What's Going on in the World?

Wisconsin Union Fight

The problems that have sparked in Wisconsin, Indiana and Ohio have grabbed national attention. The governor of Wisconsin, Scott Walker, put out legislation ultimately undercutting collective bargaining and the ability to organize in unions. Governor Walker, being the first Republican governor Wisconsin has had in some time, has upset not only the middle class workers of Wisconsin, but also the Democratic lawmakers who feel he is simply out to get the unions because of their agreement to cut wages and benefits to help balance finances within the state. With the dispute heating up, many Democrats decided to actually flee the state in order to avoid voting on the issue, further postponing the decision and allowing the fight for justice to ultimately continue. The Democratic concern about Mr. Walker's motives were highlighted when a prank call revealed his plans to not only carry out his plan, but also the Republicans plot to trick Democrats back into the Capitol, ultimately trapping them and therefore coming to a conclusion on the issue that has sparked so much controversy. Walker claimed that the phone call was simply a distraction to him, but that his legislation on the issues concerning unions-- which would take away union power to bargain on anything besides pay-- was simply an effort to improve the tough financial situation the state is currently in. He claimed that the legislation overall would save the state 1.44 billion dollars, but as the riots continue it would seem that the state is only losing money after the protests closed down local schools in Wisconsin as well as other businesses and jobs for a few days. Only time will tell if the problem gets resolved or if the Democrats of Wisconsin will simply be hiding in the Chicago area forever.

I became aware of the issues going on through news stories, but I was more aware than ever when I took a trip to the University of Wisconsin and drove through the protesting for a good five minutes. The issue that is being protested is one that I feel is worth fighting for and I respect what teachers as well as other unions are doing to try and stop the legislation from passing. My mom is a teacher so I know how upset she would be about the entire situation and to be perfectly honest, I think the governor is being completely closed-minded about the state's financial situation. I am not in any way trying to play down the severity of their financial problems, but I simply cannot believe that the ONLY way to improve debt is by taking away the rights of unions across the state. While I thought the fleeing of Democrats to Illinois from Wisconsin was somewhat childish in a way, I can understand their outrage and the proposal for this legislation as well because they are firm believers in the rights of unions and the importance of respecting middle-class workers. The most shocking part of the situation to me was probably the prank phone call made by Ian Murphy, a blogger in New York, not just because of the somewhat humorous nature of prank calling a governor; but the simple fact that Mr. Murphy got answers from the governor that are essential to the decision by both Democrats and other Republicans. The idea to "trick" Democrats into voting for the legislation completely disgusted me and I feel that as a governor, the protesting by unions and fleeing of Democrats should be a red flag that maybe your "grand decision" may not be as golden as it was a few weeks ago. People are clearly unhappy, people that voted for Mr. Walker are clearly unhappy, and I for one would be surprised if he makes it through the rest of his term with no problems. Taking away the rights of unions is the exact opposite of what unions are supposed to do. Workers unions as well as teachers unions were put in place to protect the rights of those within the union and tries to cut out the opportunity for lawmakers and business-owners to exploit their work and pay. I think the entire idea of the legislation is single minded and completely ineffective leaving the governor looking more like a stubborn fifth-grader than an established and respected politician.

Mock Trial Recap

During the trials, I found myself considering the issues of sexual harassment in a very different way because in the beginning I considered sexual harassment to be very black and white. Without consent of sex, it can be considered rape; in an office, asking for sexual favors in exchange for job opportunities is harassment as well as illegal. However, I found that sexual harassment was more than just black and white. There were gray areas. Everywhere. Did the woman actually say no or was saying no a game her and her boyfriend often played, did the man at the office actually say things with sexual overtones or was he trying to be friendly and the other employee simply took the comments too seriously. Tons of gray area. This was a concept I struggled with as the entire trial process began to unfold because gray area can be tricky and it takes a lot of detail to dilute gray back to black or white. In the first trial, I thought Kevin Murphy was guilty the second I heard Elyse Robert's testimony. Black and white. But then the details of her attendance as well as her normal conduct in the office were brought to light and my so sure opinion was being tested with every testimony. In the end, we as a jury came to a pretty unanimous decision of guilty, which I have to say I agree with. The most compelling facts for me was Elyse's need for therapy after her encounters with Kevin, the lack of help given to her by her supervisor as well as others who knew about the harassment, and the comments Kevin seemed to be making to her in the office. These facts drove me to the conclusion that Kevin was in fact guilty and that the verdict was the right one. The only thing I can think of that would have changed my mind about the verdict of guilty was if the supervisors would have done something to remedy the situation and then the harassment had stopped because then the solution would have been reached and taking the issue to court would have been a gross over exaggeration by Elyse.

In the other trial, I felt that the trial really could have gone either way. The question that I kept asking myself, even on the prosecuting side was whether or not Susan Williams actually had the opportunity to leave and chose not to or whether she simply stayed due to the force of David Jones. I would have to say that I was frustrated with the verdict of innocent because of how well I felt I knew the case and I personally thought there was more evidence supporting guilty rather than innocent. I think that the most compelling facts the jury somewhat ignored was David's testimony alone. He openly states Susan said no, but proceeded to tear her shirt, put on a condom before anything even happened between them, and said he was somewhat frustrated by the lack of sex they were having in the relationship. I can understand both sides to be honest and I think there were many more pieces of evidence to consider in the second case because of the subjectivity of the testimonies.

I think after sitting through this mock trial experience I have found that it is very important for people to understand not only the severity of sexual harassment, but also the different kinds of sexual harassment that actually fall into the category. While the gray area is irritating, it is important to recognize because many of the answers fall into the middle ground where one piece of evidence or one statement can truly alter whether or not harassment actually took place. I do not feel there are real sexual harassment problems at Deerfield, but I also do not want to discount that it could be happening. Just because I have not seen or experienced it first-hand does not mean it might not be happening to someone else. A big problem with the existence or non-existence of sexual harassment is the lack of knowledge of what constitutes as sexual harassment. A kid may whistle at another or make a sexual joke, but where is the line? Some students may be more sensitive to comments with sexual overtones where as others may feel they are harmless comments clearly made for entertainment and poking fun at another. I think the reason sexual harassment may not be a problem here is simply because those kinds of actions I feel are taken very seriously by both the faculty and the students. I feel we are bright enough as a student body to understand that full blown sexual harassment is not acceptable. Then again, as I stated before, it is really up to each individual student whether or not they feel a certain comment or action is sexual harassment or jokes made by immature teenagers. Either way, if a student feels they are being sexually harassed it is the faculties responsibility to take these claims seriously and not dictate whether they feel the situation is sexual harassment or not. It is important for students to feel they are being protected so each claim needs to be carried out and remedied in order to keep a safe, productive, and sexual harassment free learning environment for all students.

State of the Union Address

While watching the State of the Union Address, I found myself considering not only the words of President Obama, but also paying attention to the entire dynamic of the room as the speech was going on. His focus for this particular State of the Union Address was unity and the importance of the country coming together in a time of need; putting aside all differences to work towards a common goal. In order to further drive this point, the representatives from each state sat together instead of the routine Democrats on one side and Republicans on the other. All attendees of the speech wore ribbons showing their support of the Tucson shooting that had happened prior to the speech and there seemed to be senses of comradery among the group as they listened to our President speak.

At first, I jumped into my normal critique of the president because I personally feel that President Obama has a tendency to promise too much to the country. Rambling off a list of ten agendas is setting the White House up for failure. I would much rather hear about three or four solid and realistic goals for the upcoming year that I as a citizen can be confident will be accomplished as opposed to knowing that only three from a list of ten were achieved; I will be left disappointed that the other seven were not equally as successful. Aside from the normal banter about what has been done and what still needs to be improved, I noticed that President Obama put an extreme emphasis on education and the importance of improving, maintaining, and excelling towards a greater education system with less flaws. This promise was one that I was particularly interested in because as a student, we are often told here at Deerfield how great we have it. To be honest, in middle school and even through my first couple years in High School I could tell you everything that was wrong with our school and a number of ways that all of these problems could be remedied. However, it is important to understand that there aren't thousands of Deerfield High Schools covering our nation. There are schools with outdated materials, not enough funding, little to no parent support, lack of motivation from kids, issues with violence, drugs, attendance, graduation rates; the list goes on and on. It is important to recognize those schools like Deerfield, but far more important to not only acknowledge, but to take a stand for those schools who find themselves to be the polar opposite of Deerfield. I know that I cannot take my education for granted because not everyone is as fortunate and the need for a good education is in constant demand. We need educated students to find themselves at universities in order to grow up and help our country grow and learn. We need education to help our students further our nation because without education, there is no way to move forward. Barack Obama made sure to announce and pledge his devotion to improving education and I for one am happy he did.