and it will take more than one president to change that dependence. On the issue of China, Biden and Trump not only differ in approach, but also in their understanding of the situation. Trump correctly sees China as a threat. China’s growing economic hegemony over the region is
an ever-growing peril to the sovereignty of Asian countries and global democracy. Trump has chosen to confront China on such issues, engaging in a trade war that has hurt China’s economic growth.
On the other hand, Biden has been critical of Trump’s handling of the situation. Biden states that America should increase naval presence and cooperate with Japan and South Korea. This is not only a dangerous idea, but is also antithetical to his global view of peace and stability. Biden also claims
that China and America can work together to solve climate change with a continuation of the lackluster agreement signed in 2014 by President Obama and Xi Jinping. Perhaps the most extraordinary achievement of President Trump’s foreign policy agenda is the signing of the Abraham Accords. The Abraham Accords uprooted years of diplomatic theory that peace in the Middle East region could only occur with the establishment of a Palestinian state through Israeli concessions. We have yet to see the full effects of this agreement, but it will surely open more doors for peace and normalization between Israel and Arab states. Biden had eight years to normalize relations between Israel and the Arab states – he did not. His plan, four years later, now involves aiding Israel on the condition that they change course in the conflict with the Palestinians. This not only
leaves our ally cold in one of the most consequential global regions, it could tear down everything that President Trump has accomplished. Based on the information above, it is clear who the proactive and realistic candidate is: President Trump. Over the past four years, he has challenged the status quo, reimagined our China strategy, achieved diplomatic breakthroughs in the Middle East and much more. Joe Biden has no solid plan for his next four years. His foreign policy is more a ridicule of Trump than anything else. In an increasingly globalized world, we need a president who understands the reality of the situation, not one who claims to be an expert but has 47 years of experience to the contrary. Maxwell Clegg is a sophomore studying public policy and public service and economics.
OP-ED
A14 • NOVEMBER 4, 2020
THE CHRONICLE
The Supreme Court and Electoral College suppress American voices By Daniel Cody The United States is an empire with immense power and influence over global politics. As we approach Election Day, we hope to use the electoral system to help us craft a better version of our own country. Voting is supposed to give the people a voice, but in America, electoralism doesn’t guarantee democracy. When the country’s bleak status quo permeates the Supreme Court and Electoral College, our allegedly exceptional democracy is challenged. As industrialization concentrated power in the Global North and the old empires collapsed, we built new ones. The current republic system replaced monarchy as the primary form of government. However, to keep the masses under control and the elite in power, the ruling classes installed institutions that limit the power of the people. One of these institutions is the Electoral College – a body created by the nation’s founders to delegate more power to the
states. However, this is a thin veil that barely hides the truth. The winner-takes-all rule creates an uneven divide between the rural and urban poor. Optimally, we would have a popular system where the public directly elects a president. I often find myself asking, is it democratic to hold the value of one voter over another? We think that balancing provincial authority with the collective is somehow more representative, but we forget the elections of 2016 and 2000, when the distribution of delegates didn’t quite match up with the popular vote. Or, on a smaller scale, when the Republicans hijacked state legislatures by gerrymandering and segregating state assemblies’ electoral districts. This is not to degrade the representation of rural populations; different rules for different states can be necessary, but the election of a chief executive should be done by the entire population. On the other side of the aisle,
we remember the 2016 Democratic Primaries, when, through various propaganda wars and maneuvering, the Democratic National Committee (DNC) attempted to thwart the Bernie Sanders campaign, prompting the resignation of DNC chair-
“ I often find myself asking, is it democratic to hold the value of one voter over another? ” woman Debbie Wasserman Schultz, and the nomination of Hillary Clinton, a hawkish and insufferable centrist. Why we use district representative systems like the Electoral College is plain and simple: the U.S. is scared of popular demand. The will of the people disassembles the financial complex we have created through the last 30 years. Keeping poor people down is the rich man’s first priority, and his status quo of misleading politics is possible
with the “stopgap” mechanism of the Electoral College, as Megan Day points out in Jacobin. Sadly, this kind of interference is not exclusive to the Electoral College. The Supreme Court operates in a similar manner, except it awkwardly fulfills the role of a secondary legislature. The mainstream consensus grants the Supreme Court the same prestigious status as the Electoral College. However, justices are not elected by the public, are nearly impossible to impeach and have no obligations to uphold popular opinion. Some of the most important decisions in recent history – rulings on abortion, gay marriage and other cultural benchmarks – were gridlocked or blocked in Congress before they were sent to the Court. It’s not like Congress doesn’t have the authority, it’s just too dysfunctional to make the important decisions. Instead of making laws through our (allegedly) dually elected legislature, we pipeline our bills to the supposed genius
of nine jurors who are chosen through an already questionable election system. Liberals may herald Ruth Bader Ginsburg as a stalwart advocate for women’s rights, but they also forget she was an enabler of the same system that replaced much of our lawmaking democracy with autocrats. It’s fair game to nominate a justice during a president’s term, just like it’s fair game to gerrymander districts in your favor during a census year. However, that doesn’t make it right. As people mailed in their ballots and stood in the hourslong lines, they put their trust in these systems that work against their interest. I find it hard to do the same.
Daniel Cody is a sophomore studying journalism and political science. He also serves as an Op-Ed Editor for The Chronicle.
There are two imposters among us ;_;
By Mark Herron
Have an opinion? We want to hear it. Email us at huchronicle.op.ed@gmail.com
THE CHRONICLE
OP-ED
NOVEMBER 4, 2020 • A15
Robert Kinnaird / The Hofstra Chronicle
Biden and Trump are using rainbow capitalism to their advantage By Daniel Cody and Yashu Pericherla Within the last decade, playing the rainbow card has been a cornerstone of partisan politics. Whether it’s Governor Cuomo’s Twitter profile or Susan Collins’ virtue signaling during the Senate’s Kavanaugh confirmation hearings, this superficiality is concerning. The phenomenon of rainbow capitalism – the overproduction of corporate paraphernalia in pride flag colors – is not activism. Although voters already turned out to the polls on Tuesday, Nov. 3, we continue to remind our community that this “acceptance” or “tolerance” is a thin veil for corporate interest. What has happened is normalization, yes, but only through the translation of queer identity into consumer behavior. Sure, Walmart has floats in national pride parades, but we doubt that the same Walmart executives who gut our local industries are as enthusiastic about queer rights as they say they
are on their website. We are not “Walmart Proud.” Donald Trump and Joe Biden both claim to be allies of the people underneath the LGBTQ+ umbrella, often speaking on our behalf. This support is not genuine. On the campaign trail, both candidates have used this virtue signaling to their political advantage. Biden, who is considered a “radical liberal” in the eyes of Trump supporters and rightwingers, has had a notoriously centrist stance on LGBTQ+ rights up until the last few years. Biden voted for the Defense of Marriage Act, which defined marriage as between a man and a woman. However, Biden later voted to cut funding from schools who taught about LGBTQ+ equality. Unlike politicians like Senator Bernie Sanders, who has been a longtime advocate of queer rights, Biden’s support follows wherever mainstream activism goes. Today, his stances are always safe bets, likening him to an (at-best) milquetoast liberal can-
didate, which is why many were concerned his platform wouldn’t stand up against Trump’s. However, Biden hasn’t been the only perpetrator. Trump has a vocally conservative, generally anti-LGBTQ+ voter base, but he has still tried to court the “gay vote.” Famously, Trump held up an upside-down rain-
“Having ‘ambassadors’ and spokespeople representing the LGBTQ+ community does not equate to having actual stakes in issues relating to us. They are not required to care.”
bow flag, claiming the support of queer people. That support might be most prevalent with gay men, but it reigns true that the majority of the gay community is politically liberal or left. The most groan-worthy part of Trump’s alleged support of queer people is shown with his
choice for vice president, Mike Pence. An ex-Indiana governor with a history of bashing Planned Parenthood, Pence’s views on queer people are best summed up by his remarks on unions between same-sex couples, which he described as “the collapse of society.” Additionally, having “ambassadors” and spokespeople representing the LGBTQ+ community does not equate to having actual stakes in issues relating to us. They are not required to care. Tiffany Trump’s recent speech advocating on behalf of her dad for the “L-G-B-I-A” is a blatant example of identity politics and performative wokeness that politicians preach to curry favor with marginalized communities during election cycles. Whether or not she “forgot” the transgender community in her 10-minute speech – which was an extremely thinly-veiled virtue signal – is up for debate, but it left a sour taste in everyone’s mouth regardless. Rainbow capitalism has exhausted us. We don’t want
corporations’ PR teams glossing over the true plight of queer people. We aren’t a culture of commodification. Our heritage spans from the ACT UP groups of the ‘70s to the Queens Liberation Front. Not all of us share class interests, nor the same experience, but we are all tired of the identity politics. We want unionized labor and true leftism. We want support of HIV+ and trans lives, with equitable resources for all of us. We want something more sustainable than a tacky parade float.
Daniel Cody and Yashu Pericherla are student journalists who serve as an Op-Ed Editor and Assistant Op-Ed Editor, respectively.
THE HOFSTRA CHRONICLE special edition November 4, 2020
2020 E lection Hofstra students of all backgrounds came together on election night to create a simulcast covering national, local and congressional races. Adam Flash / The Hofstra Chronicle