Howard Ernst, author of Chesapeake Bay Blues and the recently published Fight for the Bay, has been commended by scientists, politicians, and citizens alike for his work in unmasking the political battles faced in the recovery of the Chesapeake Bay.

The Bay, once known for its incredible shellfish production, has deteriorated to the point where some believe it will never recover.  Some fault lies in the political action, or lack thereof, made by the federal government in its restoration.  In a lecture sponsored by the Eisenhower Institute on March 18^th entitled, “Chesapeake in Peril: Why a Dark Green Awakening is Needed to Save the Chesapeake,” Ernst compares, “Earthquakes don’t kill people; engineers kill people [in their construction of poor buildings]”.  He explains that, in the same way, pollution isn’t destroying the bay.  “Politicians are killing the bay.”

The statistics are staggering.  The oyster population is less than 1% its former amount, and yet, a moratorium has never been placed on oyster fishing.  The water, rife with extreme levels of nitrogen and phosphorus components, generates harmfully large phytoplankton blooms, threatens the life of the fish in the Bay, and constitutes a major problem to the Bay ecosystem.  The blue crab population, known historically as a chief export of Maryland, is faltering on and off the brink of dangerous levels.

Declared an impaired body of water by the EPA, the Chesapeake Bay has been a political focus since the 50s.  However, each legislation passed has failed to greatly improve the state of the Bay due to its tentative inaction, falling woefully short of proposed goals time and time again.  Ernst focuses in his books and lectures to identify the breakdown in policy that leaves the Chesapeake Bay it its dismal state.

Most politicians and citizens will agree when asked that more effective plans for environmental reform are important.  However, when it gets down to the gritty stuff, opinions begin to flay a little.  Ernst divides those involved with Chesapeake Bay legislation into two demarcations: cornucopian and environmentalist.

Ernst defines a cornucopian in such a way as to insinuate that this money concerned, free market guru bears the stereotypical greasy mustache, nearly cackling in his intrinsic evil.  The cornucopian, Ernst explains, is not concerned with the ideal of preserving the ecosystem and derives no other comfort from the Chesapeake than in its dollar sign.  The cornucopian ideal is a minority.  Most people take sympathy with environmentalists.

The environmentalists, however, are divided into four subgroups.  In short, Earnst attributes the success of the minority cornucopian and the failure of the majority environmentalist to this factor.  Illustrated in Ernst’s book, the divisions can be made through colors; there are Light Green environmentalists, Green moderates, Dark Green liberals, and Red radicals.

Ernst went into some length as to the differences between these groups.  Essentially, Light Greens work closest with legislatures and play within the rules to get action.  Greens set limits, focus on keeping political and environmental balance, and see the environment as a right or privilege that should be available to all.  The Dark Greens declare nature as spiritual, delighting in the intrinsic, connective, and religious aspects of nature, naming ecosystems “Green Cathedrals”.  The Dark Green proposal is that the one who creates the problem should fix it – that, in their mind, government should be held responsible.

Reds can generally be considered the animal rights activists, taking opportunities to fight legislation through brute force, generally against the law.  Certainly the most severe of the environmentalists, Reds are disgusted at human’s destruction of nature, and would rather the environment survive before them.

The issue with these subgroups of the environment is in their competition.  Rather than focusing on a unified attack against the issues in the political system, Earnst reports that these groups find distaste with each other and squabble amongst themselves.  The Reds are offended by everyone who doesn’t see the Bay issue as desperate enough for stricter action; the Greens hate the reputation earned of environmentalists by Reds, and wish that Light greens would stop trying to compromise.  Light Greens, consequently, see Dark Greens as pretentious; Greens just kind of hang out in the middle, watching the chaos as Reds make enemies with everyone and Light Greens express their mortification.

The web of dispute between the environmentalists becomes increasingly ridiculous as it is written out, nearing on the comical.  Essentially, this is the problem of the Chesapeake Bay; not necessarily pollutants or SAV depletion, but the people who can’t keep their heads together.

Ernst, concluding with a few questions and finishing comments, underlined the need for environmentalists to stop worrying so much about titles and ‘who done what’ and instead focus on their unified enemy, the cornucopian.

The lecture almost had the feel of a grotesque fantasy with these grossly exaggerated stereotypes, but Ernst’s embellished definitions served to rile the audience enough for them to pay attention.  The inflated stereotypes define in themselves the problem that needs to be eliminated in the fight for the Bay.

Dr. Howard Ernst is an Associate Professor at the U.S. Naval Academy and a Senior Scholar at the UVa Center for Politics.  For more information on his work, books, and upcoming appearances, go to http://www.howardernst.com/Home

Last Friday, April 13 th the Gettysburg College community joined forces to fight cancer in a Relay episode began on Friday 13 th 8:00pm and ended on

Saturday 14 th at 8:00am . The president and Relay committee of Colleges Against Cancer: Gettysburg chapter worked since the beginning of the Spring Semester to make Relay For Life in Gettysburg College an amazing event.

The preparations for the Relay on Friday 13th took hours. The members of Colleges Against Cancer worked together to set up Bream Gym and make it entertaining, fun, and as comfortable as possible.

At 8:00PM the doors to the gym opened and immediately the gym was packed of excited college students, families of students, community members and canc

er survivors. After the welcoming speech for the community’s cancer survivors, including one of our Gettysburg student students, people started to walk the tracks keeping the motto of the night in mind, “Cancer never sleeps, why should we?”

The attendants to the event enjoyed a variety of games like Dance Revolution, Lip Sync and hot dogs eating contests, performances from DTO, and an assortment of food provided by local markets.

This first Relay for Life in the Gettysburg Campus raised around $57,000, going beyond what was ex

pected. The money will be donated to The American Cancer Society to keep the research and find a way to destroy cancer.

On February 7, Stacy Sobel Esq. gave a lecture entitled GLBT Equality in the Current Political, Social, and Legal Landscape. The lecture was attended by members of Allies and the Law and Justice Society, who co-sponsored the lecture, as well as other members of the Gettysburg community. Ms. Sobel is a leading authority on the military’s “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy. She is the current Executive Director of Equality Advocates Pennsylvania and a lecturer at the University of Pennsylvania Law School where she teaches a class entitled “Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity, and Law.”

Ms. Sobel gave a brief summary of how the Gay Rights Movement has evolved over the past several decades. From how the concept of a man loving a man or a woman loving a woman was incomprehensible in 1955, to the first Gay Right’s March in 1970 when Ms. Sobel, at five years old, knew what gay was. Sobel mentioned two Supreme Court cases which have affected the Gay Rights Movement. The first, Bowers v. Hardwick in 1986, stated that there were no privacy rights for gay sodomy, and that any who engaged in sodomy were breaking state laws. The decision from this case set precedent for other cases by making homosexuality a crime. The second major case which has impacted the Gay Rights Movement was Lawrence v. Texas in 2001 which overturned Bowers v. Hardwick. In Ms. Sobel’s words that case treated gays as real people who were involved in relationships. Lawrence v. Texas was unusual as it overturned a decision made less than twenty years ago.

Ms. Sobel talked about the status of homosexuals today, referring to anti-discrimination policies in Pennsylvania that protect sexual orientation and gender identity. Nationally only seventeen states have laws prohibiting the discrimination with only a couple including gender identity. In Pennsylvania only fourteen municipalities prohibit discrimination including; Scranton, Allentown, York, Pittsburgh, Philadelphia, and Erie (which gives protection for both homosexuals and transgender and was the first to pass such laws).

Ms. Sobel discussed some of the current problems facing homosexuals and transgender persons. Most of the calls Equality Advocates Pennsylvania receives are for job discrimination and family law. Because gay couples do not receive the benefits that come with civil marriage they are faced with problems involving insurance, taxes, and custody rights. In 2001, Family Law stated that gay people could adopt. However, since then more has been added to give both parents rights, including: in loco parentis (in place of parent), child support in case of break up, and second parent adoptions. Even so there are still problems, for second parent adoptions a home study is conducted by Child Protective Services to make sure that the home is alright. Medical powers of attorney are needed in order to make medical decisions for a child if second parent adoption has not yet been done.

If gay couples are not married they must have powers of attorney in order to make medical decisions. There are also problems with inheritance. If a will is not made out and a couple shares a house the surviving partner can lose the house. They must also pay an inheritance tax which has forced surviving partners to sell their property in order to pay. In one case a man and his partner had co-ownership of a house. When one died his parents received the house due to an absence of a will, and his parents told the partner he could remain there if he paid them the value of his half of the house.

Transgender persons are not as protected by the law. Only a few of the states and municipalities that have discrimination laws protect transgender persons. They are disproportionately homeless and jobless. In urban centers transgender women are harassed by police because they are associated with prostitution due to discrimination in finding jobs. Ms. Sobel recounted a case involving a transsexual man who applied for a job with the Philadelphia Library System. There were eight openings with three hundred applicants taking the civil service test. He placed in the top three, but never received a call for an interview. What he found out was that the library system thought he was being fraudulent because two different names were listed. Since the law against discrimination in Philadelphia included gender identity he had to be called in for an interview because of his score, and is still working for the library system happy to have a job.

One of the final things Stacy Sobel talked about was the military’s “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” policy. Over the past ten years the opinion of there being openly gay servicemen serving has changed. The United States and Turkey are the only members of NATO which do not allow openly gay service members to serve. During the testimony for the passing of the policy, Bowers v. Hardwick was used to justify the passing. Even though a study by the Rand Corporation, one of the most conservative think tanks, found that there was no proof that having openly gay service members would have any negative impact on morale and readiness. The policy has been shown to hurt the military. In order to get more troops scores needed for the entrance exam have been lowered, and people with criminal records are being let it. Meanwhile, Arabic translators, pilots, and other highly trained and skilled personnel have been dismissed at the cost of millions of dollars.

Despite the backlash that occurs with each step forward for the Gay Rights Movement Stacy Sobel is optimistic about the future. In order to move forward more diversity training and education are needed. She believes that within forty years gay marriage will be allowed. More and more religious institutions have been coming out to show their support. The Gay Rights Movement has been moving forward at an unprecedented speed, but as Stacy Sobel said “while things are better, they’re not perfect.”

The Blavettt Lecture, which will occur on Friday March 23 and several subsequent days, will highlight as speakers two prominent former politicians: Former House Majority Leader Dick Armey and Former Senate Majority and Minority Leader Tom Daschle.

Armey began his career in academics and transitioned to politics, trading a job as an Economics Professor at North Texas State University, which is now the University of North Texas, for a position in the United States House of Representatives. He defeated, in 1984, Representative Tom Vandergriff to become the Representative for the 26 th District of Texas. He served in the House of Representatives, eventually attaining the position of House Republican Conference Chairman. In 1994, Armey, along with House Majority Whip Newt Gingrich (also a former professor), drafted the Contract with America. The Contract with America was the driving force behind the Republican Revolution of 1994, which resulted in the Republican Party gaining control of both Houses of Congress. Gingrich became the Speaker of the House and Armey the House Majority Leader, the highest position next to the speaker. In 1998, when Speaker Gingrich resigned due to Republican losses in the midterm elections, Armey retained his post as Majority Leader, which he held until his resignation in 2002. He has remained active, currently serving as a senior policy advisor for the Washington D.C. law firm of DLA Piper, the co-chairman of DLA Piper’s Homeland Security Task Force, and the Chairman of FreedomWorks.

Like Armey, Daschle started his political life as a four term congressman from South Dakota, representingnthe 1 st Congressional District of South Dakota and then the At Large Congressional District of South Dakota. While serving in the House, Daschle quickly became involved with the Democratic leadership. Upon his election to the United States Senate in 1986, Daschle was appointed to the Senate Finance Committee. In 1988, Senate Majority Leader George Mitchell appointed him co-chairman of the Democratic Party Committee. In 1994, Daschle was elected by his colleagues to replace George Mitchell, who retired, and became the Senate Majority Leader. From January 3 rd to January 20 th, Daschle became Majority Leader, as there were 50 Republican and 50 Democratic Senators, and Vice President Gore gave the Democrats a technical Majority. After the inauguration of George W. Bush as president, Daschle reverted again to Minority Leader, until May 2001, when Senator Jim Jeffords of Vermont became an independent and caucused with the Democrats. Daschle remained majority Leader until 2002, when the midterm elections cost the Democrats their majority, therefore he reverted to Minority Leader. He held this position until 2004, when he was defeated by John Thune. Daschle also remains active, as he is a Special Policy Advisor for the law firm Alston & Bird LLP, a visiting professor at Georgetown Public Policy Institute, and a Distinguished Senior Fellow at the Center for American Progress.

It is wise that Armey and Daschle were chosen to speak, as they are less likely to try and push one president contender, as some speaker would feel obligated to do, but rather analyze the current political situation with critical and non-involved eyes. The very fact that they are no longer serving in the House of Representatives or the Senate gives them the power to move away from party talking points and offer honest and forthright opinions.

On Saturday November 18 and Sunday November 19 a sense of excitement filled the air. No, not because Thanksgiving break was right around the corner, but because of the events planned for the two days that were Rememberance weekend– a time of year where Gettysburg becomes filled with renactors, civil war buffs, and tourists. Not only was there a parade, and ceremony on Dedication Day, but there was a Jazz Concert, the 45th Annual Fortenbaugh lecture, and book signings after the lecture. Students, community members, and visitors alike had the opportunity and privilege to attend any or all of these programs. This commemorated the 143rd anniversary of Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address.

One of the higlights of the weekend was the parade on Saturday from 1:00 PM to 2:00 PM, Union and Confederate re-enactors marched through town, in groups, which ranged from the 19th Regiment P.U.I. Company G to the Sons of the Confederate Veterans from Maryland. Not only did these units carry swords and guns in varying styles and sizes, but they also carried flags, ranging from large to small. The re-enactors who portrayed soldiers did so very convincingly, as they rounded corners, the officers barked out commands to make sure that the marching was not flawed.

At 8:00, the Gettysburg College-Community Orchestra performed in the Majestic Theater. The Orchestra played pieces such as: Shostakovich’s Festival Overture, Lalo’s Symphonie espagnole, Bizet’s L’Arlesienne: Suite No 2, and Tchaikovsky’s Symphony No.2. They were conducted by Dr. Lewes Peddell and featured not only a guest conductor, Dr. David Ramael, but also a violin solo by Lizzie Van Voorhis.

In the Dedication Day Ceremony, wreaths were placed at the Soldiers’ National Monument to honor the dead and their sacrifices.

After the wreaths were placed, everyone was treated to remarks by Tom Brokaw. Brokaw gave an address about not only the importance of the Gettysburg Address, but the idea of sacrifice, especially involving todays’s conflict in Iraq.

He urged all citizens wheter they supported or did not support the commander in chief or the war itself, to support the soldiers because they were fighting for all of us. Brokaw also spent time discussing the political atmosphere today. For what could have been a politically charged address, Brokaw made sure to stick to relatively unifying themes, which became his overarching idea, that the country needs to find a common ground. The ceremony was concluded with James Getty’s, who portrayed Abraham Lincoln, recitation of the Gettysburg Address.

The 45th Annual Fortenbaugh Lecture featured Drs. James and Lois Horton, who spoke on “The Man and the Martyr: Abraham Lincoln in African American History and Memory.” Also featured was Jeff Shaara, who awarded the 2006 Michael Shaara Prize for Excellence in Civil War Fiction to E.L. Doctorow, for his novel The March.

After the lecture, people had the opportunity to have books signed by Professor Gabor Borritt, Jeff Shaara, E.L. Doctorow, and the Hortons’.
Rememberance Weekend was a success and represents one aspect of the uniqueness of attending Gettysburg College, very few students across the country can speak of seeing renactors walk through campus, and even fewer can report that many of these renactors are in fact students.

Contributions to the Article by Kim Tenure

Friday 1st
Carnaval from 9pm to 1am
Movie Night at 10pm

Saturday 2nd
Avenue Q and The Producers
Movie Night from 10pm
AIDS Rememeberance Dance in the Attic 10pm to 1am

Friday 8th
Happy Hour from 5pm

Friday 10th – coffeehouse from 10pm

Saturday 11th – Midnight Madness

Friday 17th- Pat Green Concert

Saturday 18th – Comedian (Attic) ,Pete Lee from 9pm – 11pm

On Sunday night, September 24th, the First Year Class had another installment of their First Year Experience Program. They all went to the Majestic Theater and listened to a speaker, Dr. Maura Cullen talk about diversity and other assorted topics which included but were not limited to size, gender, age, sexual orientation, race, and disability. After the program was over each of them received a coupon for a free movie at the Majestic.

The program began with a slide show of a series of different quotes; which helped to segue into Cullen’s presentation. To illustrate several of her points, Cullen used Power Point to project her topics onto a central screen. She spent the bulk of the presentation discussing the topics using a variety of anecdotes and personal experiences to help illustrate central ideas. A sampling of her strategies includes the following items.

For size, she talked about a friend who had lost 130 pounds and how she described the differences in the ways people treated her. During the gender portion, she offered various statistics about the employment of women. For age, she urged everyone to write at least one letter to a grandparent or someone else they love, because letters are very important to people. For race, she discussed an experience she had where she was the only white person in a church and asked the audience to put themselves in that scenario. In her discussion of disability she brought up the fact that people are only temporarily able bodies (TABs) because anything can happen at any point. Finally, for sexual orientation, she told the audience that she was a lesbian and described some of the problems which she has faced due to her sexual preference.

The program ended with a slide show of composed of various pictures, some of which included first year students, several were of Cullen and her father, but the majority of the pictures were of people who succeeded or people who fought against an established norm or people who faced severe repression. The show was accompanied by the song “I Believe I can Fly,” sung by R. Kelly, a man whom Cullen says made some bad choices, but should not be judged by them.

The reaction of the First Years was somewhat mixed. One person said that “I thought it was pretty good, it was better than I thought it would be.” Another person said “It was a good attempt because she had a good message, but I don’t know if one talk will change any opinions.” One student added “I think she has a lot of really good points, but towards the end of the program, her speech became more biased. Overall, it was very entertaining, but I felt embarrassed because our class was rude and I really like WAWA iced tea.” Lisa Spadaccini, the President of the First year Class said that she was originally skeptical of the program, “but after it was over, I learned a lot more about diversity. I can identify with the idea of being the only person of a specific race in one area, because it has happened to me.” One last person had an odd opinion: when asked about the program, they replied that “it made me crave Taco Bell.” So, student feelings on the program were somewhat mixed, but most agree that it offered some ideas to think about.

Gettysburg College junior, David Moore was the initiator of the night’s events designed to commemorate the five year anniversary of the World Trade Center and Pentagon tragedies that claimed the lives of nearly 3,000 people. With the cooperation of the Student Senate and Student Senate President Stephen Ginter, Gettysburg College was able to organize the event that included speeches by the school’s chaplain, Joseph Donnella, Dean of Students Julia Ramsey and the spotlight speaker of the night: Congressman Todd Platts from the 19th District of Pennsylvania.

The memorial began with the playing of the National Anthem by the Gettysburg College band under the direction of Dr. Lewis Peddell and concluded with a heartfelt candle lighting while the band played “God Bless America.” The mood was solemn and respectful as onlookers observed the historical significance of the setting of Gettysburg where the civil war raged about hundred forty-five years ago. Dean Ramsey made note of this “enduring quality” of the College and the town of Gettysburg in her speech.
Although the tone of the ceremony was mournful, Congressman Platts recognized the need for the survivors to keep the dead alive by remembering the “hope of that day” and most importantly the “love of that day.” He cited the sense of national pride and togetherness that arose from the deaths of thousands. No one in the crowd could say that they had not been affected by the events of September 11; even the institution itself lost three alumni in the attacks.

The words of the night’s speakers resonated in the air as those present blew out their candles and walked off in silence, a few asking each other “do you remember where you were when it happened?” Many can recount this memory exactly, which is a testimony to the significance of 9/11 in the minds of Americans everywhere.

Friday 13th – Homecoming, “Cupola”; coffeehouse from 10pm

Saturday 14th – Alumni Band/ chorus, Kickoff celebration 175th anniversary

Friday 20th – Family weekend; Happy Hour, artist: Rob Gonzalez

Saturday 21st – Impulse (Ballroom)