26 items found for your search. If no results were found please broaden your search.
(11/13/15 3:12am)
In the week
since the website Deadspin released photos of the 2013 domestic violence incident involving Dallas Cowboy’s linebacker Greg Hardy, media columnists from
coast to coast have reacted with appropriate disgust and bewilderment.
(11/06/15 1:47am)
When Metrojet Flight 9268 crashed in the Egyptian desert Saturday, affiliates of the Islamic State immediately claimed responsibility for the disaster. Russian aviation officials initially disputed this claim, but the prospect of the plane being brought down through an act of terror has become more likely in recent days. Both American and British officials now believe a bomb may have exploded as the plane ascended, and all flights from the United Kingdom to the Egyptian city of Sharm el-Sheikh have been suspended.
(10/22/15 7:45pm)
Throughout
the long and glorious history of America’s national pastime, an undeniable
relationship seems to have formed between baseball and American political culture. From the president throwing the first pitch on opening day to presidential mascots competing in races at Washington National’s games, the political and sporting traditions of our nation seem to come together in
baseball.
(10/14/15 4:55pm)
Among political commentators from both sides of the isle, there appears to be consensus that Hillary Clinton won the first Democratic debate. Indeed, Clinton was better prepared than any other candidate, and she handily won the war of words among the five Democrats.
(10/08/15 2:50am)
Among our nation’s 50 states, Arizona has often held the undesirable
distinction as one of America’s most politically backward places. From being
one of the only states outside of the American South to allow segregation in public
schools in the '50s to more recent controversies such as SB 1070, Arizona has
repeatedly been the focal point of national debate for all the wrong reasons.
Unfortunately, several prominent Arizona politicians have further contributed
to this reputation in the last week.
(09/25/15 2:26am)
In his address to a joint session of Congress on Thursday, Pope Francis called for
America to help craft a better future for men and women around the world.
Recognizing our nation’s unique position of influence, Francis urged Congressional
leaders to enact policies that uphold human dignity and protect the vulnerable
from forces beyond their control.
(09/17/15 1:01am)
Last week, ASU was named the most innovative college in the nation by U.S. News and World Report. The prestigious ranking represents the culmination of years institutional development and expansion under President Michael Crow, and generated widespread acclaim on social media.
(09/10/15 5:00pm)
The National Football League’s 2015 season kicks of this Thursday in Foxboro, Massachusetts, but the league office will surely celebrate the date as the end of the league’s worst year ever.
(09/03/15 3:13am)
To commemorate the 10th anniversary of Hurricane Katrina hitting the Gulf Coast, media organizations across the nation are dedicating coverage to the disaster and its impact. From broadcast specials featuring footage of the disaster to print and digital pieces on the impact of the hurricane, Katrina is once again dominating the news cycle.
(08/27/15 2:18am)
When Gov. Jerry
Brown (D-California) announced in April that his state would
impose the most stringent water-rationing policies in the nation aimed at
reducing residential water consumption by 25 percent, critics scoffed at the
plan.
(08/20/15 2:47am)
The summer of 2015 has unquestionably been a significant milestone for progressive politics in America. The Supreme Court maintained federally funded healthcare and gave LGBTQ couples the right to marry across the nation. Police reform, mandatory sentencing laws and the disproportionate impact of these policies on minority communities have become focal points of American politics. There’s even a socialist running a serious campaign for the American presidency.
(04/29/15 3:18am)
As the school year comes to a close, we columnists here at The State Press prefer to end the year on a light note. Often columnists write on difficult, sometimes controversial issues; ideally, these columns can incite constructive discussion, but sometimes they inspire vitriol.
(04/23/15 2:59am)
This past Sunday, hundreds of refugees from the war torn nation are believed to have drowned when their boat, operated by smugglers, capsized. Survivors have stated that many of the ship’s occupants moved to one side of the ship when a patrol boat was sighted (the ship was actually a commercial vessel), causing the ship to capsize.
(04/16/15 3:51am)
On April 7, Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky announced that he would run against Ted Cruz for the Republican nomination for the presidency. The announcement was not unexpected, as Paul has long been considered one of more than a dozen viable Republican candidates. Republican Sen. Marco Rubio has since entered the race, and Democrat Hillary Clinton has also launched her own long-anticipated campaign.
(04/08/15 4:36am)
Baseball fans and fanatics alike rejoiced this week as Major League Baseball’s 2015 season began. Somewhat confusingly, Opening Day was Monday when the first game of the regular season was Sunday, but that doesn’t really matter. What truly matters is that baseball — peanuts, Cracker Jack, A-Rod and all — has returned.
(04/01/15 3:58am)
Voting opened today for student government elections across all four ASU campuses. Here on the Tempe campus, the last several weeks have seen many well-developed campaigns compete for the future leadership of Undergraduate Student Government. Students vying to be the future USG Senators of their respective colleges have demonstrated the level of preparation befitting of the leadership of our school.
(03/26/15 3:30am)
Last week, Benjamin Netanyahu was re-elected as Prime Minister of Israel. His victory over Labour Leader Isaac Herzog marked the conclusion of a long campaign filled with incendiary speech by Netanyahu.
(03/19/15 12:49am)
If you have a Time Magazine subscription, you may have noticed the theme the publication has been running with over the last two weeks. As the primaries for the Democratic and Republican Party nominations grow closer and closer, editor Nancy Gibbs and her staff devoted their two most recent issues to the presumptive frontrunners for each nomination. The first issue examined Republican frontrunner Jeb Bush, followed by a look at Democratic frontrunner Hillary Clinton.
Interestingly, neither candidate was chosen to be the focus of the magazine because they lead the early polls (although many show they both tentatively do). Rather, Time Magazine focused on Jeb and Hillary because they are each the heir-apparent to two of America’s most powerful political dynasties.
To me, this fact is incredibly disturbing and unsettling. Yes, there is nothing wrong with members of certain families holding office repeatedly. In fact, many members of U.S. political dynasties, whether it is the Adams’s, Taft’s, Roosevelt’s, or even Kennedy’s, have been some of the most influential and important policymakers in U.S. history.2016 is a unique moment in the history of the U.S. Never before has our nation faced the possibility of a general election where both major candidates are members of such political dynasties. Voters may have a choice, but in a way, they really don’t. One way or the other, the U.S. is to some extent going back to more of the same (almost ironically, Time also discussed in its issue on ISIS three weeks ago how U.S. may elect a third Bush, only to enter a third war in Iraq under a member of this family).
It may not seem like a significant issue, but this striking lack of diversity is the greatest threat to American democracy today.
Elizabeth Warren was a relative unknown to many Americans until recently. A former Harvard Law professor, Warren is a Senator from Massachusetts who was crucial in the creation of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, part of her longstanding opposition to corporate abuse and predatory actions by Wall Street firms that hurt average Americans.
In recent months she was touted as a potential contender for the Democratic nomination against Hillary. Yet Warren has repeatedly stated that she has no intentions to run for the Presidency, and is instead focused on serving an effective term in the Senate.
But if the U.S. is going to escape from the increasing apathy that has consumed our voters, it is imperative that Elizabeth Warren contest Hillary Clinton for the Democratic Nomination for the Presidency.
This article is not an endorsement of Elizabeth Warren. It isn’t an endorsement of Hillary, Jeb or anyone else for that matter. It is an endorsement of diversity.
Particularly in a day and age in which Americans continue to struggle with the same issues of racial injustice that it faced more than 50 years ago, it is easy to associate diversity simply with race, or gender or even ethnicity. The diversity of ideas is at least as important, if not more so, for our nation to maintain a strong democracy.
I am a firm believer in the effectiveness of the marketplace of ideas (i.e. we all voices our opinions, and the best gain acceptance through debate and examination as the worst become irrelevant). But the marketplace of ideas simply does not work when people do not voice their opinions.
This is especially true in politics. Earlier this year, I wrote on how infighting among Republicans in Congress threatens their party’s chances of success in 2016. While I still believe this is true, the diversity of potential candidates among Republican leadership is wonderful for democracy.
Rand Paul (who is arguably a Libertarian) is currently cosponsoring a bill to decriminalize medical marijuana at the national level with Democratic ally Cory Booker. Marco Rubio was influential in crafting a failed immigration reform bill two years ago. Arizona Senator Jeff Flake is an ardent proponent of improving relations with Cuba. Republicans like Ted Cruz, Jeb Bush and John McCain might call each of these men crazy for their support of these respective proposals.
In a strange way, this jumble of opposing views among members of the same party is wonderful for voters. It presents us with real choice, and real alternatives — not just more of the same. It makes our vote matter.
In contrast, the Democratic Party currently has no such diversity, and it's hurting the party. John Kerry already tried and failed to attain the Presidency; Harry Reid is perhaps too frail to run; Joe Biden claims to be a strong advocate of women’s rights, but his actions speak differently and severely damage his credibility as a legitimate candidate; Hillary appears to be the frontrunner for the Democratic nomination, because she is what’s left of the Democratic leadership.
… Except for Elizabeth Warren. Clinton and Warren are as divergent as two female, Democratic leaders possibly could be. As Politico’s extensive and detailed profile of Warren notes, while Clinton was raised in relative privilege, dating a future President as a young adult and remains close with many powerful Wall Street donors, Warren grew up in poverty and rose to influence through hard work and sheer will power. More importantly, Warren is the tireless bane of Wall Street’s existence. The two could not be more different, and this is exactly the sort of conflict that voters need to see at the national level.
In 2008, the battle for the Democratic Nomination between President Barack Obama and Hillary was one of the most contentious in recent memory. Yet Obama and Clinton did not diverge on policy views or proposals nearly as much as Clinton and Warren do. Both the Bushes and the Clintons are wealthy families with close ties to corporate America. A general election between these two candidates would be a failing of the American political system, as both candidates benefit from the status quo and have no real need to debate it.
But a fervent debate between Elizabeth Warren and Hillary Clinton in the Democratic Primary opens up the discussion on a national level of Wall Street’s relationship with average citizens in an unprecedented fashion. As the Occupy Wall Street Movement demonstrated in 2012, many Americans have misgivings about Wall Street’s conduct in light of the 2007-08 recession. We need candidates that will duke it out and bring this issue to the forefront in the conventional political structure (rather than just direct action protests).
In the previously mentioned Politico profile of Warren, John McCain is quoted as stating Warren is not a viable presidential candidate because economic reform is her only talking point. Warren has, as an example, remained notably silent on issues of foreign policy. Similarly, former Massachusetts Congressman Barney Frank has congratulated Warren on deciding not to run, because he does not believe she has a chance of beating Clinton.
McCain and Frank might very well be right. Her policies may not even be the right course of action. But if Warren is serious about attempting to institute economic reform in the U.S., that does not matter. She needs to run regardless. A Warren campaign would force the eventual President, whomever it may be, to address the issues that she brought to the national stage while campaigning. Moreover Warren, who is not up for re-election until 2018, can then return to doing good work in the Senate, and can craft legislation for the issues she brought to light.
Most importantly, Warren needs to run because American voters are more apathetic than they ever have been before, and this threatens the democratic process.
As a student of international relations, I have been presented with innumerable examples in which democratic nations abroad are irrevocably harmed by the apathy that a lack of diverse candidates and ideas creates. The most striking example is Chile; once a nation with a proud democratic tradition, Chile fell victim to oligarchy, and ultimately tyranny, when its democratically elected, socialist President Salvador Allende was removed in a coup by the dictator Augusto Pinochet.
Yet amazingly, Chilean voters have shown an incredible disinterest in politics and the democratic process since the reinstatement of democratic government, according to leading survey group Latinobarometro. Under pressure from American and World Bank policymakers, Chilean politicians have almost uniformly supported the same type of economic reform (known as Neoliberal reform, it is largely similar to conservative economic policy in the U.S.), regardless of their party or value system. Voters know that there is no diversity among candidates, because they will all push for the same economic policies, so they simply don’t care. Chile has struggled to eliminate the seeds of Pinochet’s dictatorship as a result, only just eliminating his sham election system more than twenty years after he left office.
While the U.S. is not quite that bad, our nation is not far removed from the apathy-induced catastrophe that uniformity has sparked in nations such as Chile. A recent academic study by researchers at Princeton concluded that the U.S. is increasingly similar to an oligarchy, not a democracy. Opportunities for economic and social advancement are decreasing, according to the study, and fewer and fewer Americans are in control of the future of the entire nation. This is incredibly alarming.
It is easy to see the conclusions of this study on the ground. Our nation faces many, many challenges. Wealth disparity among Americans is higher than it ever has been before. Racial tensions are once again in the spotlight, often surrounding economic issues such as housing, employment and educational opportunity. And, as Elizabeth Warren knows all too well, many Americans are confused and upset with the conduct of members of Wall Street and Congress that are meant to aid Americans, not set them further back.
But Americans are increasingly apathetic because too many elected officials are simply not discussing these issues. Elizabeth Warren, step up to the plate and take a swing at tackling these issues at the national level by challenging Hillary in 2016. There simply is no one else who can. Reach the columnist at clmurph5@asu.edu or follow @ConnorLMurphy on Twitter.Editor’s note: The opinions presented in this column are the author’s and do not imply any endorsement from The State Press or its editors.Want to join the conversation? Send an email to opiniondesk.statepress@gmail.com. Keep letters under 300 words and be sure to include your university affiliation. Anonymity will not be granted.Like The State Press on Facebook and follow @statepress on Twitter.
(03/04/15 12:42am)
On Tuesday evening, the U.S. House of Representatives finally passed legislation that provided funding for the Department of Homeland Security. The agreement came after weeks of internal negotiations by members of Congress that culminated last Friday, when House Republicans were unable to pass a version of the legislation over concerns regarding President Barack Obama’s executive action on immigration.
(02/25/15 2:41am)
Diane Douglas and Doug Ducey are currently in a bit of a squabbling match. Douglas, the superintendent of public instruction, recently fired two staff administrators of the state Board of Education, of which Douglas herself is a member.Ducey quickly challenged Douglas’s actions, arguing that the superintendent of public instruction does not have the authority to fire board staff.
In only a few brief days, the conflict between Douglas and Ducey has become fairly heated. Douglas has taken every opportunity to assert her supposed authority, releasing a widely circulated ad stating that Ducey was not on the ballot for superintendent and repeatedly attacked Common Core standards.
Douglas initially argued for the dismissal of board members because of their support for Common Core and has since gone so far as to say Ducey is supporting these standards by contesting her decision.
Since this controversy first came to light, the fired board members — Executive Director Christine Thompson and Assistant Executive Director Sabrina Vasquez — have been able to go back to work, and state Sen. Kelli Ward, R-Lake Havasu City, has drafted legislation that explicitly states who does and who does not have the authority to hire and fire board members. Ultimately, the debate over the authority to hire and fire state Board of Education members is distracting Arizonans from the far more significant issue in education today: the fate of Common Core standards.
Given how often it is referenced in public discourse, it is easy to lose track of what Common Core standards are. In short, Common Core standards are K-12 educational standards intended to be enforced on a national level. The standards are supposed to insure that students receive a uniformly high education regardless of which part of the country they come from. Additionally, Common Core standards are supposed to foster critical thinking at a younger age than the pre-existing standards.
These standards are particularly significant given the increasingly interconnected nature of the American economy. Moving across the nation, if not the world, is not uncommon in the highly interconnected world in which we live. Establishing uniformly high educational standards allows students from any part of the country to move to any other part of the country and be equally competitive in the job market or in applying to institutions of higher education. The National Governor’s Association supports the standards.
This is not to say that Common Core is not controversial. On the contrary, these standards are often the subject of fervent debate. A recent review by the New York Times has shown that elementary students in New York have struggled to pass the new higher standards brought about by Common Core; however, the same report also detailed that the student scores were expected to decrease following the implementation of harder standards and that the overall quality of student education and student retention is still expected to improve over a larger sample space.
Leaders of Arizona government, however, oppose Common Core as a matter of state’s rights. Douglas and Ducey both oppose the standards, insisting that the state ought to have the right to determine its own public school curriculum. Much as Douglas insists that she has the power to exert all the influence she wants over the state Board of Education, Arizona leaders who oppose Common Core oppose these standards because they claim they have the power to do so. However, both Douglas and opponents of Common Core are doing more damage than good in exerting their authority wantonly.
Even as Arizona continues to rank among the worst states for high school education, Douglas and Ducey both want to prevent the further adoption of tougher standards that would put our public schools on par with the rest of the nation. While our elected officials have often shirked from the responsibility of increasing educational standards, our public schools are doomed to be inadequate if we continually resist increasing standards.
By rejecting Common Core just so Arizonans have sole authority to determine our curriculum, our elected officials are holding back the students of our state and preventing Arizona from advancing on a national and global level.
Our state is currently in the midst of many drastic changes to its education system. AIMS testing is being phased out, more stringent civics courses are being integrated into public education, and the overall fate of Common Core remains in flux. The debate between Douglas and Ducey has come to dominate the local news cycle, but their spat is not nearly as meaningful to the future of our state as the intentions of both these leaders to eliminate Common Core. Reach the columnist at clmurph5@asu.edu or follow @ConnorLMurphy on Twitter.Editor’s note: The opinions presented in this column are the author’s and do not imply any endorsement from The State Press or its editors.Want to join the conversation? Send an email to opiniondesk.statepress@gmail.com. Keep letters under 300 words and be sure to include your university affiliation. Anonymity will not be granted.Like The State Press on Facebook and follow @statepress on Twitter.