Spring 2011 Issue (Cover 1)

1

PLUS: 11

PLUSPLUSPLUSPLUSPLUSPLUSPLUSPLUSPLUSPLUSPLUSPLUSPLUSPLUSPLUSPLUSPLUSPLUS:

WHY IS SUNY SPENDING

MILLIONF O R L O B B Y I S T S ?

Honors College is a MessStony Brook University Has a Union Problem

The Donald’s Magnifi cent Hair

Spring ‘11

2Think Magazine

Think Magazine is the student-run, progressive publication at Stony Brook University. We provide the best coverage of campus news, local politics, New York issues and national commentary on campus.

Think Magazine is supported by our partnerships with Campus Progress, a project of the Center for American Progress; and The Huffington Post.

www.campusprogress.org

Editor-in-ChiefAdam Peck

Executive EditorKatie Watt

N�ews Editor:Campus/Long Island

Doug Newman

N�ews Editor:N�ew York/N�ational

James Butler

Culture EditorBrian Lee

Opinions EditorTrevor Christian

Contributing Writers

Simone BrownRoss Barkan

Alicia KanauerAdam MeierKlara Huszar

Katie WattKatie Blasl

Rachel ClarkAlyssa Carroll

Trevor ChristianCevin Henderson

Aleks Gilbert-PetrovicAdam PeckJen Novotny

Brian Lee

WebmasterJon Scheiber

Recycle this magazine when you’re done. Or we’ll find you.

Copy EditorAlicia Kanauer

Copy EditorT Geckle

Governor Cuomo’s budget that passed earlier this year is devastating to public education in New York, including and especially to the State University of New York system. It marked just the latest cut of millions of dollars from the

operating budgets of all of the 64 member campuses, and now, four years after these drastic cuts began, we are operating on a budget two thirds the size of what it was in 2007.

But my anger is not directed towards the Governor or the legislators that passed this

harmful budget. It’s directed towards the people who claim to represent the students: SUNY Chancellor Nancy Zimpher, the secretive SUNY Student Assembly comprised of “our peers” from all 64 campuses, and yes, at President Stanley and the other SUNY Presidents. In the hours after Gover-nor Cuomo unveiled his budget, all of the aforementioned released statements on the proposed budget. Did they condemn it? Yes. But in a remarkable and horrific display of negligence for students, their condemnation was not direct-ed towards the cuts, but to the fact that the Governor seem-ingly did not endorse plans to allow individual campuses to dictate their own tuition rates. In other words, Governor Cuomo pledged not to raise tuition, and our representatives vigorously attacked him for it.

The fight to drastically raise tuition has been waging for years, and it will inevitably happen in the next few years. But it is alarming and frankly a bit saddening to see where the battle lines are being drawn. President Stanley and most other SUNY presidents have all come out in favor of such plans, as has SUNY Chancellor Zimpher. But so has the Stu-dent Assembly, a group of fellow students who are corralled together by Chancellor Zimpher and told what to think and what to say so as to give the appearance of student support for SUNY’s agenda.

“Governor Andrew Cuomo today in his executive budget announced that New York’s public colleges would not see a tuition increase this year. SUNY students think this is unwise,” wrote the Student Assembly in response to the Governor’s budget. “SUNY students think this is unwise.” You, reader, are being used to support a plan that will force you and everyone else to pay more money for public education, an institution meant to be affordable to all New Yorkers. Do not let the Student Assembly or Chancellor Zimpher or Presi-dent Stanley or anyone else interpret silence and inaction as affirmation and acceptance.

Tuition withMisrepresentation

Letter from the Editor

THINKSB.COM

Managing EditorRoss Barkan

3thinksb.com

Inside This Issue

Mor

e th

ana

Mag

azin

e Log On to our award-winningwebsite: www.thinksb.com

Tune In to our weekly radio show Think Out Loud. Mondays 10am-11am, WUSB 90.1fm (or online at wusb.fm)

OUTSIDE THE BOX NEWS

Stony Brook UniversityHas a Union Problem. 8

Why Does SUNY Spend $2 Million on Lobbying?10

Infographic: Visualizing our Lobbying Spending12

The Trials and Tribulations of the Honors College16

And What Single Stony Brook Department Outspent all of Hofstra University on Lobbying?

15

( (( ( CULTURE+OPINION( (

CollectiveThinking: The Governor’s Budget4

Fate of the Union: DOMA, Glenn Beck5

YOUARE HERE Defending

Bradley Manning22

Glenn Beck’sNew Career24

Culture: Pat Tillman Story;Finals Playlist; Alvin Ailey20

ThinkTank: Libya;Teachers Unions6

4

10

86

2016

4Think Magazine

Ou

tsid

e 1.America’sGreatestThreatth

e B

ox 2.GovernorCuomo’sBudget

3.GOPers Say

The Darndest Things

4.Where’s theCertifi cate?!

5.Wisconsin

HatesWorkers

@rratto: It’s not only GOP Govs. Add Dem. Gov. #Cuomo to the list. His budget and proposed property tax cap are devastating NY schools

@DianeRavitch: Plus, Cuomo allowed 3%millionaire tax to expire. Protects Wall Stcampaign $$ but hurts kids.

@mlcliff : #Cuomo & NY GOP strange bedfel-lows attacking public education. Media allow-ing it unchallenged, why? Favor to Mario?

@shravanp: Give SUNY and CUNY More Control of Tuition.

Powered byFollow THINK on Twitter @ThinkMagazine

#guvbudget

Outside the Box

Page 6

More OtB, pages 5-7

Full Name of Child: Donald Trump’s HairSex: UnknownDate of Birth: When Hairline Began to Recede (approx at age of 7)Place of Birth: Made in ChinaRace of Child: Raccoon

Father: Donald TrumpUsual Occupation: Celebrity Narcissist

Mother: Sheinhardt Wig CompanyUsual Occupation: Making Wigs for Raccoons

We’ve seen Barack Obama’s long-form birth certifi cate...but only Think has obtained Donald Trump’s hair’s certifi cate of authenticity. Behold!

“I’m on the air for four hours a day without a script! That’s a recipe for disaster.”

“I think there should be more jailed journalists.”

“Our First Lady does not project the image of women that you might see on the cover of the Sports Illustrated swimwsuit issue.

“We should end the En-vironmental Protection Agency’s war against American oil and gas.”

Limbaugh Gingrich Coulter Beck

1. 2. 3. 4.

THINK EXCLUSIVE

Answer Key: Limbaugh, 3 ; Gingrich, 4; Coulter, 2; Beck, 1

5thinksb.com

Madison, WIWisconsin public sector employees

were stripped of their collective bargain-ing rights after newly-elected Republican governor and Koch funded union-buster Scott Walker proposed a law that would do so under the guise of balancing the State’s budget.

Workers who already had to absorb thousands of dollars in what are effectively pay cuts flooded the capital to protest this legislation for weeks on end. Now, the battle will be fought in the courts.

New York, NYThe Glenn Beck Program will con-

clude it’s run on Fox this December. Beck’s ratings have been on the de-

cline in the last few months, much to the delight of sane people everywhere. And advertising dollars, the most important metric for any television program, had long been drying up. Many of his sponsors pulled out after he called the president a racist, and progressive group Color of Change launched a successful campaign that cost Beck 300+ advertisers. At least he still has Goldline!

Meanwhile, Bill O’Reilly, the original Fox News fear-mongerer, has received a ratings boost in recent months.

Hope, ArkansasMike Huckabee publishes yet another book focused on the economy as he

eyes a presidential run. The staunch social conservative has fallen out of the spotlight since jobs became the number one issue, but the fiscally themed “A Simple Government” could give a boost to the anti-establishment Fox talk show host who is likely stir up more excitement among the base than a moderate like Mitt Romney.

Washington, DC Broad-based outrage resulted in the GOP stepping back from one of the most bizarre and backwards social policies ever brought before Congress. In an attempt to even further limit the scenarios in which a woman can receive federal aid for abortions, House Republicans tried to redefine rape. The mentally handicapped and victims of date rape drugs were among those who would no longer have been ‘raped’ in the GOP’s eyes because they couldn’t fight back. But luckily this much fundamentalism was a little too much, even for America.

Washington, DCObama refuses to defend DOMA as being

constitutional, citing the provision that makes a valid gay marriage in one state invalid in the next.

The Republicans hired a law firm to defend the backwards legislation, but their professional relationship was a breif and rocky one. King and Spalding, the firm, dumped the case after only a week because they faced pressure from their other employers, such as Coca-Cola, to distance them-selves from the GOP on this issue.

Stripping away the rights of unions? Attacking women with dan-gerous legislation designed to limit their rights? It’s a bad time to be a sane, thinking human being in American right now.

15%Chance of S u r v iva l

So just how doomed are we?

FATEof the

UNION

6Think Magazine

The RighT... It is America’s responsibility to dispose of cruel foreign dictators, lauch premptive strikes, and make the world safe for Democracy, e.g. Th e Bush Doctrine

...Is WRONG. Who needs the American military? Tunisia didn’t. Egypt didn’t. Libyans even faced violence and went right on without us. Uprisings come from within, and sovereignty lies with the people. Had another nation colonized America to ‘rescue’ us from Great Britain back in the 1700s, our revolution-ary war would have been fought against them. Th at’s because puppet democracies aren’t real democracies. In puppet democracies, the sovereignty lies with a foreign military suff ering from a debilitating addiction to oil and Israel. In puppet democracies, any elected leader is despised for being an ally of

the foreign intruders. Believe it or not, Iraqis didn’t enjoy our more than seven year occupation. Saddam was a horrible, deranged, violent dictator, but it wasn’t our responsibility to depose of him. Not because he was ac-ceptable for Iraq, but because only a revolution initiated by the people of Iraq could be legitimate. Since the revolution was ours, Iraq got an American puppet for president.Libya is diff erent. Bombing Qaddafi isn’t in our nation’s best interests, but it’s in the expressed interests of the Libian people.Had we not invaded Iraq, that revolution could be going on right now.

The RighT... Teachers, not Wall Street, are responsible for the recession. Let Wall Street do whatever it wants, but punish the greedy teachers accordingly.

...Is WRONG. What Republicans don’t want you to know is that it’s not about the money. If it were about the money, they would have given up on their union-busting campaign when teachers made consessions. Instead, they kept right on going so that teachers could never fi ght for their rights again.

No one takes a public job for the money. Th ey take it for the job security, the health insurance, and the feeling of having made a diff erence.

Teacher’s aren’t greedy for wanting to earn a living wage.

Corporations are the greedy ones. Th ey make millions, even billions in profi t–– then turn around and lay off workers. Re-publicans are so busy defending the rights of corporate bosses that they’ve launched an all out attack on public workers.

Th is battle is about workers rights. Rights that go against the wants of the powerful. If big business was overstepping its bounds, Republicans would defend them with free market rhetoric. When workers try to exercise their rights to unionize, its perfectly fi ne for Republicans to interfere.

Outside the Box

7thinksb.com

SB Professor Joins Wisconsin Protests

ThinkFast

Ed Quinn, a Stony Brook University and SUNY Union Leader, traveled to Wisconsin earlier this semester to join in the protests held at the capital building in Madison in opposition to Republican Governor Scott Walker’s plan to eliminate collective bargaining in the state.

“It’s a burden on the members,” Quinn said about the financial sacrifices the unions willingly made. “They’re effectively taking a pay cut between $3,000-$4,000 per year.”

Teachers in Wisconsin currently make just over $51,000 annually. “This is not the way to stimulate the economy,” he pointed out. “Teachers already make 4 to 7% less than others with similar education and jobs.”

Luckily, says Quinn, New York unions are safe as long as the assembly is controlled by Democrats. -Trevor Christian

Student Helps Build a Startup on the Way to SXSWStony Brook University junior Jon Gott-

fried was at the annual South by South West festival this year, but not as a spectator. He spent this year’s event courting donors and answering questions from CNN about a startup company he helped create called Lemonade Stand.

If you haven’t heard of it until now, there’s good reason. Lemonade Stand didn’t exist before SXSW. It was built from scratch in 48 hours

with a group of total strangers on a bus trip from New York to Austin.

Gottfried was one of 180 “buspreneurs,” the moniker given to participants in the Startup Bus, a project that puts computer programmers on a bus equipped with WiFi and Red Bull in an attempt to create and incubate new technology startups.

-Rachel Clark

Stony Brook Graduate At the Center of Park51 DebateOn May 28, 2010 the conservative Washington Times newspaper ran an

editorial in opposition to what they called the “9/11 Mosque,” the proposed Muslim cultural center set to be built blocks from the site of the World Trade Center.

It marked the beginning of a long summer plagued by the heated rhetoric of conservative icons like Newt Gingrich, Pamela Geller and Sarah Palin. All of them wasted no time offering their own condemnations of the center on their own blogs or Facebook profiles. Candidates running for federal office as far

away as North Carolina campaigned almost exclusively on their opposition to the “ground zero mosque.” Fox News devoted hours of airtime to opponents of the center to peddle their talking points. And thousands of hateful, vitriolic emails came pouring into the offices of Park 51, the center.

All of those emails landed in the inbox of Stony Brook University graduate Aylin Karamehmetoglu, the newly hired Chief of Staff at the Cordoba Initiative, the non-profit organization behind the cultural center. -Adam Peck

Read the full articles online, only at thinksb.com Subscribe to ThinkFast.

Bi-weekly. Tweet@ThinkMagazinefor the latest.

Southampton Revisited

.com/thinksb .com/thinkmagazine .com/thinkmagazine

The best from our award-winning website.series of tubes.

Last semester we visited the abandoned Southampton campus with a camera and some questions. What we found was a cam-pus in limbo. Some buildings were empty, others were left in mid construction, while the dorms looked ready to move into––big screen TVs and all. Check out the site for pictures of Stony Brook’s boats for sale, colapsed moldy ceilings , and much more!

THINKSB.COM

thin

km.a

g/A

ylin

Park

51

thin

km.a

g/sb

sout

ham

pton

thin

km.a

g/lm

ndst

thin

km.a

g/W

Ipro

test

s

8Think Magazine

November 30 of last year, Ayse Porsuk was on campus at one of the dining halls handing out literature about her union, Local 1102 of the Retail, Wholesale, Depart-

ment Store Union. She had with her a copy of the contract that the union had signed with Stony Brook University’s food service provider, Lackmann Culinary Services.

By all accounts she was doing nothing wrong, certainly nothing illegal. So she was surprised when her supervisor, Eisa Shukran, approached her and told her she couldn’t display the contract or any other union literature on campus.

Shukran proceed to harass, intimidate, coerce and restrain Porsuk from participating in union activities, according to court documents obtained by Th ink. Two days later the union fi led a suit against Lackmann with the National Labor Rela-tions Board, and ultimately won minor concessions from the company.

While much of our collective attention has been paid to the ongoing labor disputes in the Midwest—in Wisconsin, Ohio, Indiana—the attack on unions has been slowly build-ing for years right here on campus.

Th e case of Ayse Porsuk is just one example of what Local 1102 Director of Collective Bargaining Dennis Romano sees as a quickly deteriorating relationship between his union and Stony Brook University’s contractors.

Author Adam Peck is the Editor-in-Chief for Think. He can be reached at [email protected].

N� ews

STONY BROOK UNIVERSITYHAS A UNION PROBLEM.Food service workers are being threatened. Truck drivers aren’t being paid enough. And the union that represents them both is facing unprecedented aggression.

So why is Stony Brook University doing nothing?

ment Store Union. She had with her a copy of the contract that the union had signed with Stony Brook University’s food service provider, Lackmann Culinary Services.

By all accounts she was doing nothing wrong, certainly nothing illegal. So she was surprised when her supervisor, Eisa Shukran, approached her and told her she couldn’t display the contract or any other union literature on campus.

Porsuk from participating in union activities, according to

8

court documents obtained by Th ink. Two days later the union fi led a suit against Lackmann with the National Labor Rela-tions Board, and ultimately won minor concessions from the company.

the ongoing labor disputes in the Midwest—in Wisconsin, Ohio, Indiana—the attack on unions has been slowly build-

Author Think. He can be reached at [email protected].

8

ment Store Union. She had with her a copy of the contract that the union had signed with Stony Brook University’s food service provider, Lackmann Culinary Services.

nothing illegal. So she was surprised when her supervisor, Eisa Shukran, approached her and told her she couldn’t display the contract or any other union literature on campus.

Porsuk from participating in union activities, according to court documents obtained by Th ink. Two days later the union fi led a suit against Lackmann with the National Labor Rela-tions Board, and ultimately won minor concessions from the

Author

ON

9thinksb.com

“I have to tell you, it’s always been tough negotiations with Lackmann,” he said. “That’s fine, I expect that. But it’s more than that now, it’s more of a contentious situation than in the past. That troubles me.”

Stony Brook University’s current relationship with Lackmann began in 2009, when the Faculty Student Association, the semi-autonomous organization responsible for negotiating and signing all of the university’s major contracts, chose the Woodbury-based company to replace outgoing food service provider Chartwells. That summer, they began operations at most of the on-campus dining centers.

Romano says that almost as soon as Lackmann took over, the attitude towards his union and its members changed noticeably.

“Things became different when Lackmann came in,” he said. “We didn’t have these issues with Chartwells. And then Lackmann came in and wanted to change things. Right from the get-go we

saw things were changing. Different management teams, different ways of doing things.”

Negotiations that had previously been merely tough became outright hostile. When Local 1102 went to negotiate the contracts of a relatively small group of workers at two auxiliary services at Hofstra University, where Lackmann also holds a contract, they were met with stiff resistance from the leadership at Lackmann.

“They ran an anti-union campaign that you would expect to see with a new union. The employer they got to run it got very aggressive,” said Romano.

Lackmann management disputes the notion that they are being aggressive at all with workers at Stony Brook.

“Lackmann has informed FSA that they are not taking a hard line against union activities,” said Angela Agnello, the Director of Marketing and Communications for the Faculty Student As-sociation.

If that sounds at all dubious, it’s because despite provisions written into FSA contracts that contractors have to abide by fair labor practices, there is no independent agency or committee within Stony Brook University or the FSA to independently in-vestigate claims of workers’ rights violations or any other ethically questionable practices. They are by and large left to take contrac-

tors at their word.Which raises serious questions about the relationship between

the Faculty Student Association and its contractors. Just how much control is handed over to private companies at an otherwise public university?

The answer, it seems, is quite a lot. Lackmann not only manages the facilities on campus but they are also the employer for hun-dreds of workers in each of the campus dining facilities managed by Lackmann. In other words, most food service workers are not university employees.

It’s a model that was adopted in order to shield the Faculty Stu-dent Association—and by extension, Stony Brook University—from liability associated with, among other things, labor disputes like the ones currently facing Lackmann Culinary Services.

“Campus Dining employees are employees of Lackmann,” confirmed Angela Agnello. When asked directly whether these

workers should be the concern of the FSA and Stony Brook University, she responded: “The food service staff is hired, paid, and provided benefits by Lackmann.”

“I think the university absolutely has a responsibility to all its workers on campus,” said Jackie Hayes, a gradu-ate student at the University at Albany who has studied the history of SUNY and their relationship with auxiliary companies like FSA.

“Anyone can kind of see they work for the university in every-thing but name,” said Hayes.

At Albany, anti-union measures taken by their food service provider Chartwells in 2009 led to a student-organized campaign against the administration and the University Auxiliary Services (Albany’s equivalent of our FSA) to demand the university take some responsibility for the treatment of these workers. Students successfully applied pressure on Chartwells, who backed down their campaign.

Stony Brook University and the Faculty Student Association are still holding firm on the notion that food service workers are not university personnel and thereby not entitled to the same protections as university employees.

When we pressed FSA on whether food service workers should receive protection from the university if Lackmann continues to act aggressively towards its own employees, we were simply referred back to their statements that these were not university employees. The implication was clear: the answer is no.

“That’s basically them taking this cowardly and cheap route to make their administration jobs slightly easier,” said Hayes.

While there is little the FSA

Document The court document filed with the NLRB by Local 1102 on behalf of Ayse Porsuk.

/news/

Continued on Page 19

THERE IS NO INDEPENDENT AGENCY WITHIN STONY BROOK OR FSA TO INVESTIGATECLAIMS OF WORKERS’ RIGHTS VIOLATIONS.

!

10Think MagazineN� ews

The High Price ofFederal Lobbying

SUNY spent almost $2 million on lobbying last year, more than any other university in the

nation, and an increase over a year ago.

Where’s it going? And can we aff ord it?

by Ross Barkan

Author Ross Barkan is the Managing Editor for Think. He can be reached at [email protected].

11thinksb.com

VISUALIZING OURLOBBYING

THE AMAZING INK

NEXT

Homeland security and public education do not seemingly share the same bed. Yet according to lobbying reports acquired from opensecrets.org, SUNY has spent an undisclosed amount of money lobbying for various department of defense and department of homeland security appropriations.

SUNY claims all eff orts are related to “education, research, and training programs.”

Th e lobbying reports contain addendums for vague “lobbying issue areas” like “Energy and Water” and “Agriculture.”

Along with these benignities are the terms “Defense” and “Homeland Security,” appearing on fi ve lobbying reports, including one from 2010 that totals $480,000 in

lobbying expenses. “SUNY could be pushing specifi c projects and applications

related to homeland security and defense,” said Les Paldy, a distin-guished service professor in department of technology and society here at Stony Brook University.

SUNY’s Evasive Lobby

Th ough SUNY’s lobbying expenses are miniscule compared to its overall $11 billion budget, (SUNY is America’s largest public university system), SUNY spent approximately $1.9 million on lob-bying in 2010, more than any other university system in the nation.

Dr. John Marburger, who served as president of Stony Brook from 1980 to 1994 and presidential science advisor to George W. Bush, believes that the money spent on lobbying executive branches like the department of defense and homeland security is ultimately a waste.

“Th e overwhelming majority of money we get for federal research comes from the result of peer-reviewed competitive research propos-als,” Marburger said. “Th ere are two negative aspects of lobbying for earmarks. It takes money out of competitive programs like Stony Brook and it makes the executive branch agencies angry. Earmarking is a practice that agencies don’t like because it disrupts their budgets.”

Earmarking is a common legislative practice in which funds of a proposed bill are directed to specifi c projects that might or might not be relevant to the overall bill. Research universities like Stony Brook compete for grants (in which the outcome of research is unclear) and contracts (specifi c tasks that need to be executed) from the federal government routinely. Th e department of defense, with its swelling three quarters of a trillion dollar budget, and the department of homeland security are two major providers of research money for antiterrorism, security, and engineering initiatives.

Offi cials at Stony Brook and SUNY were laconic and evasive when pressed for specifi c details about SUNY’s lobbying activity in those areas.

“Right now our primary federal focus is restoration of the proposed cuts to Pell

column/news/

Photo/Illustration Money is pouring from SUNY into Washington DC in the form of lobbyists who are after federal dollars. SUNY logo courtesy of SUNY.edu. Photo by Adam Peck for Think

The High Price ofFederal Lobbying

12Think MagazineN�ews

Photo Southampton students arriving at the main campus after a march to protest their campus’ closure. (Courtesy: DansHamptons.com)

Labor/HHS/Education

Commerce/Justice/Science

Energy/Water

Immigration

Department of Defense

Health Issues

Financial Services

Veterans

Transportation/HUD

Interior/Environment

Agriculture

Trademark/Patent

Science/Technology

Homeland Security

$480,000$96,722

$107,262

$117,200

$87,200

Q1 H.R 3221: Student Aid Accountability & Fiscal Responsibility Act (SAFRA)$$

F I S C A LQUARTER

AMOUNT SPENT ONSUNY LOBBYISTS

AMOUNT SPENT ONOUTSIDE LOBBYISTS

$400,000Q2 H.R 3221: Student Aid Accountability & Fiscal Responsibility Act (SAFRA)H.R 2847: Jobs for Main Street Act

S. 515: Passage of Patent Reform Act of 2009

$350,000Q3 H.R 5116: America COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 2010

H.R 5485: National Domestic Preparendness Consotium Enhancement Act of 2010

$310,000Q4 S. 729: Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors (DREAM Act)

James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act (First Responders Bill)

$1,948,384SUNY SPENT

IN 2010

LOBBYINGON FEDERAL

VISUALIZING SUNY’S LOBBYING SPENDING

13thinksb.com/column/news/

Photo The 81-acre campus will be largely unused until Stony Brook figures out how best to utilize the space (Courtesy: Panoramio.com user Patricia Long)

Labor/HHS/Education

Commerce/Justice/Science

Energy/Water

Immigration

Department of Defense

Health Issues

Financial Services

Veterans

Transportation/HUD

Interior/Environment

Agriculture

Trademark/Patent

Science/Technology

Homeland Security

$480,000$96,722

$107,262

$117,200

$87,200

Q1 H.R 3221: Student Aid Accountability & Fiscal Responsibility Act (SAFRA)$$

F I S C A LQUARTER

AMOUNT SPENT ONSUNY LOBBYISTS

AMOUNT SPENT ONOUTSIDE LOBBYISTS

$400,000Q2 H.R 3221: Student Aid Accountability & Fiscal Responsibility Act (SAFRA)H.R 2847: Jobs for Main Street Act

S. 515: Passage of Patent Reform Act of 2009

$350,000Q3 H.R 5116: America COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 2010

H.R 5485: National Domestic Preparendness Consotium Enhancement Act of 2010

$310,000Q4 S. 729: Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors (DREAM Act)

James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act (First Responders Bill)

$1,948,384SUNY SPENT

IN 2010

LOBBYINGON FEDERAL

VISUALIZING SUNY’S LOBBYING SPENDING

14Think Magazine

grants,” said Vanessa Herman, assistant director for governmen-tal relations and higher education at Stony Brook. Herman, a lobbyist for SUNY who often travels to Washington, is a listed lobbyist in four of the five lobbying reports that mention home-land security and/or defense that were obtained from opense-crets.org. Herman refused to comment further about what the specific education, research, and training programs related to homeland security and defense actually entail.

Morgan Hooks of the SUNY office of communications refused to elaborate as well, asking to see one of the lobbying reports via e-mail before not offering any comment on how lobbying efforts for the department of defense and homeland security are linked to educational initiatives.

And David K. Belsky, press officer and director of new media at SUNY, offered to comment on this story before being asked how much of the $1.7 million is spent on lobbying initiatives related to the department of defense and homeland security, what the actual education, research, and training programs are, and why SUNY would be lobbying for bills like The Chemical Facility Antiterrorism Act (H.R. 2868). Belsky did not respond to any of the questions, instead referring them to Hooks, who was not willing to answer any questions or disclose any informa-tion related to the lobbying reports.

Inside the Reports

The reports can, to an extent, speak for themselves: one lob-bying report filed by Michael Trunzo, SUNY vice chancellor for governmental relations, in 2009 includes a “lobbying activity” for the aforementioned Chemical Facility Antiterrorism Act (H.R. 2868). Herman is the only listed lobbyist for SUNY on that bill.

The goals of the bill, which never became law, were to amend the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to enhance security and pro-tect against acts of terrorism against chemical facilities. It sought to amend the Safe Drinking Water Act in order to bolster the security of public water systems and amend the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to strengthen the security of wastewater treatment works.

“I wouldn’t think universities would lobby for a bill like that [H.R. 2868] unless it had a provision in it that would either ex-empt universities from a requirement or amend existing laws that would decrease bureaucracy in some way,” Marburger said. In a closer examination of the bill’s language, subtle and somewhat nebulous links can be drawn between its non-academic goals and

higher education. One section of the bill stipulates that it will “establish, as appropriate…procedures for security vulnerability assessments and site security plans for covered chemical facilities that are also academic laboratories.” Academic laboratories are later defined in the bill as facilities owned by an institution of higher education where relatively small quantities of chemicals are used for teaching, research, and diagnostic purposes, and are typically handled by one person.

In another report filed in 2009, SUNY lobbied for “authori-zations” and “appropriations” related to the bluntly-named Na-tional Center for Security and Preparedness. NCSP is affiliated

with the Rockefeller Col-

lege of Public Affairs and Policy at the University at Albany, State University of New York. Estab-lished in 2007, NCSP’s stated mission is to support America’s efforts to be “secure from acts of terrorism and to be prepared to respond to incidents of high consequence and disasters through research, education, training, and technical assistance.” NCSP has been involved in developing training courses for the New York State Office of Homeland Security. NCSP’s official website does not mention any current projects from either 2010 or 2011.

Syracuse-based lobbyist Michael Brower was paid nearly $17,000 in 2010 to lobby for SUNY College of Environmental Science and Forestry. He advanced the lobbying issue “source sentinel-detection of biologics in water for national defense.” Source Sentinel LLC is a company that provides monitoring awareness for water and wastewater contaminants and “biolog-ics” is a general term that can refer to vaccines, blood compo-nents, allergenics, gene therapy, tissues, and recombinant and therapeutic proteins. They are technologically-produced and theoretically could be employed as biological weapons.

It is still unclear if the money for these lobbying efforts is drawn from actual state money or a fund established by the SUNY Research Foundation (a private non-profit group that supports SUNY research). Marburger would not be pleased if the money was siphoned from public funds.

“I don’t think it’s a wise investment,” he said. “Frankly, I don’t think it helps Stony Brook much. When I was president, I opposed earmarks.”

N�ews

15thinksb.com

Author Trevor Christian is a staff writer for Think. He can be reached at [email protected].

School of Journalism has

spent $163,000 on federal lobbying in an possibly failed attempt to secure funding for their Center for Communicating Sci-ence. Th ey have yet to see any returns on their investment, despite having received a massive earmark in the last failed budget.

According to the public documents aggregator OpenSecrets.org, the Cen-ter for Communicating Science spent $100,000 in 2010 with Liz Robbins, an experienced lobbyist recommended by popular actor and Stony Brook Professor Alan Alda.

SUNY spent more money on lobbying in 2010 than any other system of colleges, and the School of Journalism was their single largest expense.

Th e university paid for the lobbying,

as they felt the investment could bring in up to one million dollars in federal money.

Dean Howard Schneider confi rmed these figures, describing the campaign as a near success in which the Center for Communicating Science would have received a $700,000 earmark.

“We thought we hit a home run,” said Schneider, “but then the Republicans held up the budget. Every earmark was gone.”

Congress changed hands in January before passing a long-term budget. Still believing that they had a chance, the School of Journalism spent an additional

$63,000 of their own money on lobbying the new congress. Th e eff orts will con-clude this month.

In the latest wave of lobbying, Schnei-der, Robbins and Alda went down to Washington to meet with various govern-ment agencies and leaders in congress, including New York Senator Kirsten Gillibrand.

But Schneider said that his focus had shift ed onto the Departments of Energy and Education, as well as the NSF, be-cause they have money in their budget for specifi c tasks that could be performed by other groups.

“Hypothetically, if the NSF had money in its budget for teaching scientists how to communicate their fi ndings, we could receive it,” he explained.

Th e School of Journalism has resorted to federal lobbying in part because traditional sources of revenue have dried up. Stony Brook’s state funding has been

cut by nearly one third over the last three years. “We have to aggressively go out and seek funding, particularly during these diffi cult times,” said Schneider.

One presentation that Schneider and Alda gave to the NSF left the School of Journalism feeling particularly hopeful. “We could receive a $250,000 grant,” said Schneider. “We’ll fi nd out in June.”

Even if neither eff ort pans out, Schnei-der feels as though the lobbying was successful because of the connections he made. “Forming relationships in Washing-ton is important, but it costs money,” he said. “I wish it weren’t the case.”

Photo The School of Journalismsought federal funding for the Center for Communicating Science Credit: Adam Peck for Think. /news/

The School of Journalism’s $160,000 Gambleby Trevor Christian

STONY BROOK’S

16Think Magazine

But recently, many of those students have found themselves at odds with Honors College and university administrators, claiming that that the “individual attention and benefits” have given way to an authoritarian management style that has left them anything but happy. Some are even fearful for the college’s future, as closed-door meetings and committees fuel an atmosphere rife with rumor and conspiracy. Administrators insist it’s all just a misunderstanding: they say they’re only working to strengthen the college, that its future is secure, and that they’d happily assuage students’ concerns if only more would talk to them.

The confrontation began in the summer of 2010 when administra-tors introduced a new rule about faculty members serving as advisers for the theses Honors College students must complete as seniors. Formerly, any full-time faculty member could serve as a thesis adviser, but the new rule would only allow for tenured or tenure-track faculty to serve as such, excluding faculty members holding the position of lecturer. Some students who would graduate in the spring of 2011 claimed they were left scrambling at the last minute to find new advisers. Students mounted a vigorous effort to have the old policy reinstated, to no avail.

That was only the beginning. In the fall of 2010 the college began enforcing a policy about the order in which students take the three-credit seminars that form the core of their curriculum in lieu of DEC requirements. Students generally take the first two seminars in their freshman year; they then take one seminar in each of the following three years. Whereas in the recent past many students took the last three seminars in whatever order was convenient for them, the college now requires that they be taken in a specific order. Students claim that these requirements are unnecessary – as each seminar is on a completely different topic, they say the order in which they’re taken is irrelevant – and that they unduly restrict students’ flexibility in scheduling their courses.

Moreover, at the beginning of the spring 2011 semester the college also began enforcing a requirement that the four one-credit “mini-courses” students are required to take be completed by the end of their sophomore year. Students say this only adds to their scheduling woes.

Honors College Director Oliver “Trey” Street and Faculty Di-rector Jeff Edwards, who joined the college in December 2009 and August 2010 respectively, and who many students blame for the changes, claim that they’re perfectly justified.

THE UNDERCOVER COLLEGETHE BEHIND-THE-SCENES CONTROVERSY THAT’S PITTING HONORS COLLEGE STUDENTS AGAINST ADMINISTRATORS

BY DOUG NEWMAN

“Extraordinary opportunities for exceptional students.” This is the headline on the web page of Stony Brook’s Honors College, which is adorned with photos of happy, presumably exceptional students from years past. It claims its students – around 60 freshmen are enrolled each year – “experience the individual attention and benefits typically found only in small liberal arts colleges while having access to the vast range of academic opportunities available only at a major research university.”

Author Doug Newman is the News Editor for Think. He can be reached at [email protected]�ews

17thinksb.com

Photo Stony Brook’s Honors Program has a great academic reputation but students are increasingly unhappy with leadership Credit: Adam Peck for Think Magazine

SECRECY!Intrigue! Mystery!

THE BEHIND-THE-SCENES CONTROVERSY THAT’S PITTING HONORS COLLEGE STUDENTS AGAINST ADMINISTRATORS

A Story of

According to Edwards, “Every honors college in the country has a curriculum structure, and the sequencing very much determines our curriculum structure.”

Additionally, Edwards says that without sequencing, administra-tors are “simply not in a position to determine how many students are available to take a particular course.” This, he says, had caused the college to cancel an unacceptable number of classes in the past, complicating faculty recruitment (the college has no faculty of its own) and making it vulnerable to cuts in a difficult budget environ-ment: “Like anybody running any program or academic unit at this university, we’re in a squeeze, and one very basic way in which we maintain budgetary efficiency is to maintain that our course schedul-ing is on the mark.”

Street claims that the college’s course scheduling had become so haphazard that “It reached a point at which the university at large, higher administrators in the university, (put us) under a bit of scrutiny, especially given the budget crisis.” They also claim that they have made exceptions to the new requirements wherever they would otherwise keep students from meeting the requirements for their majors and where there is, as Edwards put it, “no reasonable alternative.”

Street and Edwards characterize the course-sequencing require-ment as one that has existed since the program was founded in 1989, and is merely being enforced more vigorously after years of lax enforcement. But students point to recent changes in the wording of the requirements in the Undergraduate Bulletin as evidence that there has been a substantive change.

On October 13, 2010, Street and Edwards appeared before the university’s Undergraduate Curriculum Committee, which had to approve the changes in wording. According to the meeting minutes,

“Jeff (Edwards) asserted that the courses do and should build upon one another. Such a sequence has been implicit in the function of the college since its inception, however, changes to the bulletin in Fall 2001 reduced the clarity of this implicit sequence. Changing of faculty and staff directors in the past ten years has allowed this sequencing to drift.”

The committee approved the changes on October 20, 2010, but the minutes of that meeting reflect some reservations about the changes, stating, “The committee is concerned that the sequencing is in part driven by resource constraint rather than best academic interest of students. … The committee does not see the academic sub-stance that necessitates the enforced sequence, but understands that approving the sequence will allow flexibility to design a curriculum that does build on previous curricular parts.” The minutes also state that “the committee urges the Directors to give special consideration for students who need an out of sequence course to complete the Honors College program or a commensurate major(s) or minor(s) requirements,” which Street and Edwards say they have been doing and will continue to do.

But according to Deborah Machalow, an Honors College junior and Executive Vice President of the Undergraduate Student Govern-ment, “They’re not (making all the exceptions students need). They said to us that if it’s in the student’s ‘academic best interest’ they will make an exception. Who are they to decide that?”

Machalow also claims that there are more reasons for excessive course cancellations than a lack of structure: “For this semester, there were three sections of (a seminar) that were all scheduled in the same time block. Anyone who had a conflict with one of them had a conflict with all of them.” And as for scrutiny from higher administrators, she argues, “If the changes are coming from above, (Street and Edwards)

/news/

18Think Magazine

should fight for us, against (the changes).”What seems to raise students’ ire even more than the policy

changes themselves is the manner in which they have been communi-cated and enforced. According to Machalow, after they had registered for the following spring’s classes in the fall of 2010, “Students were sent an email saying they would be dropped from classes at the end of the next business day if they didn’t meet certain prerequisites (to ensure they took them in sequence). This email was sent out at 2:06 PM on a Friday before a vacation.” And in the spring of 2011, she says students “were being enrolled in classes without permission” so that they would complete their mini-courses by the end of their sophomore year, a policy that she claims is not even enforceable, since unlike the course-sequencing requirement it doesn’t appear in the Undergraduate Bulletin, but only in the Honors College Handbook, which she believes is non-binding.

Machalow claims all this is part of a pattern of poor and even threatening communication that has appeared since Street took over as director: “We feel as though communication is a very big issue here, especially the tones of emails we’ve been getting.” Some

students allege that they’ve felt strong pressure to choose between their membership in the Honors College and keeping their majors or minors – particularly if they have more than one major or minor – or participating in opportunities like research if it would mean taking too many courses out of sequence.

Street asserts that the dissatisfied students are “a vocal minor-ity.” But Machalow says there is a reason only a few students have complained: “Students are terrified, that’s the problem. I personally am nervous.” A number of other Honors College students who pri-vately expressed grievances against the administration declined to be included in this article, citing fears about possible ramifications for their academic careers.

Nevertheless, realizing that some students, even if a minority, were upset, Street and Edwards held a town-hall meeting early in the spring 2011 semester to address their concerns. But to their dismay, few students showed up, something Machalow attributes to less than a week’s notice having been given of the meeting. Street’s

and Edwards’ request of those who did attend that they not discuss the content of the meeting with anyone other than fellow Honors College students also angered some students and alarmed others, fueling speculation that perhaps the college was threatened by external forces.

Then some students learned of the existence of the Provost’s Honors Education Task Force. While not a secret – it is mentioned in the publicly available minutes of some Curriculum Committee meetings – its existence was not made known to students, which only served to further alarm some of them. Since the fall of 2010, it has met every other week, led by Vice Provost for Undergraduate Education Charles Robbins, and it is set to deliver its recommenda-tions and dissolve at the end of the spring 2011 semester.

According to Robbins, Provost Eric Kaler asked him upon as-suming his post in summer 2010 to create the task force in order “to look at how we provide programs, services, enrichment to our highest-achieving students.” This includes not only the Honors College but also University Scholars and Women in Science and Engineering (WISE); faculty and administrators involved in these

programs now or in the past com-prise the task force. “What we’re doing,” says Robbins, “is looking at what our goals are in provid-ing these programs and whether we’re achieving those goals.”

Some of the speculation about the task force has to be alarming to any Honors College student. One rumor centers on the purported dissatisfaction among administrators with the

number of unconnected and seemingly redundant honors programs at the university and the cost of maintaining this structure. The result would entail the de facto elimination of the Honors College as it merged with the other programs to form one larger, more cost-effective program.

But Robbins does not foresee radical changes: “I think we’re going to come up with recommendations that will involve more ad-justing, tweaking our current programs rather than sort of throwing it up and starting over. I think people have a sense that the structure we have basically is sound but there are some things that we can strengthen in each of the programs.”

When asked about the possibility of combining programs, Robbins replied, “I will say that one of the things that we’ve been concerned about and want to see if maybe we can do is put a better bridge between Honors and Scholars and WISE … right now they’re very siloed, and I would like to see more integration.” But he asserts that “the chances of us eliminating

N�ews

“STUDENTS ARE TERRIFIED, THAT’S THEPROBLEM. I PERSONALLY AM NERVOUS.”

Continued on Page 23

19thinksb.com

can do to directly improve the conditions of workers on campus, they have any number of means to pressure Lackmann management to make those changes.

“[The FSA] absolutely can cut the contract before it’s end,” said Hayes of the university’s contract with Lackmann. “If they’re not meeting the standards that the university has set they can say ‘we don’t want your business anymore’.”

It’s not just the treatment of their workers that Lackmann controls at Stony Brook. To an alarming degree, Lackmann managers—who by their own admission are not public employees and not affiliated with the university—are able to dictate policy on campus as well.

For example, according to two student food service employees who both asked to remain anonymous out of fear of reprimands by their supervisors, it is Lackmann and not the FSA that sets media policy in the dining halls they manage. FSA then enforces that policy.

The policy was on display on April 29, when this reporter attempt-ed to photograph workers in the kitchen of the Union Commons. After receiving permission from a student manager, a Lackmann manager approached me and demanded I leave. Before I could oblige, the manager also asked me to delete any photos I had taken. I did not comply. I was then asked to produce my student ID (again, I did not comply, as the manager is not a university employee), and was then threatened with campus police. At no point was a university employee notified of the situation.

While the Faculty Student Association may be comfortable turning a blind eye, the university may not have a choice over their involvement soon. Local 1102 is getting ready for the next significant negotiation with Lackmann, this time over the contract of cooks that service the university. If the union faces similar campaigns that Lackmann has waged in the recent past, Dennis Romano plans on making the negotiations FSA’s business.

“In the event that things don’t change, I will certainly make the FSA aware of any labor unrest that may occur,” he said.

Ironically, Local 1102 is also the union that represents FSA’s own clerical employees, so Romano and the rest of the union have experience with direct negotiations with the administration of the Faculty Student Association. Unlike Lackmann, says Romano, the FSA has always conducted negotiations in good faith.

For its part, the FSA believes there are already ample ways for workers to raise the alarm if they feel their rights are being violated.

“To the best of our knowledge, employees have options for griev-ance hearings, arbitration and recourse with the National Labor Rela-tions Board under that contract and under Federal Law,” said Agnello.

Access to the National Labor Relations Board is evident in the growing litany of cases being brought against Lackmann by workers at Stony Brook. In addition to the case of Ayse Porsuk, Lackmann has also been party to suits in 2008 and now again in 2011.

According to NLRB Board Agent Noemi Wasserstrom, another suit was filed by Local 1102 on April 8 against Lackmann on behalf of the truck drivers that service Stony Brook University.

“It comes down to lack of benefits, wages, working condition, general overall treatment. Specifically, they are not paid accordingly,” said Romano.

As for the most recent case (the one involving Ayse Porsuk), court-mandated bulletins were posted at the entrance to every dining hall where unionized employees work stating that Lackmann managers would not engage in anti-union behavior. They hung there for at least 60 days, until mid-April. By then, Eisa Shukran, the manager named in the case, had left his job. We asked the FSA what the circumstances were surrounding his departure, and were not given any specifics.

“FSA does not comment on personnel issues,” said Agnello. “Lackmann has informed FSA that Mr. Shukran left Stony Brook to accept another position.”

That position is as the Compass Group District Manager for the area encompassing, among other things, Stony Brook University. Shukran left to take a promotion.

/news

Photo Pamphlets like this one were posted at every dining hall by court order. They state that managers will not engage in anti-unon behavior. Credit: Adam Peck for Think Magazine

F R O M P A G E 9

20Think Magazine

The Tillman Story Directed by Amir Bar-Lev Rated R 94 minutes

President Dwight D. Eisenhower in his 1961 Farewell Address off ered an ominous warning regarding the dangers of the ‘military industrial complex.’ Th e ‘military industrial complex’ as deemed by President Eisenhower was the uneasy intertwining of parties that manage war (Congress, Military, Presidential Administration) and companies that produce weapons and equipment for war (Indus-try). Eisenhower, who bore considerable military pedigree for his involvement as the Supreme Allied Commander in WWII, was resolute in his convictions. Th e ‘military industrial complex’ in its modern context has been magnifi ed due to the rapid privatization of the U.S. Armed Forces. A subsequent factor involves the complicit nature of the media in drumming up support for armed confl icts. I considered the context of Eisenhower’s Farewell Address as I viewed the “Tillman Story” at the Wang Center on March 28th. Th e fi lm screening, which included a Q & A session with Director Amir Bar-Lev, was a joint eff ort between the Port Jeff erson Documentary Series and the Wang Center.

Th e “Tillman Story” juxtaposes the tragic death of Cpl. Pat Tillman to provide commentary on the Afghanistan War and the admirable lengths to which a family was willing to go to discover the truth about the fi nal moments of a loved one. Director Lev

constructs a nuanced fi lm that readily admits it doesn’t have de-fi nitive answers for diffi cult questions. Th is is particularly fi tting in encapsulating the unique character of Pat Tillman. Tillman in one of the fi lm’s poignant moments describes his intentions for joining the Army with, “Times like these (9/11), What freedoms we have. Th at wasn’t built overnight. Th e fl ag is a symbol of that. I have a great deal of respect for those who have served.” Th e loosely construed caricature of Tillman as simply a jingoistic individual is inherently false. Director Lev off ers an engrossing portrait of a man who was fi erce competitor on the football fi eld and who was equally privy to intellectual debate.

Th e familiar narrative of Pat Tillman is one that is synonymous with a NFL player who joins the Army aft er the horrifi c 9/11 attacks propelled by patriotic sentiments. Tillman is honorably killed in a hillside skirmish with Taliban militiamen. Th e greater tragedy is revealed to be the fraudulent claims propagated by the government to cover up Tillman’s unfortunate death. Th e fi lm tracks Tillman’s mother, “Dannie”, who presses the Pentagon for the true account of her son’s death. Dannie reconstructs the events through her own lengthy investigation and analysis of large volumes of Army dos-siers. Viewers are given a fascinating look as to how information is

What We’re Listening To in the ThinkPad.

1) Reptilia by The Strokes 3) Free Stress Test Professor Murder4) C + F Sam Prekop2) To Go Home M. WardCulture

21thinksb.com9) My Girls Animal Collective

7) The High Road Broken Bells

5) Love the Lie JF Robitaille6) Swing Tree Discovery

10) Friday Rebecca Black

8) She’s Got You High Mumm-Ra

/culture

created and disseminated in the Army. The Tillman family does not mince words in expressing

disappointment in the military chain of command’s decision to falsify the circumstances of Pat’s death for ulterior motives. The expedient process of transporting Tillman’s body back to the United States proves to be one of the more heartbreaking mo-ments of the film. Two bereavement officials are sent to Dannie Tillman’s home to persuade her to sign a document which would make Pat’s funeral one adorned with military honors. This was explicitly against Tillman’s wishes. The strength of the Tillman Story lies in visceral interviews with members of the Tillman clan and his army unit. Interviewees are given the opportunity to dispel the ‘mythos’ surrounding Pat Tillman’s character and his untimely death.

The fruition of Dannie Tillman’s efforts is a 2007 Congres-sional hearing in which former Sec. Defense Donald Rumsfeld and other high ranking members of the military hierarchy are subpoenaed. The bitter reality lies in the fact that the military hierarchy does not acknowledge how and when they knew of Tillman’s death. Tillman is posthumously awarded a Silver Star Medal by Lt. Gen. Stanley McChrystal for bravery and cour-

age. This is disconcerting as Tillman is an unfortunate victim of friendly fire in a brutish environment. Director Lev leaves viewers with the sentiment that the real perpetrators of fraud and deception were not incriminated.

Director Amir Bar-Lev spoke with audience members in a poignant twenty minute Q&A session after the film screening. Lev stated his intentions for making the film with, “I wanted to recognize this admirable guy. Pat Tillman was lionized as a hero. Hopefully younger viewers will learn a lesson.” Lev commenting on the uncertainty surrounding Tillman’s death stated, “This fiasco can be characterized by blunders, mistakes and missteps. It can be further described as a smoke screen, ills of the fog of war, bungled up media coverage and screw-ups by the military brass.” Lev in defending his film editing stated, “The film was meant to be open ended. There is no conclusive evidence that Tillman’s unit deliberately acted in a malicious manner. This was a major screw up. Top Down. Bottom Up.” Lev in assessing the military’s intentions stated, “They wanted to protect the public at large. They provided variations of who Pat was. The counterargument is that wars need to be fought. We need to understand the extent of the duplicity, negligence.”

Alvin Ailey American Dance Theater made their way to the Tilles Center to perform three times on a stop on their tour celebrating the 50th anniversary of Alvin Ailey’s famous choreography, “Revelations,” as well as Judith Jamison’s final year as Artistic Director. On Friday, April 29th, the company performed four pieces: “Anointed,” “The Evolution …of a Secured Femi-nine,” “The Hunt,” and last but not least, “Revelations.”

One word to describe Alvin Ailey American Dance Theater is strong. The strong technique and incredible athleticism of the dancers poured through with each movement of every dance.

“Anointed” began with a sensual duet between Rachael McLaren and Antonio Douthit entitled “Pass-ing.” The strength of the women of the company showed through the most during “Sally Forth,” a section of “Anointed.” A strong feeling of anguish came through during the piece, which espe-cially showed through during the periodic changing of colored lights that seemed to dance along with the music.

“The Evolution of a Secured Feminine,” a piece choreo-graphed by Camille Brown, was a solo danced by Briana Reed.

It was quirky and, of course, perfect technique-wise, but it did not thrill like the next piece did.

Overall, Alvin Ailey American Dance Theater was magnifi-cent. The athleticism of the dancers is beyond belief, and the perfect technique is unlike anything ever seen. If you ever find yourself with a chance to see the company perform, they cannot be missed.

Alvin Ailey American Dance Theater

by Alyssa Carroll

Full Review ON�LIN�E at thinksb.com

22Think Magazine

Bradley Manning is the 23-year-old Army Private accused of leaking many of the US military and diplomatic docu-ments released through the organization Wikileaks. Starting in April 2010, Wikileaks has released hundreds of thousands of fi les providing irrefutable evidence of US torture, civilian killings, and contempt for democracy around the world.

Although no court has convicted Manning of a crime, the Obama administration has held him in solitary confi nement for the past ten months. On March 2, the Army brought 22 addi-tional charges against Manning, including “aiding the enemy.” He

is now confi ned to a cold, tiny cell in a military prison in Quan-tico, Virginia, where in recent weeks he has been forced to strip naked every night. Psychologists for Social Responsibility have criticized Manning’s treatment as “needless brutality,” and human rights organizations like Amnesty International have condemned it repeatedly. Th e UN Rapporteur on Torture is currently looking into Manning’s treatment.

Th e brutal treatment of Manning is appalling, but is hardly surprising given the government tradition of repressing dissent. Although US citizens enjoy civil liberties not present in many other countries, the US government has never willingly tolerated serious threats to state secrecy and impunity. Interestingly, many politicians and pundits have been calling for Manning’s prosecution under the Espionage Act—the draconian 1917 law that criminalized criticism of the First World War, and which remains in eff ect today.

Dissent is especially dangerous when it takes the form of whistleblowing—insiders defying orders and exposing evidence of their institutions‘ crimes. And disobedience within the military

is a particularly serious threat. Military regulations are designed to scare soldiers into robotic obedience of orders. But a disobedient soldier can undermine the ethic of unquestioning obedience that is central to the system.

On Sunday, March 20th, hundreds of protesters demonstrated in support of Bradley Manning outside the Quantico, VA, prison where he is being confi ned. Former US soldiers from Veterans for Peace, Iraq Veterans Against the War, and March Forward led the demonstration, with a group delivering fl owers in honor of Manning to the prison entrance. Th e protesters then pushed back a long line

of heavily-armed police and sat down in the middle of the highway intersection adjacent to the gate. Th e police eventually arrested about three dozen people for peacefully occupying the highway.

When people like Bradley Manning risk their careers, reputa-tions, and personal safety for the sake of justice, the rest of us have a moral duty to show solidarity with them. But solidarity is not just a thankless obligation—it can have a very powerful impact, strength-ening the morale of the persecuted rebel and thereby encouraging others to follow suit. David House, a friend of Bradley’s who has been among the few visitors allowed to see him, told me during the rally about the miserable conditions in which his friend is being held. “But when I tell him how so many people on the outside are supporting him, his eyes light up,” he said. “It means more to him than anything in the world.” Solidarity is a powerful thing.

For more information on how to support Manning and other disobedient soldiers, see www.couragetoresist.org and www.brad-leymanning.org.

Opinions&Editorials

Solidarity with Bradley Manning

Have a thought? Share it with us!Submit Letters to the Editor or Op-Eds to Think! Keep letters to 250 words, and Op-Eds

to no more than 500 words. Send all entries to [email protected]!

Opinions&Editorials

by Kevin Young

23thinksb.com

One of our two cover stories this issue focuses on the relationship between Lackmann Culinary Services, their

workers who service Stony Brook University’s dining halls, and the Faculty Student Association that contracts with them. At its most basic level, this is a story of unionized workers being mistreated and at times harassed by management of a large pri-vate corporation. For that reason, we cannot accept the response of the university and the FSA, that these workers are somehow not the concern of the campus community simply because the name on their paychecks is not a university employee.

As students, we have the right to demand that our university look out for everyone on our campus, especially those as vital and underappreciated as the men and women who service our dining halls. Students should not have to feel a twinge of guilt every time they purchase a morning coffee in the Union Deli or lunch at the Student Activities Center, nor should they be the ones to take action on behalf of these workers. For once let

this be a campaign of self-awareness.A responsible university would do the following : bring in an

independent entity to look at the treatment of workers, speak to all parties involved, and relay their findings.

If those findings unveil a pattern of improper treatment by management, demand immediate improvements and set a firm deadline. If the deadline is missed or changes are not made, drop Lackmann Culinary Services.

As an institute of higher education engaged in training the next generation of workers, managers, executives, etc., we cannot afford to waiver at all from such a basic commitment to ethical, moral behavior. And at a time where certain leaders in Wisconsin and Washington have shown reprehensibly poor judgment in regards to unionized labor, Stony Brook University can create a new narrative: that unions and the workers who comprise them are important and deserving of equal and fair treatment.

Time to Take the High Road

any of the programs that we’re talking about are really slim to none. It’s

just not going to happen.”Robbins is aware of students’ dissatisfaction. He supports the

recent changes, but acknowledges that fl exibility is important: “Our policy should be that these are the courses people take in a certain order, in a sequence, as long as they can go to Trey and say, ‘I’ve got to take XYZ for my major and the only time it’s taught is now, so I’m going to have to take that and then take this Honors seminar next year or next semester or whatever,’ and we have to have that fl exibility … but I think that our desired preference should be for students wherever possible to sign up for (seminars) in some sense of sequence.”

He also acknowledges that there has been a learning curve for the college’s new administrators as they implement the new poli-cies: “I think as we’ve gone on with the year there’s been more of an appreciation of a need for some exemptions and compromises

and I think they’ve been better at doing that.”As for students’ fears of retaliation for speaking up about their

concerns, Robbins asserts that they are unfounded: “No one is going to face any kind of retaliation at all in terms of grades, in terms of their thesis, in terms of anything. Th at just is not conceivable any-where on the table in this matter, and I would not – it’s not going to happen, but it just would not be tolerated from this offi ce.” He urged students to speak up about their concerns: “If student A has a problem trying to get an exemption or was made to feel lesser or was made to feel that they need to change their major or was made to feel anything, then I want to know that, and I will deal with it.”

Ultimately, says Robbins, “We want this to be as positive an experience as possible.” Th at reminded me of something Machalow said earlier: “(Administrators’) main job is supposed to be to serve us and help us attain our educational goals, not to force curriculum and rules on us. We’ll do what you force on us, but we won’t be happy. And you might as well make us happy.”

The End

any of the programs that and I think they’ve been better at doing that.”UNDERCOVER COLLEGE CONT. FROM PAGE 18

NEWSPAPERS ARE FOR LOSERS.MOBILE SITES FOR APPLE, ANDROID & BLACKBERRYAND WEB APPS FOR iPHONE & iPAD! THINKSB.COM

Editorial

24Think Magazine

Glenn Beck

Glenn Beck may be leaving his show on Fox News, but he’ll still be around as a producer. During his tenure at Fox, Beck drove a far-right propaganda machine even further toward the fringe. The staff at Think imagined how Beck might change other shows to fit his vision if he ever had the opportunity to produce them.

TV SHOWPILOTS

Because two minutes is not enough! Paranoia, anger, and a deep-seeded hatred of liberal people fuel this hour of chaos. After Beck plays clips from Goldstein... I mean Obama’s speeches, Dick Cheney appears on the screen to lead the audience in disgust with his award winning snarl.

In this 24 spinoff, torture expert Jack Bauer (Kiefer Sutherland) interrogates prisoners at Guantanamo Bay. Jack uses water boarding, sleep depravation, starvation and Chinese water torture to extract information from terrorists about evil plots and the Obama campaign. And because it’s all fiction, the torture always providesreliable information!

Donald Trump sends a team of secret agents to Hawaii to obtain proof of Obama’s secret Kenyan birth. But in an attempt to find imaginary evidence, they get lost deep within the chain of islands. Tune in to see if Trump’s men can escape the clutches of the mysterious Barack Smoke Monster!