The Brandeis Hoot - 10-2-09

VOL 6, NO. 6

OCTOBER 2, 2009

FY ‘10 budget ‘a little worse’ than expected

B R A N D E I S U N I V E R S I T Y ' S C O M M U N I T Y N E W S PA P E R

THEHOOT.NET

New Gosman solar energy system to reduce CO2 emissions by 10 percent

BY DESTINY D. AQUINO

BY ARIEL WITTENBERG

Special to The Hoot

Editor

The university’s latest Fiscal Year 2010 budget projection is “a little worse” than last May’s projection, in part due to potential problems in raising restricted funds for the university’s operating budget, Senior Vice President for Administration and Finance Jeff Apfel announced at yesterday’s faculty meeting.

Such changes in the budget, while small, only serve to remind the university of the many budget cuts that are still to come to help balance the university’s budget in the years leading up to 2014.

While the university usually needs $11 million in restricted gifts to budget toward university operations, this year, Apfel said, “That maybe might not be achievable.”

Reaching the $11 million goal will be difficult this year because of President Jehuda Reinharz’s pending resignation.

Senior Vice President of Institutional Advancement Nancy Winship told The Hoot, “any time a president transitions, a university will have a downturn in fundraising.”

This downturn could last for a “testing period” of a few years after the transition has occurred while the new president strengthens ties with donors, Winship continued.

Reinharz has told the Board of Trustees that he will continue to help procure donations to the university up until 2014 despite his intent to leave the university

by June 2011.

Decreases in fundraising could also be due to a combination of other factors. An unfavorable economic climate, as well as the fact that the university pushed donors to “stretch” donations to cover the FY 2009 budget, could mean that donors may be unwilling to donate again so soon, Winship said.

Even after the university balances the FY 2010 budget, it will still have to work to close the budget gaps of FY 2011, FY 2012, FY 2013 and FY 2014.

According to Apfel’s predictions, if the university accurately implements all of the Curriculum and Academic Restructuring Steering Committee’s (CARS) recommendations (which include implementing the Justice Brandeis Semester, instituting a business major, cutting 35 staff See BUDGET, p. 4

IN THIS ISSUE:

PHOTO BY Lien Phung/The Hoot

PHOTO COURTESY OF Alteris Renewables

SOLAR PANELS: (Above) President Jehuda Reinharz, Professor Sabine Von Mering (GER) and Andy Hogan ‘11 announced Wednesday that the university will begin installing solar panels on top of the Gosman Athletic Center (Below) as early as Novemeber.

A 277 kilowatt solar energy system will be installed on the roof of the Gosman Athletic Center in order to provide the university with over 300,000 units of Kwatt energy per year in cooperation with Alteris Renewables, university President Jehuda Reinharz announced Wednesday evening.

The energy gained from the solar energy system will be the equivalent to ten percent of the athletic center’s needs. Over the next 25 years the solar energy system will prevent 11.6 million pounds of CO2 from entering the environment.

The solar panels will be financed

by EOS Ventures, a renewable energy company, as part of a power purchase agreement. The agreement states that Brandeis will buy the energy from EOS instead of a standard energy company, saving the university close to a million dollars over the panels’ lifetime.

Preparation for the solar panels is expected to begin in November.

The panels will be built by Alteris Renewables, the largest designbuild energy company in the Northeast, and one of the top ten energy companies in the United States.

See SOLAR, p. 3

Univ. seeks new nurse manager for Health Center

BY SEAN FABERY Special to The Hoot

The university will begin interviewing candidates to fill the position of nurse manager at the Brandeis Health Center, filling a vacancy created by the departure of former director Kathleen Maloney.

Maloney retired in May after having worked at the health center for 11 years. She initially came to Brandeis in 1998 intending to set-up the health center, but she chose to stay well past her original six-month assignment.

Despite the vacancy, things are proceeding as normal at the health center, even as the university has set in place measures to combat the spread of H1N1 on-campus.

“Everyone at the Health Center has pitched in to extend themselves so that students are well cared for,” Director of the Health Center Dr. Debra Poaster wrote in an e-mail with The Hoot.

“We did a lot of advance planning over the summer to respond to the surge that H1N1 might present,” Poaster said. “Many departments of the University have worked to coordinate a flexible plan to deal with this new flu, and it has been working smoothly to help students who are ill and keep the campus healthy and functioning.”

Candidates for the position have yet to be

Getting into the season Diverse City, page 9

PHOTO BY Max Shay/The Hoot

selected.

Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, which runs the university health center, will present Brandeis with a list of candidates for consideration at a later time.

For the foreseeable future, however, the university will keep its focus on battling the flu.

“The flu has been occupying everyone’s time,” Dean of Student Life Rick Sawyer said.

When the search commences, student rep-

Stopping short of an accident Impressions, page 14

resentatives will be invited to be present at candidate interviews. Representatives will include members of the Student Health Advisory Committee, as well as BEMCO Operations Director Dan Litwok ’10 and Student Union Treasurer Daniel Acheampong ’11.

The move is part of a recent effort by the university and the Student Union to involve students in university administrative appointments.

AUDIO @ THEHOOT.NET Off The Beaten Path: Finding nothing remarkable in a Communist themed bar.

Tech Talk: Thinking iPhone, MMS, Google maps replacement?

2 The Hoot

October 2, 2009

N E W S

Urofsky sheds light on university Students hope new univ. namesake at Meet the Author talk President has greater on campus presence

BY ROBIN LICHTENSTEIN Staff

Melvin I. Urofsky discussed his new biography of Louis D. Brandeis this Monday as a part of the Meet the Author series sponsored by the Office of Communications and the Louis D. Brandeis Legacy Fund for Social Justice.

Urofsky, Professor of Law and Public Policy and Professor Emeritus of History at Virginia Commonwealth University, is famously well versed in the life and times of Justice Brandeis.

He has studied the man and his life since his graduate school days.

According to Professor Stephen Whitfield (AMST), who introduced Urofsky at the event, upon the death of Brandeis’ wife it was said that, “No one knows as much about her husband as Mel Urofsky.”

Urofsky described Brandeis as “a man opposed to bigness” who made it his priority to fight giants of the time like JP Morgan while also developing the modern-day specialized law firm.

At the same time, Brandeis the reformer began what is now the widely known practice of pro bono work, where law firms take on the cases of those who are unable to pay.

Brandeis was a, “pragmatic idealist.

A man who always had his eye on the ideal but knew how to get there,” Urofsky said.

During the question and answer session, Urofsky expanded on some of the themes in Brandeis’ life, explaining that Brandeis set out to “educate the bench and the bar” referring to Brandeis’ years spent as a lawyer before joining the United States Supreme Court in 1916.

Urofsky also discussed Brandeis’ role as an active Zionist, chairing the Provisional Executive Committee for Zionist Affairs at the outbreak of World War I. Brandeis had also made his opinion on women’s rights known in 1908 when he presented the now famous “Brandeis Brief ” stating the biological differences between men and women that made it necessary for women to have a shortened workday—something that may seem troubling to students today.

“It is ahistorical to apply what

ARIEL WITTENBERG Editor

PHOTO BY Max Shay/The Hoot

we know now…to what people thought then,” explained Urofsky referencing “the Brandeis Brief ”, noting that Brandeis was working with the ideas of the time.

Brandeis had a tendency to treat his work on the Supreme Court in the same way he would treat his work as a lawyer, keeping things grounded in facts, rather than taking part in the more theoretical writing that tends to come with Supreme Court decisions. Urofsky described Brandeis as one who loved reading government documents, and enjoyed keeping things cut and dry.

“It made him an effective lawyer and Justice,” he said.

The tendency towards fact came out in other parts of Brandeis’ life, noted Urofsky.

The Supreme Court building that we are familiar with today was built in the middle of Brandeis’ career on the bench, but Brandeis refused to make use of the office space reserved for him there because he felt it was inappropriately lavish.

Urofsky said that his biography presents Brandeis as a man who had four lives: As a lawyer, a reformer, a Zionist, and as “Mr. Justice Brandeis.”

Urofksy said that he enjoyed the writing process, which took about a year.

He did get frustrated though; While Brandeis was known for writing everything down, insight into his more personal emotions is hard to find, and was not helped by the fact that Brandeis burned many of his personal letters.

The habit was picked up by one of Brandeis’s daughters, who also burned some of her personal documents that could have been of help in writing the biography.

The Brandeis’ were a family that “took the right to privacy very seriously,” joked Urofsky, “I wanted to wring their necks more than one time.”

Urofsky said that the book, while hefty at 950 pages, is actually 20 percent shorter than the original manuscript.

He said that he “wrote fat,” knowing that the editing process would involve cuts.

However, Urofsky said that he wrote the other 20 percent telling himself, “This is going to be my retirement project, then I’ll worry about the publication.”

The talk was held in the Faculty Club, with books available for sale for Urofsky to sign.

Got a news tip?

E-mail news@thehoot.net

While praising Brandeis President Jehuda Reinharz’s touch with donors, some students say they hope his successor spends more time with them.

Phil LaCombe ‘10 called Reinharz a “phenomenal fundraiser,” but said “he does not connect well with students.”

LaCombe cited Reinharz’s reaction to student opposition two years ago to arming campus police.

“We had 800 people sign our petition, and we met with him, but it was as if his mind was already made up,” LaCombe said.

“It’s amazing how the administrative building is right next to the student center on campus, and yet we never see each other.”

LaCombe wants a president “who is out and about on campus and who shakes your hand as you walk to class.”

Former Student Union President Jason Gray ‘10 was one of three students given advanced notice of the resignation announcement. The others were editors from The Hoot and the Justice.

“The more I worked with Reinharz,” Gray said, “the more I came to respect him.”

He rejected the notion that the president ignored student life, although Reinharz did not attend either of Gray’s State of the Student Union addresses. “He and I had great communication outside of that,” Gray said.

Student Union President Andy Hogan ‘11, said Reinharz’s resignation announcement “was a surprise.”

Hogan said Reinharz had “done a good job and that his legacy will be defined in his fundraising abilities.”

Hogan said that he wants to make sure students have a role in selecting Reinharz’s successor.

Board of Trustees Chair Malcolm Sherman told The Hoot last week that students would be included on a hiring committee.

In the past year, several university committees included one non-voting student member.

Hogan said he would press the trustees to give students a larger voice.

“I want as many students as possible to have as much input as possible in this decision,” he said.

NEWS

October 2, 2009

The Hoot 3

Empty space in Village dorms still used for storage LEAH FINKELMAN Special to The Hoot

Across from the Village gym, there is a large 1000 square foot room.

The walls and door are glass, but the inside is not visible due to the tan butcher paper covering them. The butcher paper is torn in one corner of the door, but even someone peering through would see only darkness.

The space in the Village has been more or less empty since the Village Dorms opened in August 2002.

The only serious consideration of a use for the room was in 2008 when the university planned to open Ollie’s Eatery in the space, but then had to move the late night diner’s location to The Stein due to Village ventilation problems.

Currently, and since the building’s construction, the space is nothing more than a shell. There is no plumbing, no lights, and no accessible bathrooms.

According to Vice President of Campus Operations Mark Collins, it would cost about $50,000 just to add sheetrock walls and electricity.

The administration has considered using the space for everything from a student storage space to a studio for BTV. As of right now, and for the foreseeable future, it is used as a storage space for extra filters for the ventilation systems found around campus, especially in academic buildings and administration buildings, as well as other assorted items.

The idea for another place to eat on campus came from the administration, including Dean of Student Life Rick Sawyer and Senior Vice President for Students

PHOTO BY Max Shay/The Hoot

and Enrollment Jean Eddy in fall of 2008.

At that time, the only places on campus to get food were found on Upper Camus or Lower Campus, leaving the students in what is informally called South Campus (Ziv Quad, Ridgewood, and the Village) with a long trek uphill to buy food.

But before plans were made, the administration realized that the ventilation system needed was both extensive and expensive. According to Collins, new ventilation would have raised the cost of

the project by nearly $100,000. It just didn’t seem like the “best way to spend the money at the time,” he said.

Because Ollie’s would have been in the basement of the dorm, the ventilation couldn’t go out, it had to go up, through five floors of Village dorms.

The Stein, on the other hand, was already outfitted with a kitchen, plenty of seating, and the proper ventilation.

Other factors also went into the decision to move Ollie’s into the Stein.

“The Village, it’s really a residence hall,” Collins said. “Students are sleeping, studying, et cetera.

Did it make sense to have music and loud noise late at night?”

Also, because the space in the Village is so small, no more than around 20 students would have been able to hang out in there at one time.

The move was a “no brainer” and a “win-win,” Collins said.

Students living in the Village wouldn’t have to deal with a loud, disruptive ventilation system, and students all over campus would be

able to gather in a common space late at night without disrupting their sleeping and studying peers.

The Student Union published an article on their website in January of 2008 announcing that although Ollie’s Eatery would be opening in the Stein, the Student Union was working with the administration to continue the construction in the Village. For now, the space remains empty.

Currently, Ollie’s is open in the Stein from 10 PM to 3 AM Thursday through Sunday.

University gets solar panels to top Gosman Athletic Center through purchase agreement

SOLAR (from p. 1)

President Jehuda Reinharz announced the installation of the panels at an event discussing the new climate action plan, which was unveiled last week, in the new Shapiro Science Complex. He was joined by Chair of the Faculty Senate Professor Sabine Von Mering (GER) and Student Union President Andy Hogan ‘11.

Bill Kanzer, marketing director of Alteris, explained that, “EOS is going to own the panels but Brandeis is going to use all the energy they create.” According to Janna Cohen-Rosenthal, Brandeis sustainability coordinator, the solar energy system will have “1,385 high-efficiency photo-voltaic modules mounted on the southerly-facing roof surfaces of the field house.”

“It will be visible from the ground and serve as a bold statement of Brandeis’ commitment to reducing impact on global climate change,” Cohen-Rosenthal said.

The solar energy array will wire into Brandeis’ current electrical grid and convert into the standard type of electricity currently found in the university’s buildings. Once the project begins, a website will be designed to allow anyone to track the progress of the program. Once completed, the website will monitor and make available figures regarding how much energy is being created, how much we are using and how much CO2 is not being released into the environment, as well

as any news or additions to the project.

The idea for the power purchase agreement was originally thought of by Students for Environmental Action (SEA), who decided to research solar energy options at the end of last summer as an addition to the university’s Climate Action Plan.

According to President of SEA Matt Schmidt ‘11, the students got the ball rolling after speaking to several renewable energy companies, and Cohen-Rosenthal worked to create the plans, which were finalized earlier this week. The Climate Action Plan was unveiled last week and commits Brandeis to being climate neutral by 2050 as well as reducing energy use by 15 percent in the next five years.

The idea to install solar energy on campus was thought of after SEA urged the university to sign the American College and University President’s Climate Commitment in the fall of 2007. Brandeis was one of the first 200 members to sign. The Commitment holds Brandeis and other universities to creating a Climate Action Plan within two years of signing, reducing greenhouse gas emissions significantly and creating reports periodically that can be accessed by the public.

Von Mering explained in detail a new website called Brandeis Forum on Environmental Crisis. She also discussed the work of the steering committee who developed it. The

website brings students, faculty and administration together in an effort to discuss and create plans to aid the university in becoming climate neutral. Von Mering explained, “this isn’t just a website to look up stuff, we want everyone to have a voice and put up stuff, so it may grow and the university can benefit.”

The main goal of the committee was to create and maintain the forum website.

Members of the forum steering committee include Von Mering, Cohen-Rosenthal, Eric Olson, Senior Lecturer in Biology from the Heller School for Social Policy and Manage-

ment, Laura Goldin, Associate Professor of the Practice in the Environmental Studies Program and Charlie Radin from the Office of Communications.

4 The Hoot

NEWS

October 2, 2009

More budget cuts loom in future BUDGET (from p. 1)

positions and increasing student enrollment by 400 students by 2014), the university will face a cumulative budget gap of $23 million over the next four years.

If the CARS recommendations do not work, the university could face a cumulative budget gap of up to $52 million by 2014.

“If CARS works, we hopeful-

ly will be able to fix the budget for the long run,” Dean of Arts and Sciences Adam Jaffe said at the meeting.

As for the immediate future, Apfel said the university will have to find a way to make up the budget gaps at least through 2014.

“The good news is we are better off than our compatriot universities,” Apfel said at the

faculty meeting. “But while our problem is more manageable, we have less flexibility” because of the small size of the university’s budget.

Apfel added that even if the Board of Trustees allows the university to dip into its reserve fund, “we would run through it by 2013.

We’re going to have to think of other ways to make this money.”

Reinharz told the faculty he

believed the solution would be “a combination of a lot of things,” including selling assets.

The sale of assets could eventually include the sale of artwork from the Rose Art Museum.

“Right now we are in the midst of a lawsuit, and that complicates things,” Reinharz explained, referring to a lawsuit brought against the university by three benefactors to the Rose

Art Museum in an effort to stop the sale of artwork.

The Suffolk Probate Court will hold a hearing on Oct. 13 to consider a motion for a preliminary injunction, filed by the plaintiffs, and a motion to dismiss the case altogether, filed by the university.

“We will have a better idea about what our options are in two weeks,” Reinharz said.

The Hoot 5

October 2, 2009

E D I TO R I A L Established 2005 "To acquire wisdom, one must observe."

Alison Channon Editor in Chief Ariel Wittenberg News Editor Bret Matthew Impressions Editor Chrissy Callahan Features Editor Hannah Vickers Sports Editor Alex Schneider Layout Editor Jodi Elkin Layout Editor Max Shay Photography Editor Leon Markovitz Advertising Editor Vanessa Kerr Business Editor Danielle Gewurz Copy Editor Leah Lefkowitz Backpage Editor Samantha Shokin Diverse City Editor Senior Editors Sri Kuehnlenz, Kathleen Fischmann

FOUNDED BY

A

s the initial shock of university President Jehuda Reinharz’s resignation announcement begins to wane, Brandeis community members are turning towards the future.

While appropriately considering Reinharz’s strengths and weaknesses, successes and failures, the university community has begun to consider what characteristics a new president must possess.

Certain qualities are obvious. The new president must be a skilled fundraiser with the ability to connect to the old vanguard of donors as well as foster relationships with new ones. Furthermore, the new president must be capa-

Leslie Pazan, Igor Pedan and Daniel Silverman

SUBMISSION POLICIES The Hoot welcomes letters to the editor on subjects that are of interest to the general community. Preference is given to current or former community members. The Hoot reserves the right to edit any submissions for libel, grammar, punctuation, spelling and clarity. The Hoot is under no obligation to print any of the pieces submitted.

Letters in print will also appear on-line at www.thehoot.net.

The deadline for submitting letters is Tuesday at 8:00 p.m. All letters must be submitted electronically at www. thehoot.net. All letters must be from a valid e-mail address and include contact information for the author. Letters of length greater than 500 words may not be accepted.

The opinions, columns, cartoons and advertisements printed in The Hoot do not necessarily represent the opinions of the editorial board.

The Hoot is a community student newspaper of Brandeis University. Produced entirely by students, The Hoot serves a readership of 6,000 with in-depth news, relevant commentary, sports and coverage of cultural events.

Our mission is to give every community member a voice.

Diversify the upper echelons

W

ble of handling crises and controversies with grace instead of defensiveness.

From a student’s perspective, the new president should be a visible figure, not another faceless administrator cloistered in a bell tower. We should know what our president looks like not because we have scoured the university website, but because we see him, or maybe even her, walking around campus, waving to students with a smile on his or yes, even her, face.

For that matter, it would be refreshing if the new president did not fit the mold of all of the university’s previous presidents. We should continue Reinharz’s admirable legacy of increasing diversity on campus by increasing the

diversity of the administration. Whether the new president is a woman or a minority, the presence of a president who is not male or not white will signify that Brandeis is truly an institution dedicated to the pursuit of social justice.

We do not advocate the hiring of a token woman or a token minority to show how ‘diverse’ and ‘open-minded’ we are.

Rather, we ask that the search committee make a serious effort to seek candidates who do not fit the mold, and give those candidates the benefit of consideration, in order to embody this university’s pillar of social justice and our founding ideals.

Sustaining student activism

ednesday, university President Jehuda Reinharz had the pleasure of making an announcement that was actually good.

Starting in November, preparations for the installation of a solar panel system atop Gosman will begin. The solar panels will provide the university with over 300,000 units of Kwatt energy per annum and will prevent nearly 12 million pounds of carbon dioxide from entering the atmosphere over the next 25 years.

The installation of solar panels will mark a turning point in Brandeis’ sustainability efforts. Instead of handing out reusable water bottles and threat-

ening to eliminate Dasani from the entire campus, the university will soon be able to point to concrete measures that significantly reduce our environmental footprint. Best of all, the soon to be state of the art solar energy system comes at no cost to the university.

Thanks to the efforts of Students for Environmental Action and university Sustainability Coordinator Janna Cohen-Rosenthal, Brandeis will acquire the solar panels via a purchasing agreement with Alteris Renewables.

This announcement signifies what is best in student activism and student and staff collaboration. Students in SEA had an excellent idea and made the effort to reach out to renewable energy

providers to see if their dream of solar panels for Brandeis could be made a reality. They then worked with CohenRosenthal who was able to take their idea, their passion, and their research and turn it into a concrete plan that the university administration could get behind.

Everyday students at Brandeis develop a thousand ideas and plans that might improve our campus but most never go beyond the complaining stage. It is both refreshing and heartening to see that old-fashioned nose to the grindstone student activism is not dead. Judging by Wednesday’s announcement, it might just be the key to keeping our university alive and well.

Check out Off the Beaten Path for restaurant and bar reviews!

6 The Hoot

October 2, 2009

SPORTS

Men’s soccer shutout by Wheaton, defeats Newbury

BY HANNAH VICKERS Editor

The Brandeis men’s soccer team fell to Wheaton College Lyons 3-0 on Saturday but came out on top of Newbury College Nighthawks 6-1 Wednesday night. Newbury dropped to 0-8 on the season with the loss.

Wheaton, who is ranked fourth in New England, improved to 9-1-1 with their victory over the Judges. Adam Sussman ’10 scored the winning goal in the 27th minute off a free kick outside the box by Josh Solomon ’11. Solomon also got the assist on the Lyons next goal, which came just over four minutes later. He passed the ball to Pablo Mena ’12 who went on to dribble up the field and sent the ball to the back of the net from twenty yards out. Brandeis was outshot 6-3 in the first half.

The Judges doubled their shooting in the second half, but were unable to make it on the board. Kyle Gross ’11 and Joe Eisenbeis ’13 had the best chance for Brandeis in the 64th minute, but Lyons goalkeeper Cole Davidson ’11 stopped the initial shot

by Gross as well as the rebound by Eisenbeis. The final goal of the game came with only seven seconds left to play. Wheaton’s Yuri Moreira ’11 headed in a ball off a throw-in by Jake Wagner ’11 to make the final score 3-0.

Matt Lynch ’11 had six saves in the game, a new season-high, but was unable to get the win. With the win Davidson got his fourth shutout of the season, also with six saves.

According to Coach Michael Coven, the officiating definitely had something to do with the loss. Brandeis managed to put one in the net to make the score 2-1 in the second half, but an official called a foul in the box and took away the goal. The official was apparently unable to name which Brandeis player had committed the foul. In addition, the final goal that came in the last few seconds also took place under a questionable call. A Wheaton player knocked rookie Lee Russo into Lynch and the ball sailed into the empty net while they were both on the ground. A foul was not called on the Wheaton player.

“Wheaton is a good team,” Coven told The Hoot. “A 2-1 loss is respectable, but 3-0 isn’t. We still had some great moments, though.”

Despite the loss, Coven was happy with other aspects of the day.

“The atmosphere at the game was tremendous,” he said. “It was good for the university to see so much school spirit out

there… I want to thank Zach and the Student Government, Student Events for putting it together.”

After the disappointing loss to Wheaton, it was a completely different story Wednesday night against Newbury when the Judges defeated them 6-1. Brandeis completely dominated the game. The Nighthawks had just one shot attempted the entire game, and consequently only had a single goal. In the fourth minute Hector Aduboj ’13 fed the ball to Hayato Iwahori ’10 who blasted the shot past Lynch to get on the board first.

Newbury was shut out from that point forward with Brandeis putting up 15 shots in the first period and 21 in the second. Of those 36 shots, 21 were on target.

“We’re taking it one step at a time,” Assistant Coach Gabe Margolis told The Hoot.

“We needed a win and everybody got off the bench. It’s nice to be going into the conference like this.”

The first goal for the Judges came in the 20th minute. Corey Bradley ’10 broke through the offensive zone and passed the ball to rookie Matt Peabody who put it away to tie the game. Brandeis went on to take the lead with less than six minutes remaining in the first half, and never looked back from there. The game-winning goal came off the foot of Sam Ocel ’13. Ocel took the shot off a feed from Noah Bass ’12 who took advantage of a turnover in the defensive zone. This was the first collegiate goal for Ocel.

The Judges opened up the second half even stronger than they closed out the first.

The next goal for the home team came in the 52nd minute. Alexander Farr ’12 took a through ball from Peabody and beat out the Nighthawks goalie William McNally in a one-on-one situation to send it to the back of the net. Just over three minutes later Peabody got his second goal of the game, his first multi-goal game of his collegiate career, and reclaimed the team scoring lead.

Ocel took a shot on McNally and Peabody converted the rebound.

Brandeis added two more goals on before the end of the game. Steve Keuchkarian ’11 blasted a shot from 25 yards out off an assist

by Matt Callahan ’12. The final goal came with less than four minutes to go courtesy of Ed Senibaldi ’12. Lynch allowed the only Newbury goal in the first half but did not have to make any saves after that. Blake Minchoff ’13 made his collegiate debut in the second half but did not face any shots on goal.

“A lot of teams get breaks like this, but we’re in a competitive conference and even

PHOTO BY Max Shay/The Hoot

GOING FOR THE BALL: Kyle Gross ‘11 takes the ball down the field in Wednesday’s game against Newbury College.

our non-conference games are very competitive,” Coach Coven said. “I’d say we have the most difficult schedule in New England, but it’s good to play the best.”

“I would have liked to see them have a better shot percentage,” Coven added.

This weekend marks the beginning of UAA conference play and the Judges will face Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland on Saturday. Case Western is 5-3-2 on the season compared to Brandeis who is now 2-4-1.

“Case is good and it will be a good game,” Margolis said. “You could almost say this is when the real season starts.”

Coven is also expecting a good matchup against their UAA opponent. Case Western saw five seniors graduate last spring, so it’s been a bit of a different game for them.

They’re winning games more games by margins like 1-0, so Coven remains optimistic.

Brandeis will face Colby-Sawyer away next Thursday, and will then host the UAA conference game against Rochester University next Saturday, Oct. 8 at 5 p.m. When asked about those games, Margolis said they’re trying to focus on the here and now.

“It doesn’t do any good to look beyond who we’re playing this weekend, particularly for conference play,” said Margolis.

As the men geared up for their last practice at Brandeis before travelling, Coven showed some pride in his team.“The team has been working really hard,” Coven told The Hoot. “The personality of the team is good, and they’re really supportive of each other. I love working with these guys.”

Men’s and women’s cross country finish 3rd and 1st in Invitational

BY HANNAH VICKERS Editor

The Brandeis men’s and women’s cross country teams had outstanding performances at the Connecticut College Invitational this past Saturday, finishing third and first respectively. The most recent U.S. Track & Field and Cross Country Coaches Association poll had the Brandeis men 22nd in the country for Division III cross country. The same poll, which can be found on the association’s website, ranks the women 15th in the country for the second week in a row. Both teams are ranked fourth in the Northeast region.

The men finished third out

of 16 teams and were paced by Chris Brown ’12. Brown came in fourth place out of 214 runners with a time of 25:32 on the eightkilometer course, just 15 seconds behind the winner.

Marc Boutin ’12 also cracked the top ten with a time of 25:36, landing him in eighth place. Devon Holgate ’11 finished 14th at 25:54 while classmate Dan Anastos put up a time of 26:28 to land in 25th. Ryan Cheng ’11 had a time of 26:55 to come in 55th.

With these results the Judges moved up the University Athletic Association (UAA) best 8K times list for 2009. Brown and Boutin now hold first and second place respectively, while Holgate moves up to sixth place. Emory Uni-

versity and New York University each have two runners with topten times, but no other school has three runners in the top ten.

The women’s team saw even greater success at the Connecticut College Invitational this weekend with all eight runners finishing in the top 50 out of 197 runners, including three in the top ten.

This was the second meet of the season the Judges won, though this was the first with more than two team competing. They took down 14 other schools to capture the win with 54 points, 34 points better than runner-up RPI. The Judges were paced on the six-kilometer course by Marie Lemay ’11, who finished fifth with a time of 22:47. Alyssa Pisarick ’12

finished just three seconds behind Lemay for sixth place. Kate Warwick ’12 put up a time of 23:01 for eighth place.

Brandeis also had two runners finish in the top twenty, Ally Connolly ’10 and Emily Owen ’11, who ran 23:28 for 17th and 23:40 for 20th respectively.

Molly Shanley ’11 came in 28th overall with a time of 24:08 while Jess Girard and Julia Alpaio, both ’10, finished 31st and 47th with times of 24:13 and 24:43. The top five runners for the Judges finished within 53 seconds of one another while less than two minutes separated Lemay from Alpaio.

Like the men, the women’s performance this weekend moved

them up the UAA 2009 best 6K times list. Lemay, Pisarik, and Warwick now hold onto the top three spots. In addition Connolly is tied for fifth with Kirsten Keller from NYU, Owen holds the eighth, and Shanley the tenth.

In addition to these outstanding performances, both teams have a runner being honored as a UAA Athlete of the Week.

Brown is the men’s cross country athlete of the week thanks to his performance at the Invitational while Lemay holds the honors for women’s cross country. Both teams are off until next Saturday, Oct. 10, when they will compete in the Open New England Championships at Franklin Park in Boston.

SPORTS

October 2, 2009

The Hoot 7

Women’s soccer gets first road win, first home loss

BY HANNAH VICKERS Editor

Brandeis came out on top of Gordon College 2-0 last Thursday for their first win on the road, but fell Wednesday night to the Wellesley College Blue 2-1 in overtime. With those two games the Judges moved to 5-2-2 and sixth in the University Athletic Association standings.

The game-winning goal against Gordon came in the seventh minute of play courtesy of Melissa Gorenkoff ’10 with an assist from Alanna Torre ’12. Gorenkoff, who now has 67 career points, is now in eighth place on the all-time scoring list and just three behind Tina Mowrey ’93 to tie for seventh. The only other goal of the game came in the 84th minute. Mimi Theodore ’12 got the ball away from the Gordon keeper and sent it to the net unassisted.

The Judges outshot Gordon 22-7, with 13 of those shots on target compared to 3 for Gordon.

Hillary Rosenzweig ’10 tended goal for the first half for Brandeis before handing it over to Jaclyn Weinstein ’12 for the second half. Weinstein had three saves in her 45 minutes in the goal while Rosenzweig did not have to stop a single ball. Rosenzweig is still on the cusp of having the most shutouts in school history.

“It’s unfortunate Hillary didn’t

get credit for the shutout,” Coach Denise Dallamora told The Hoot.

“I’ve got to get Jackie some time,” she went on to explain.

“Hillary is a senior, and I want Jackie to have experience.”

While the win on the road was certainly welcomed, especially because it came on grass, which the Judges aren’t used to playing on, the loss at home Wednesday night was not.

“We played well over all last night,” Dallamora said. “There was a bit of a let down in the second half, but I can’t fault them.

They’re going to make mistakes.”

Brandeis struck early in the game, getting what would be their only goal less than three minutes in. Tiffany Pacheco ’11 scored her fifth goal of the season by going one-on-one with the Wellesley keeper. The assist on the goal came from Mimi Theodore.

The Blue went without a single shot until the 39th minute, and as a result Brandeis was able to outshoot them 12-2 in the first half.

The second half was much more balanced, with each team taking ten shots. Wellesley finally got on the board in the 59th minute, where the third time seemed to be the charm for the Blue. After failing to score on their first two corner kicks, Chelsea-Ann Patry ’13 took the third straight corner for Wellesley and the ball sailed into the net off a header by Erin Simons ’12. The game remained

PHOTO BY Max Shay/The Hoot

GOAL: Brandeis shoots against MIT in a home game last week.

tied through the rest of the second, forcing the team into overtime.

“Their first string goalie was worse than their second,” Dallamora told The Hoot. “I think if they’d left [Katie Martore] in we would have won.”

“I’ll guess their second string girl will move up to first soon,” she added.

The Judges fell just 15 seconds into the first overtime when rookie Megan Turchi blasted the ball from 25 yards out. Her shot found the perfect spot just above Rosenzweig’s fingers, but just below the crossbar to give the Blue

the win. Apparently there had been confusion on the field because the midfielders had not called their marks. It wasn’t until after Turchi got the ball that the Judges realized their error.

“We had a terrible mistake to lose the game,” Dallamora admitted. “It was inexcusable. It was at the kickoff so we were all in our defensive zone.”

Despite the circumstances of the loss, the Judges remained composed, Dallamora acknowledged. At this point in the season, they’ll just have to move on and focus on the next game ahead of them. UAA conference

play opens up this weekend with Brandeis facing off against Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland.

“It’s a gotta win game,” Coach Dallamora said. “We need to work on making less and less mistakes.”While Case Western has a solid team, Dallamora thinks with some pressure the Judges definitely stand a chance.

“It’s hard this time of year with midterms and papers…obviously schoolwork has to come first,” Dallamora explained. “But every game is a must win game for us if we want to make it to the NCAA, to nationals.”

Twins don’t give in: Another look at the A.L. Central

BY SARAH BLOOMBERG Staff

So the post season starts next week, and most teams already know what they will be doing.

For the National League, the Philadelphia Phillies, St. Louis Cardinals, and Los Angeles Dodgers have clinched a playoff spot, and the Colorado Rockies have a magic number of one to clinch the National League wildcard spot. For the American League, the New York Yankees and Los Angeles Angels have clinched the division, and the Boston Red Sox have clinched the wildcard. The only known match-up is the Angels hosting the Red Sox. But once again I would like to focus on the Minnesota Twins and Detroit Tigers who finished a four game series Thursday in Detroit. Granted this is because I am currently watching the game, and do not want to jinx anything, so bear with me through a little background information. On August 20, 2009 the Twins were five games below .500 and were not only 6.5 games behind that Tigers, but also 4 games behind the Chicago White Sox. It looked like their season was done. Luckily, one of the people who believed that the Twins still had a chance was the manager, Ron Gardenhire. He told the team to stay close (I am not sure what his defi-

nition of close is), and that there was seven games with Detroit at the end of the season so anything could happen. And then Justin Morneau went down followed

by Joe Crede. And somehow the Twins still refused to give up.

Which leads up to the four game series that was supposed to start last Monday, but was postponed because of rain; this series would start off with a double header. Great… it’s not like the pitchers need any time to rest. At the beginning of the series the Tigers’ magic number was 6; in simpler words, if the Tigers won three games against the Twins they would advance to the postseason. The first game was Tuesday; the Twins won 3-2 in 10 innings. Starter Nick Blackburn was able to pitch 7 innings and gave up only 1 run.

In the top of the tenth the Twins continued their tradition of getting hits in the right places when Orlando Cabrera singled allowing Denard Span to score; then Delmon Young hit a sacrifice fly to center field allowing Cabrera to score.

The next two games did not go so well for the Twins. The Tigers had a 5-0 lead over the Twins in the second game, and the Twins were able to

answer back with four r u n s , but the winning run was Curtis Granderson’s solo home run off Matt Guerrier in the bottom of the eight. The Twins did score one run in the top of the ninth, but they could not get the last needed run. The series was tied 1-1, and the Twins were back to being 3 games behind.

Then came the third game,

which the Tigers dominated.

Carl Povano gave up seven earned runs, too much for the team to overcome. I actually stopped watching the game around the top of the seventh in hopes that maybe something would happen while I was not watching, but fate would not let that happen.

The Twins lost and were now three games behind; Detroit was facing a division championship and playoff spot if they won on Thursday.

So Thursday came, and Minnesota came out with a 4-1 lead by the top of the fourth. They were able to double their score with a fourrun in the eighth. The Tigers responded with two runs in the bottom of the eighth, and then the drama started. Twins pitcher José Mijares threw behind the back of batter Adam Everett and received a warning from the home plate umpire Angel Hernandez, and Tigers manager Jim Leyland was ejected from the game. Mijares was able to shake it off and get out

of the inning with no more runs.

In the top of the ninth, Jeremy Bonderman hit Delmon Young in the knee on the very first pitch.

This led to an ejection for Bonderman, and both teams’ benches cleared with people coming in from the bullpen as well. It would be sorted out with only a few more problems, and the top half of the inning was finished with the score still 8-3. To end the game Twins closer Joe Nathan came in even though it was not a save situation and had a shaky outing but was able to come away with the win.

The Twins were able to keep playoff hopes alive. They now have a three game series against the Kansas City Royals at home, while the Tigers will be playing the White Sox at home. In order for the Twins to win the division outright they will need to sweep the Royals and the White Sox will need to sweep the Tigers. To force a tiebreak against the Tigers, the Twins will need to sweep the Royals or win 2 out of 3 while the White Sox will need to win 2 out of 3 or sweep the Tigers, respectively. So I am going to do something that I very rarely do; hope the White Sox will play their best baseball of the season and sweep the Tigers. I know you can do it Chicago. And whatever happens, it will be an exciting week for the AL Central.

12 The Hoot

October 2, 2009

FEATURES

Room vacancy, new roommate not wanted

PHOTO BY Max Shay/The Hoot

ROOMMATES INTERRUPTED: Ziv suitemates Ben Sacks ‘10 and Steve Sasmor ‘10 have an empty bedroom in their suite after a suitemate moved out to save money. They hope Community Living does not drop a ‘random’ in their suite, thereby negatively affecting roommate cohesion.

BY ROBIN LICHTENSTEIN Staff

If you’re an upperclassman, you probably recall the days when arranging for on-campus housing after returning from study abroad wasn’t a concern. You participated in the housing lottery, hoped for a good number and filled up a suite, knowing you would have a spot when you got back.

However, the new housing policy – instituted this year – has created some complications in housing arrangements, leaving students studying abroad for the fall unsure of whether or not housing will be available for them on campus in the spring.

In the meantime, back at Brandeis, there have been several instances of vacancies in upperclassmen housing, causing some students housing uncertainty of their own as they wait for their vacancies to be filled by strangers.

Occupancy of the Village might determine whether empty suites

get filled. Starting this year, students planning to study abroad in the spring were placed in the Village so the vacancies they will create in upperclassmen housing can be filled by the incoming midyear class.

According to the community living Web site, the Village can house 220 students in doubles and singles.

Senior Vice President for Students and Enrollment Jean Eddy said in an e-mail to The Hoot that there are 87 midyears expected to move in this spring, though she expects that number to increase

by January.

This leaves countless people returning from abroad, people unhappy with their living situation and those who decided not to go abroad to compete for the remaining spots in the Village and elsewhere. And that does not include the many sophomores living in first-year quads or in the Charles River Apartments.

There are several “dingles” (a double with only one occupant) in the Village, and vacancies in many Ziv suites. One such Ziv is inhabited by Ben Sacks ’10, whose Ziv was initially full, but now has a vacancy after his sixth suitemate decided to live off campus for financial reasons.

“We received an e-mail mid September from the [Community Development Coordiantor] for Ziv that we could expect our [Ziv] to be filled,” Sacks said.

However, that last suitemate has yet to materialize; a fact Sacks isn’t at all unhappy about. After receiving the initial news from their CDC, Sacks and his suite mates sent back an e-mail of their own saying they would rather not have the vacancy occupied by a stranger.

When asked his reasoning for this request, Sacks cited suite dynamics as his biggest problem with placing students in any random vacancy.

“The idea of having an unknown was not pleasant because we have a dynamic – that’s why we live with each other,” he said. “If you are happy with the people you live with in a suite and you get along, it’s scary to think of adding someone with whom the group might not get along.”

Sacks cited other things such as cleanliness, mutual friends, and sleeping habits that might stray from pre-existing suite dynamics.

David Perlow ’11 who is spending the semester in Madrid, Spain echoed Sacks’ concerns.

“It would definitely create an awkward situation for a new person coming into an environment where people have gained a sense of familiarity with each other,” he said.

Deborah Taied ’11, who is spending this semester in Copenhagen, Denmark, might become that odd student out come January. Uncertain of her housing situation for the spring se-

mester, Taied is currently dealing with the possibility of moving in as a stranger among a pre-existing group of friends, though she hopes that won’t be the case.

“Me and [my friend] who is abroad right now requested to live together if there were only doubles [in the Village] available,” she said.

The study abroad Web site states that students studying abroad in the fall semester, as in years past, “are not guaranteed housing when they return.”

Instead, their main priority is to “house the incoming midyear students as a group.”

But Taeid remembers when the study abroad housing system was more user-friendly.

“I had just thought I would take the spot of a friend going [abroad] in the spring like past years since the number of students going away in the spring traditionally outnumbers those in the fall,” she said. Now she doesn’t know what she’ll do.

Like what you read? Visit us online at www.thehoot.net.

The Hoot 13

October 2, 2009

IMPRESSIONS The Self Shelf

A Little Learning

To cover up a cover-up

BY MATT KIPNIS Columnist

ILLUSTRATION BY Bret Matthew/The Hoot

How to diffuse a time bomb

BY ALEX SELF Columnist

In the sands of ancient Persia, a storm is brewing and threatening to envelop the world. Iran constantly gets closer and closer to having nuclear arms capabilities as the world squabbles over who should do something about it.

Of course, if it were this cut and dry, one would have to wonder why a reaction is so slow in coming.

However, a more comprehensive picture of the Iranian situation is the fact that a belligerent, oil producing dictatorship trying to enrich uranium for dubious purposes with Israel threatening to strike without warning…while much of the rest of world either wrings its hands or doesn’t care.

With all of these problems, it’s a wonder that our foreign policy department sleeps at night.

That being said, there are two solutions currently being debated that the United States might employ to solve this problem, and the first one is catastrophically flawed. This solution would utilize military might against the Iranian threat. This would ostensibly involve some kind of preemptive strike on the Iranian nuclear facilities (in spite of the fact that they have started moving them closer to military bases). This would almost certainly bring about war with Iran.

While Israel threatens to carry out this action, it would be a disaster for both itself and the U.S..

The entire region would be embroiled in war which would kill tens of thousands of people, and Israel would be in danger--not to mention the fact that if Iran has developed a nuclear weapon, it could spell Armageddon.

This violence would envelop U.S. troops in Iraq and Afghanistan who would find themselves in the middle of yet another war; these troops would suddenly find themselves on the frontlines facing an angry and perhaps nuclear armed Iran. Not only would this be bad for our soldiers but it would reflect poorly on the U.S. as whole.

Also, there’s the question of why we’d punish an entire country (thus turning all of Iran against us) when only the somewhat autocratic leaders are to blame. The leaders have been trying to con-

vince their citizens that the U.S. and Israel are out to get them.

Why should we help them with their propaganda?

The best case scenario for this plan would be for Iran’s leadership to falter before the war got out of control and to give up its nuclear capabilities without stopping its supply of oil. Also, this would somehow involve the youth movement not completely turning on the west. This is about as likely as President Ahmadinejad attending a Shabbat service.

The risks in this solution far outweigh any possible benefits. Next, we turn to another flawed solution that is being debated even as we speak.

This solution involves going through the U.N. I agree in principle with this solution but, given the track record of the U.N. in solving these problems, additional approaches must be taken.

Ironically, the first part of this solution involves the usage of the discarded military solution-the United States must use the threat of force to get the U.N. moving.

No one wants WWIII, and the threat of war provides a valuable bargaining chip in terms of getting the U.N. to act. This tactic is already being carried out (perhaps not so tactfully) by war hawks in the U.S. and Israel.

The next part of the solution would be to offer Iran a facesaving alternative to complete surrender on the issue. The U.S. could offer to help set up the nuclear power plants, or have an ally with better Iranians relations assist. Thus, Iran could be both assisted and supervised as it strives for nuclear power.

This offer also undermines those who say that Iran is unfairly being persecuted for seeking nuclear power; if the leadership wants nuclear power, this proposal would be a worthy compromise as it would allow both sides to accomplish their respective goals.

This has already been attempted by Russia but it seems to have failed, which brings us back to the U.N. Assuming that pressure and diplomatic maneuvering can force the U.N. to actually enact sanctions on Iran, it is only a matter of waiting. First, the supply of uranium to Iran should be cut off.

In the event that this fails to deter,

economic sanctions should be put in place as well.

A regime that has just gone through a…well, we’ll call it “troubled” election cycle and is insecure about its power cannot rationally afford economic sanctions which would cause further insurrection.

Ideally, these sanctions would eventually force Iran to accede to the previous offer of assistance in addition to supervision.

However, if all of these solutions fail, then simply isolating Iran as has been done with North Korea would be a far better solution than war, as it would prevent the chaos and death associated with it. Not to mention that if Iran is on the verge of getting a nuclear weapon, a military conflict could result in the first use of a nuclear weapon since the ashes of Nagasaki descended upon a ruined crater where a city once stood.

All in all, the main goal of the resolution should be to prevent any kind of military actions, as even the most punitive sanctions are less hurtful and inflammatory than war. Sanctions put more pressure on leadership, whereas war rallies the people around it.

The only challenge to this solution is that it could conceivable allow Iran to develop a nuclear weapon. However, I haven’t heard a single plausible argument on why Iran would be fire a nuclear missile at Israel or the U.S., or any western nations for that matter, and thus guarantee its absolute destruction.

Also, I would argue that an isolated and sanctioned Iran with a nuclear weapon is much less dangerous than an Iran engaged in war on the verge of developing a nuclear weapon.

While the solution I have highlighted is certainly not infallible, it is low risk and practical--words that cannot be attached to most of the other plans.

Actually, this solution is the one towards which our foreign policy department appears to be leaning.

I have faith that the U.S. can help solve this world problem peacefully, and that this resolution will eventually lead to both a calmer western world and a more stable Middle East.

Until then, we can only watch the storm clouds on the desert horizon with growing trepidation.

In September 1999, much of the Russian populace lay in a state of terror.

That month a series of seemingly random bombings rocked the country.

The first bomb, on Sept. 4, went off at a military barracks in the Buymaksk.

The dead numbered 64. Five days latter a second bomb went off in a working class neighborhood of Moscow, killing 94. The third bomb, detonated during the early hours of Sept. 13, leveled a Moscow apartment building.

One-hundred twenty-one people died. The fourth and final bombing occurred three days later, in a city south of Moscow, resulting in an additional seventeen casualties.

So what? Why should we care about decade old bombings in Russia?

One reason has to do with the identity of the then newly appointed Russian Prime Minister: Vladimir Putin. In response to the bombings, Putin pushed for Russia to retaliate against Chechnya, the object of official suspicion concerning the explosions. Under Putin’s leadership, Russia followed up the bombings by inaugurating a second war with Chechnya. Perceived as someone willing to get tough in the face of terror, Putin’s popularity soared, and he subsequently assumed the Presidency following the resignation of President Boris Yeltsin.

And yet, why should we care?

To answer that question, I offer Scott Anderson, whose article concerning these very bombings appeared in this month’s newsstand issue of GQ. “It is a riddle that lies at the very heart of the modern Russian state, one that remains unsolved to this day,” Mr. Anderson writes. “In the awful events of September 1999, did Russia find its avenging angel in Vladimir Putin, the proverbial man of action who crushed his nation’s attackers and let his people out of a time of crisis? Or was that crisis actually manufactured to benefit Putin, a scheme by Russia’s secret police to bring one of their own to power? What makes this question important is that absent the bombings of September 1999 and all that transpired as a result, it is hard to conceive of any scenario whereby Putin would hold the position he enjoys today: a player on the global stage, the ruler of one of the most powerful nations on earth.”

Anderson’s article details certain inconsistencies and unanswered questions concerning the bombings: how a bomb could go off in a building inspected by the FSB (Federal Security Bureau, the successor to the KGB) three hours earlier, how the initial sketches made by witnesses after one of the bombings match the identity of a known FSB operative, how a Russian politician with FSB connections could misidentify a city where a bomb went off, only to have a bomb go off in that city three days later.

“Immediately after the bombings a broad spectrum of Russian society publically cast doubt on the government’s version of events,” Anderson explains, but “Those voices have now gone silent one by one. In recent years a number of journalists who investigated the incidents have been murdered – or have died under suspicious circumstances – as have two members of Parliament who sat on the commission of inquiry.” Perhaps the most famous of these deaths occurred in 2006, when former KGB agent and Putin critic Alexander Litvinenko was killed with a dose of the radioactive isotope Polonium 210, delivered by two intelligence agents with whom he was meeting in a London café.

And yet, remarkable as Anderson’s story is, in getting it to print Anderson discovered that the ruthlessness of the Russians was matched by the perfidy of his publisher. GQ is a subsidiary of Conde Nast Publications, the company responsible for Vogue, Vanity Fair, and The New Yorker.

Conde Nast, worried about its Russian circulation (it has Russian language editions of GQ, Vogue, Glamour, and Tatler) and possible retaliation by the Russian government, opted to bury Anderson’s article in the pages of American GQ, literally. A search of GQ’s website yields nary a reference to Anderson’s story, which ran six pages in the print issue.

But this article isn’t so much about Russian politics or Conde Nast’s cover-up as it is about good journalism, the kind NPR practiced in pursuing this story. I freely admit that I am not a GQ reader. I would never have heard of this story had it not been for the superb investigative work of National Public Radio. In a story that ran September 4th, NPR interviewed Anderson about his story, and proceeded to investigate Conde Nast’s suppression of it. NPR obtained a memo from one of the firm’s lawyers, Jerry Birenz, stating in part, “Conde Nast management has decided that the September issue of U.S. GQ Magazine containing Scott Anderson's article ‘Vladimir Putin's Dark Rise to Power’ should not be distributed in Russia.”

Complying with its legal advice, the story was not posted online, nor was it run in any of Conde Nast’s foreign editions – in effect, Conde Nast sought to both publish and bury the story at the same time.

Perhaps this decision makes business sense. And given the conditions for journalists in Russia – of seventeen journalists murdered in the last decade, sixteen of the cases remain unsolved – it would be understandable if Conde Nast feared for Mr. Anderson’s safety. “But Conde Nast's Birenz did not raise security issues in his memo,” NPR’s David Folkenflik reported, “And Anderson says he was not told of any safety matters by the company, just concerns of lawyers.”

Conde Nast’s shameful conduct deserves the widest exposure. Under Putin’s leadership the Russian press has been cowed or killed, making foreign sources of information all the more valuable. The fact that the mere fear of Russian retaliation can drive a company as large as Conde Nast to bury an unfavorable story testifies to the true condition of Russian society.

And it ought to help us appreciate, in this age of politicized news and corporate cutbacks, the value of a free press.

14 The Hoot

IMPRESSIONS

October 2, 2009

Pedal to the metal on and off campus

ILLUSTRATION BY Destiny Aquino/The Hoot

BY ALEX SCHNEIDER Editor

It was called “the pedal-to-the-metal bill” by friends and foes alike. The legislation, signed by President Clinton in 1995, effectively removed government control of highway speed limits, reversing a ‘70s law that capped all speed limits at 55 miles per hour in order to conserve energy (and survive what had become a severe oil embargo). Many states raised their speed limits by 10 miles per hour.

10 years later, 12,545 Americans have died as a result. According to a study published in the American Journal of Public Health in July, those deaths have had a net cost of $12 billion. While skepticism over this specific figure is warranted, the fact remains that an increase in the speed limit can, as the authors of the study report, have “long-term repercussions.”

Why do faster speeds correlate with

higher deaths? Any reader who has operated a motor vehicle can certainly attest to the fact that driving faster is more dangerous. The reasons are numerous, but they stem from the fact that in the scheme of evolution, man was never meant to move faster than 10-20 miles per hour.

Why, then, do Americans often drive at inappropriate speeds, considering the inevitable danger of doing so?

One reason is the perception of safety.

Highways are designed to deceive drivers into perceiving that they are moving slower than is the case. The ‘white dividing lines’ in highways and on roads are actually drawn proportional to the speed limit. On South Street, for instance, such a white line might be slightly longer than the width of a Hoot centerfold.

On the other hand, on a highway, white lines can be as long as one to two car lengths. The artificiality of such an arrangement often deceives drivers into thinking that all roads with familiar markings – dividing lines, barriers, colorful signs – are safe at any speed.

They aren’t.

Imagine, on the other hand, driving on a narrow road with unfamiliar signage at night. Any reasonable driver would slow down in order to ensure his own safety. After traversing such a road numerous times, the driver might increase speed over time, but still drive slowly.

This contrasts greatly with driving on an interstate. An experienced U.S. driver who enters any interstate in the country will perceive the road’s safety and speed up as a result. Even if the driver had never been on the road, its similarity to other, familiar interstate highways will lead to a perception

of safety.

At Brandeis, only one roadway exists, its speed limit set at 15 miles per hour.

Given the fact that the campus is densely settled, with pedestrians often darting into roads and from behind cars, this limit makes sense. Nevertheless, cars often drive through the loop road at 20, 25, or even 30 miles per hour.

Slow, right? After all, the speed limit in front of your house, if you come from the suburbs as I do, is probably in that range.

So driving at 20 – 30 miles per hour can’t be speeding, can it?

The answer all depends on perceptions.

As a driver loops around the Brandeis roadway by public safety and East Quad and proceeds up the hill toward Rabb steps, driving at 20 miles per hour, I would submit, is dangerous. Sure, the stretch of road looks like your everyday street, but consider the road’s failings: low visibility, cars on the right, a narrow sidewalk on the left, and densely populated dorms on either side.

As a driver approaches the top of the hill, moreover, they enter the area around Rabb Steps, always a difficult intersection, especially during peak time between classes.

With students moving around the area and trucks coming in and out of the loading dock, a dangerous situation presents itself.

The problem arises, however, that drivers often will drive at these increased speeds in this area of campus. Some have not visited before and do not know what to expect.

Others – often students – are intimately familiar with the area and, as in the case of the narrow roadway at nighttime, gradually drive faster the more they drive at Brandeis.

Still others are just reckless drivers who, for a variety of reasons, drive faster than the

speed limit in any situation.

As the statistics of the above study make clear, this problem cannot continue for long without a serious incident occurring.

Personally, I have seen many near misses over my time in this particular intersection. (Last year, a car traveling fast up the hill nearly hit a pedestrian exiting the loading dock area and proceeding to cross the road. Interestingly enough, the car, which was a hybrid, made no sound as it whizzed by). I have also witnessed a number of drivers slam on the breaks in this intersection.

Slamming on the breaks should not happen at Brandeis.

While many solutions to this problem certainly exist, one remains, by far, the most appealing: give drivers a reason to slow down. Narrow the roads, put more parking spots in dangerous places, and add speed bumps, stop signs, and cross walks.

The result is a roadway less likely to be perceived safe, thus requiring drivers to think twice before speeding up.

European suburbs have done just this.

There exists a town in Scandinavia that – imagine this – has no traffic signage. The road itself and the situation presented to drivers act to maintain normal traffic. The idea is clear: signs aren’t needed if drivers perceive a dangerous situation, as they will naturally slow their driving.

While such drastic measures are certainly not necessary overnight, they ought to be considered not only in communities across the country, but also at Brandeis. Speeding is dangerous, but it happens for a reason: drivers know that they can get away with faster speeds. The future of public safety lies in reminding drivers that they cannot.

Borde-nough

Looking for media watchdogs in a shrinking pool

BY CHRIS BORDELON Columnist

The media is portraying the phenomenon of protests against President Barack Obama's plans to change the healthcare system as “national.” The protesters' weapon of choice seems to be the ad hominem attack. Signs and chants portray Obama as a dictator of the political left. At the same time, reporters following Obama focus on his oratory and on the cheering crowds that complement his speaking talents.

Whether his health care plans are adopted is made to seem a question of how many crowds he can seduce by the time his proposals come to a vote.

Neither Obama's oft-rehearsed, uncompromisingly rosy healthcare pitch nor his opponents' even less substantive attacks on their image of the president's ideology and character tell us much about what is on the table. If the news allows any basis for audiences to choose a side, it seems, it is by taking the measure of which side can muster the loudest crowd of partisans.

I don't fault Obama for this situation, although he has done nothing to improve it. He'd be a poor salesman if he told the public that the plan he's pushing was full of problems. If left to his own devices, he'll show only his high cards. It is the role of the opposition and the press to call his hand.

Both groups are conspicuously failing to do that. The Republicans are showing their immaturity

as an opposition party. Obama's sweeping health care proposals should amount to a huge target, but Republicans are not really taking aim. Instead, they focus on Obama himself—Obama the socialist, Obama the dictator.

Even their shorthand for the president's proposals (“Obamacare”) puts the focus on the man rather than the matter at issue. Furthermore, the Republicans have put forward no alternative health care program—a rookie opposition mistake. Even if they prefer the status quo, the public's perception of them will suffer if they appear to be name-calling do-nothings.

Surely, Republicans can think of some worthwhile proposal to rally behind, if only to keep up appearances.

The media doesn't have the excuse of immaturity. Its coverage has focused on events—Obama’s speeches and party lackeys' rallies—and on poll data. It has been very weak on explication of ideas.

The proposed reforms are complicated, but not unfathomable.

If the best that broadcast news shows and local papers can do is to tell their audiences that some people support Obama's health care plan and that others don't, their fate should be the same as that of car companies that make lousy cars (and I don't mean that they should receive taxpayer bailouts).

The media's most important role in a democracy is to question policy. In doing so, it does not act in a partisan role, even if the

media itself has a partisan cast.

Whether the media is “liberal” or “conservative,” and whether or not there exist credible opposition parties that can do better than put pictures of their adversaries and of Hitler together on posters, journalists aren't doing their jobs if much of the public remains in ignorance of the facts surrounding the hottest political topic in the country.

What does the White House mean when it claims on its website that Obama's plan “reins in the cost of health care for our families, our businesses, and our government?” If it could do that without sacrificing quality, it would surely be a good plan. But can it?

Insurance companies set the rates they charge based on the forms and amounts of coverage that are underwritten and the risks of insuring the individual or group. Obama's plan will tend to increase costs to insurance companies. Insurers won't be able to deny coverage or charge “higher premiums” when an applicant for insurance has a “pre-existing condition,” or when actuaries have determined that age or gender makes them riskier to insure.

Insurers will no longer be able to limit their costs with provisions in their policies that make policyholders responsible for outof-pocket charges beyond fixed limits, because Obama's plan puts “caps” on out-of-pocket expenses.

Obama's proposal also “eliminates extra charges for preventive

care” that once fell on consumers, ostensibly leaving insurers to foot the bill.

Clearly, insurers' costs will rise if these measures are enacted. But Obama's plan contains no mechanism to prevent insurance companies from passing on these costs to consumers - businesses and people. If businesses and individuals are charged higher insurance premiums, how can Obama claim that his plan “reins in” their costs? By raising premiums, will his plan cause some people to lose individual coverage, and cause some employers to drop their group plans? Obama hopes to sock “insurance companies that sell very expensive plans” with a special “fee.” Will some insurance companies give up writing health insurance policies altogether under these new conditions, thereby reducing competition and potentially increasing costs further?

“Large employers” of more than 50 workers and “individuals who can afford it” will have to buy insurance or pay fines “so everyone shares in the responsibility of reform.” But will this encourage companies to downsize, cut wages or other benefits, or fold? And how many people will be able to “afford” individual coverage after these new cost-boosting initiatives are in place?

Government's costs are supposed to be “reined in,” too. But the president's plan offers “new tax credits to help people buy insurance” and to small businesses “to offset costs of providing cov-

erage.” Not only the currently uninsured, but also presumably some of those who lost coverage because of higher premiums charged due to Obama's rulechanges, will be in line for these credits. Obama's plan would also offer “new, low-cost coverage” until at least 2013 to “high-risk” applicants whose care is so costly that private companies won't insure them at anything less than prohibitive rates. In the circumstances, how can a plan that does these things be said to “rein in” costs to government?

The White House website claims that the plan “won't add a dime to the deficit and is paid for upfront” by “health system savings and new revenue.” But the website adds disingenuously that “if the savings promised at the time of enactment don’t materialize, the President will be required to put forth additional savings to ensure that the plan does not add to the deficit.” So, is the plan really “paid for upfront,” or are the “savings” and “new revenue” just self-serving projections? After a brief honeymoon of high spending based on these sham projections, will quality begin to suffer when “additional savings” are “put forth”?

The president's supporters might also wonder why he is trying so hard to avoid the impression that funding for his plans will be drawn from the Treasury's general revenue. Is health care reform important or not? Rather See WATCHDOG, p. 15

IMPRESSIONS

October 2, 2009

The Hoot 15

PHOTO BY Max Shay/The Hoot

Book of Matthew

Losing my religion: A follow-up

BY BRET MATTHEW Editor

It was about mid-way through last year. There I was, manning the cash register at my job at Einstein’s, minding my own business and wishing my shift would go by a little faster. Amid the yelling of orders and the frantic WhoCard swipes, one customer decided to strike up a conversation with me.

“Hey,” he said. “You’re Bret Matthew, right? You write for The Hoot?”

“Yeah, that’s me,” I answered, slightly surprised.

“I read your last article. It was good. I liked it.”

“Thanks.”

“I just wanted to tell you that I agree with you. I’m an atheist too.”

I’m an atheist too. Now that got my attention.

It’s true that at the end of fall semester last year, I wrote a column entitled “Losing my religion: A rant about non-believing.” The title was no exaggeration. I made it quite clear where I stood at the time. I mocked the concept of God. I claimed to despise organized religion, going as far as to call it a “detriment to humanity.”

The fact that I wrote the piece under the pressure of an uncomfortably close deadline didn’t ex-

actly pacify my writing either.

The reason I bring this up is that they are words that I can no longer claim to fully believe.

What do I believe? That’s a good question. In a sense I was born and raised into a perpetual religious identity crisis. I grew up in a mostly Jewish home, but never a strict one. I was taken to synagogue and taught about God, but never forced to pray on my own. I learned to read Hebrew, but never mastered the language well enough to know what I was actually saying.

These aren’t exactly circumstances that bring about a sense of deep personal faith. And as I grew older, I moved even further away from my paltry religious upbringing. I became dismissive of all kinds of belief, to the point where I was writing angry opinion columns about it.

And then Monday happened.

Monday, as I’m sure you already know, was Yom Kippur, the Jewish Day of Atonement. It’s a time for Jews to gather, pray, fast, and cleanse themselves of all their sins from the past year. Although I didn’t partake in these traditions (as you may have guessed), I did find myself dedicating an exceptional amount of time to personal reflection.

“Am I an atheist?” I asked myself.

I came to two very different, tentative conclusions.

On one hand, I still have many doubts about organized religion, Judaism included. I question the existence of a God. I question the use of prayer. I question the use of complicated rituals. I question devout believers, who appear to be shackled to their chosen dogma like mindless slaves. Above all, I question any institution that demand that its unprovable assertions and teachings be accepted at face value.

On the other hand, I cannot consider myself an atheist. I just can’t, if for no other reason than the fact that my arguments against all other religions seem to apply to atheism as well. Yes, religion has so far been unprovable. We do not know if there is a God, or if any of the millions of prayers invoked every day actually make a difference in the world. But out of fairness, I would argue that none of this can be disproved either. In this vast, complicated, and inadequately understood universe of ours, there exists the possibility of any number of higher beings or powers. To say that this is unequivocally untrue carries

no more weight than to say the opposite, for a simple reason: we don’t know.

In the end, atheist beliefs, while in many cases simpler than other religious beliefs, are still no less dogmatic, and still demand acceptance at face value. And as much as I question the validity of religious tenets, I must admit that my questioning has also led me to remain open to their possibilities.

Belief-wise, this probably leaves me somewhere in the middle of everything. But I suppose that this state of mind is where I’m supposed to be.

You see, it’s calm here. It’s a small, peaceful eye in the midst of contentious storms. I feel like I’m free to consider anything.

It’s been a long time coming, but I think I’ve finally managed to open my mind.

I never did give an answer to that customer’s assertion. But if I had a chance to speak to him again, I know what I would tell him: I am not an atheist, nor a believer. I am simply a rational human being, a tolerant one who seeks the truth that will satisfy my deep curiosity. And until that truth appears, I have nothing to believe, but everything to learn.

Asking tough questions WATCHDOG (from p. 14)

than make pie-in-the-sky claims that his plan can somehow reduce costs to everyone without compromising quality, why doesn't the president treat the issue as a question of protecting human dignity that would justify spending even if other programs—overseas interventions, say—had to be scaled back to pay for it? Even if he doesn't view health care as a human right, wouldn't it make sense from the standpoint of selling his plan to the public for Obama to embrace the use of general revenue to pay for his plans?

Wouldn't that avoid the need to make the doubt-generating claim that the reforms will cover many more people at little extra cost without sacrificing quality?

Why do people who are getting paid to ask the administration questions like these often fail to do so? During the Bush administration, news agencies eventually complained a great deal, but not until after the many crimes of that administration had already been committed. During the Obama administration, they've acted like lapdogs, contentedly rolling over with their eyes closed. But what our democracy really needs are watchdogs, and those, alas, seem to be an increasingly rare breed.

Have something to say? Submit a letter to the editor online at www.thehoot.net.

16

The Hoot

October 2, 2009

W E E K E N D Spotlight on Boston

Rockapella

Cashunt: The Ultimate Boston Scavenger Hunt Competition!

Sunday, Oct. 4, 10:00 a.m.

Faneuil Hall Marketplace

Saturday, Oct. 3, 8:00 p.m.

Berklee College of Music Performance Center Come see Rockapella this weekend at Berklee. The group is also known as the Kings of Contemporary A Cappella for their successful blending of rock, jazz, R&B and doo-wop.

For a one-of-a-kind experience, participate in the ninth season of the Cashunt competition. You can win prizes and get a CD with pictures from the fun-filled day. You can even qualify for an annual championship!

What's going on at Brandeis?

BUCO BBQ in the Sukkah

Russian BBQ Sunday, Oct. 4, 3:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m.

Shapiro Campus Center

Sunday, Oct. 4, 12:00 p.m. to 2:00 p.m.

Sherman This week is BUCO's annual Sukkah BBQ. Come join in the festivities and eat free food!

If the BUCO BBQ isn't enough for you, go to Russian Club's Shashlik, a Russian Barbeque. While you are eating listen to some cool Russian music.

Editor's Pick:

Family Feud

Liquid Latex Dance

Monday, Oct. 5, 1:30 p.m. to 4:00 p.m.

Shapiro Campus Center Atrium

Saturday, Oct. 3, 10:00 p.m. to 2:00 a.m.

Levin Ballroom If you want a unique Saturday night come see Liquid Latex. Bring $5 and clothing to donate the night of the show; for every piece of clothing you bring (no more than 3) you get a dollar off! Minimum dress is a bathing suit.

Pit your team against another this monday in a contest to guess the most popular answer to questions given to Brandeis undergraduate students. Sign up a team in SCC Room 203.

Unless otherwise noted, photos are from internet sources.

Hoot Comic Strips

laughingwarlock

By Ian Price

Can you draw and write comics? Want to see your work in print?

E-mail sri@brandeis.edu

Humor is Dead

By Xander Bernstein

Sleazy

By Matt Kupfer