Author: Shradha Singh

By Shradha Singh, Staff Writer

Most people who hear the words “McClatchy library” may immediately visualize the library situated within our own school, complete with its newly updated technology and stained-glass lion. But hidden within the crowd of houses on Poverty Ridge is another library, similar in name, smaller in size, but just as rich in history.

The Ella K. McClatchy Library branch is located in a small residential house in midtown Sacramento. Built in the 1900’s by Northern California architect Rudolph Adam Herold, it was home to the McClatchy family, including Charles McClatchy, supervising editor of the Sacramento Bee and the namesake of C.K. McClatchy High School.   His children, Eleanor and Charlotte, donated the house to the city of Sacramento in 1940 to become a library as a memorial to their mother Ella McClatchy.   Originally, the library was focused on providing reading material for young people and was dedicated almost entirely to McClatchy high school students.  Since the 1950’s it has served the general public within the Sacramento Public Library system.

On November 15th, the Ella K. McClatchy Library hosted an open house in celebration of its 74th anniversary in the library system. Complete with food, crafts, and music, it opened its doors to all who wished to participate, whether they were Friends of the Library, or first-time patrons who wandered through the doors. Tours of the facility included a visit to the spacious second floor that was renovated in 2013.

The branch, though not that well known, is still quite active in the community. It is host to the Tolkien book club, which meets every Second Saturday in the afternoon, as well as the Neighborhood Knitters who meet every second or third Thursday of each month. The branch even has a sunroom, in which one can find books and crafts for sale, not to mention a rich collection of borrowable books ready to take any avid reader’s imagination by storm. And with a nice quiet space and comfortable couch upstairs, what’s not to love?

The Ella K. McClatchy Library is located at 2112 22nd Street. For a more complete listing and information regarding the library, its events and/or its book collection, please visit www.saclibrary.org and look for the Ella K. McClatchy Library.

by Shradha Singh, Staff writer

As so many Americans remain increasingly afraid of the Ebola virus in West Africa, a closer and comparatively much more troubling virus is currently pervading the United States. Enterovirus, a severe respiratory disease, has been affecting children and infants across the country, resulting in death for some of its victims.

The outbreak was first detected in late August of this year, with clusters of cases appearing in Missouri and Illinois. Since that time, the Center for Disease Control (CDC) has reported a total of at least 1,116 cases of enterovirus in 47 states and the District of Columbia. Of those afflicted, at least seven have died, the most recent being a five-month-old infant in New Jersey. This unfortunate result contrasts to the only two cases of Ebola that have been contracted within the United States, neither of which proved deadly. Though enterovirus is not new to the U.S., having been identified in California in 1962, this particular strain, enterovirus D-68, has proven to be much more active and difficult to treat than ever before, raising concern within the CDC.

The virus has so far exclusively impacted children and teenagers, especially those who suffer from asthma or some other previous respiratory condition. Adults are typically immune, having been previously exposed to other forms of the virus. Those who contract the virus are usually asymptomatic (showing few, if any, symptoms). People who do display symptoms usually contract a mild fever, have a runny nose, body and muscle aches, and start wheezing or have difficulty breathing. More serious cases can result in hospitalization and patients may be placed on ventilatory support if their respiratory function is severely affected. The five cases detected in California have also been characterized by polio-like symptoms, which is not surprising considering that in severe cases enterovirus D-68 has been known to cause paralysis.

Though the symptoms of the virus are known, the cause of the current outbreak is still a mystery. Enterovirus is usually transmitted through close or indirect contact with infected people or objects. Yet, the extreme spread of cases across the country has made it difficult to pinpoint the exact source. Though some news agencies have speculated a possible link between the outbreak of the virus and the recent influx of illegal immigrant children across the border, the news is unconfirmed, and, at best, is only an untested hypothesis.  Despite the relative familiarity of enterovirus to health officials, it is still not quite known enough to be sure of any environmental or climatic origins. What is known is that the virus is evolving, mutating into something more transmissible and pathogenic than previous strains.

The CDC researchers have been investigating several antiviral drugs for treatment of the infection; none of which have been effective so far. Supportive care remains the only treatment for the virus. So far, a minor consolation has been that enterovirus is typically a seasonal illness, arising in late summer and early fall. Health officials are hopeful that this outbreak will wind down as winter swiftly approaches.

By Shradha Singh, Staff writer

History was made this month as one of the greatest space accomplishments since Neil Armstrong’s walk on the moon was achieved. On Wednesday, November 12, the space lander Philae touched down on Comet 67P/Churyumov Gerasimenko. This makes it the first time ever that a space mission has made a soft landing on a comet. However, this important event did not come without its own difficulties, the most recent of which may end the mission entirely.

The robot, about the size of a washing machine, was launched by the European Space Agency (ESA) ten years ago, in 2004, with the purpose of pursuing the elusive comet. After traveling more than 6.4 billion miles, the probe first came close to its target back in August. On Wednesday, the Philae lander finally separated from its larger space probe, Rosetta, touching down on the comet…and then bouncing back off. Luckily, the lander found its way back onto the surface again more than an hour later…only to be launched a kilometer back into space. After making a small trip back in zero gravity, the lander made a third trip onto the comet, this time to stay.

The reason for all this drama has been attributed to the failure of the lander’s ice harpoons to deploy. The result has been a precarious hold on a surface that is mostly ice and dust.

Another complication has been the matter of battery power, or rather the lack of it. The lander’s final resting place has been in the shadow of a cliff, which allows for Philae’s solar panels to garner a mere 1.5 hours of sunlight in Comet 67P’s 12-hour day. This is nowhere near the 7 hours of sunlight promised in the original landing site, nearly a kilometer away. As a result, after 60 hours of operation, Philae’s batteries ran out on Friday, November 15, making the lander incommunicable to Earth for the foreseeable future. Still, scientists hope that as the comet comes closer and closer to the sun, Philae will once again operate and send back data.

Although Philae is no longer in communication, scientists are still excited as to what was accomplished before the lander stopped responding. According to the European Space Agency, right after it landed, Philae’s Cometary Sampling and Composition (COSAC) system, one of the two gas analyzers present on the lander, was able to detect the presence of organic molecules in the comet’s atmosphere. The lander was also able to dig up some surface samples, although it is still unclear whether or not this was analyzed before its batteries died as well.

With this data, scientists are hoping to test a circulating theory that these meteors are what brought water to Earth, thousands having bombarded Earth early in its life. If this is proven true, then it would be able to explain the origins of oceans on Earth’s surface, something which has long puzzled some researchers.

By Shradha Singh, Staff writer

“Breaking Bad” was a television show that aired from 2008 to 2014, and received a great deal of critical acclaim and audience praise for its riveting storyline and heightened suspense. But when it comes to its new line of action figures, the show has received more mixed results.

A Florida mom, Susan Schrivjer, was outraged when she saw dolls of Walter White, the show’s main character, a former high school chemistry teacher who becomes a crystal meth dealer during the course of the show, and his student sidekick, Jesse Pinkman, on sale at Toys R Us. The dolls come equipped with accessories that include a fake bag of meth and detachable sack of cash.  Schrivjer considered these children’s toys, “a dangerous deviation from [the company’s] family friendly values,” according to the petition she started on Change.org to remove the toys. Over 9,000 other people agreed with the Fort Myers mom resulting in an “indefinite sabbatical” for the dolls at Toys R Us.

But the show has not taken the blow lying down. Bryan Cranston, the actor who portrays the character of Walter White, has made numerous tweets, including, “Toys R Us puts Breaking Bad toys on ‘indefinite sabbatical.’ Word on the street is that they were sent to Belize. Nicely played Florida Mom.” Aaron Paul, who plays Jesse Pinkman, has been a bit more vocal, tweeting, “Wait, so @ToysRUs pulled all of the Breaking Bad action figures from their shelves but still sells Barbie? Hmmmm…I wonder what is more damaging?” Paul has also shown support for a petition to return the dolls to store shelves, which has gained about 60,000 signatures so far.

This entire fiasco raises the question: what was Toys R Us thinking? Although admittedly the company has said the action figures were meant for adult collectors ages 15 and up, the fact remains that it is a toy store, one that is primarily known for its market geared towards younger children and the family demographic in general. The dolls may be placed in a separate aisle, but they are still only a stone’s throw away from other playthings such as G.I. Joe, Super Mario Brothers, and Ninja Turtles figures that, and this should go without saying, are definitely of interest to children. If you want to sell drug dealing dolls, then at least do it in a setting more appropriate for such merchandise. A comic book or novelty store for adults perhaps?

As for Aaron Paul’s comment regarding the toy store and its connection to another controversial product, Barbie, he does have a point. Toys R Us does not always promote entirely positive merchandise, even for its younger customers, and toys like Barbie do perpetuate eating disorders and other body image issues. However, does that really mean that we need to add to negative images with dolls dedicated to the drug trade, that even have props related to crime? We already are selling video games with excessive violence and breastfeeding dolls for little girls. TV has been less than perfect, displaying more violence and sex lately than family friendly programs. Psychologists estimate that children as young as 8 or 9 are already being exposed to sexually explicit material through media outlets. How far do we have to go until we start legislating what children are exposed to? Barbie and its related counterparts may be, unfortunately, legal. The drug trade, on the other hand, is mercifully not.

Toys R Us has just gone too far in trying to boost profit. Though it may be true that sales of “typical” children’s toys have gone down (with the exception of LEGO, which seems determined to take over the world), that is no excuse to potentially expose kids, especially little kids, to something most decidedly NOT child friendly. It is just too much to ask from a store which has already been a less than perfect influence, and which seems to get worse with every new, “fun” toy it decides to add to its shelves.

Grow a conscience, Toys R Us. Understand that you have a huge part in shaping a child’s psyche and determining their ideas of right and wrong, normal and not, depending on the toys you sell and they play with. As for collectors, try and find somewhere else to buy your merchandise. I hear Walmart has a pink “Breaking Bad” teddy bear on sale.

By Shradha Singh, Staff writer

How is it that just one man with a lighter is able to delay flights all across the country? This is the question that the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is currently pressed to answer after this exact incident occurred in the Chicago Air Route Traffic Control Center on September 26, 2014. What resulted was a huge aviation mess that delayed or canceled flights all over the nation, including right here at Sacramento International Airport.

On September 26, a contract employee for the FAA, Brian Howard, walked into the Chicago air traffic control tower, and set fire to the key center. This immediately affected two nearby airports, Midway International Airport in Aurora, Illinois, and O’Hare International Airport in Chicago, Illinois. The latter airport is the world’s second-largest airport, and the disruption of its normal schedule created a domino effect which delayed flights all across the United States. This included three flights at Sac International, two of which were supposed to depart for the crippled airports.

As reported by CNN, the fire forced air traffic controllers to transfer flight data manually rather than by computer. It also damaged the telecom line that allows flight plans to be conveyed from the airlines directly to the control center. Instead, airlines had to fax flight plans to the tower, and with so much manual data to be managed, two controllers were needed for each position. Eventually the FAA had to bring in extra technicians in order to effectively handle the situation.

Police report Howard’s actions occurred as part of an apparent suicide attempt. According to an affidavit, first responders arrived at the tower to find smoke and a trail of blood that led to Howard in possession of two knives and a lighter, and seemingly in the process of trying to cut his own throat. Paramedics took the knife and sent a resistant Howard to a hospital in Aurora for treatment. He now faces a charge of one count of destruction of aircraft or aircraft facilities, which, if he is convicted, could ultimately lead to a sentence of twenty years in prison.

Though authorities managed to get the major airports affected up and running from only sixty percent to very near full capacity within a span of two weeks, critics still expressed concern about how this one incident was able to wreak so much havoc. Technicians have defended themselves, saying that although they are prepared for this sort of situation, the process to restore the system to its original state is not instantaneous. Luke Drake, vice president of Region 1 of the Professional Aviation Safety Specialists, also said that the response to the sabotage was a “tremendous success.”

Still, that does not erase the fact that numerous previous aviation and airline mishaps and safety issues have occurred in the United States in a relatively short period of time. In August of this year, a passenger, 53-year-old Eric Slighton, was able to pose as an airport security officer at San Francisco International without raising suspicion. Just a few months earlier in April, a 15-year-old, Yahya Abdi, was able to climb over the fence at an airport in San Jose, find his way into a plane’s landing gear, and staying in there, travel all the way to Maui, with no one finding out until after the flight was over. Though these incidents are admittedly nothing like the events of this past September, the increasing number of individuals able to get past airport, airline, and aviation security is becoming an alarming trend in the United States, one the FAA and its related counterparts need to be able to stop soon, in order to keep travelers safe, secure, and unconcerned about the status of their flight.

By Shradha Singh, Staff writer

Indecision and confusion seem to be popular emotions in the U.S. Supreme Court as of late. Perhaps the best example of this can be seen in the erratic behavior of the Supreme Court and one of its justices, Anthony Kennedy.

Just over a year ago, Kennedy ruled with four other justices to strike down the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which prohibited the recognition of same-sex marriages granted by other states. This ruling allowed married same-sex couples to receive benefits. Yet on October 8, the judge ordered a temporary stay on same-sex marriages in the state of Idaho, after the state asked for a delay. Then the Supreme Court followed up just two days later striking down the stay, and allowing licensing for gay marriage to occur in the state. And, to make things even more complicated, the state of Nevada was caught in the middle, unclear whether Justice Kennedy’s stay applied to them, as Idaho had cited court cases from Nevada in its appeal.

The bewilderment of states like Idaho and Nevada is not new, and unfortunately over the past few months, has not become uncommon. The Supreme Court has long been reluctant to make a clear, definitive ruling on same-sex marriage, even when the issue finds its way to its own courts, as it famously did in June of 2013. Although the Court ruled five to four in favor of same-sex marriage rights at the time, the Court has still remained unclear on the constitutionality of same-sex marriage itself, a hesitancy not unlike that present in the 1960’s on the debate of interracial marriage, which was ultimately resolved in the now-historic Supreme Court case, Loving v. Virginia.

Instead, it has kicked the issue down to lower federal courts such as the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, which has recently repealed several gay marriage bans brought to its table. But as conservative states increasingly turn towards the highest court of the land, and the Supreme Court remains increasingly unresponsive, or in the case of Idaho and Nevada, dizzyingly active, the result has been mass confusion, both on the part of states trying to retain ideas of traditional marriage between just a man and a woman, as well as states attempting to be a bit more liberal in their policies.

So far, same-sex marriage is legal in thirty-three of the fifty states, including California, where the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals has also been active, overturning a five year-old gay marriage ban in the state in 2013. This is a sharp increase from the only thirteen states that allowed same-sex marriage at the beginning of October. Part of the reason for this big jump is because of the surprising recent refusal of the Supreme Court to even hear appeals supporting gay marriage bans from several states, forcing them to provide marriage licenses to same-sex couples.

Three more states, including Kansas, Montana, and South Carolina, are also in the process of legalizing marriage between same-sex couples, as they continue to fumble their way through the federal appeals process. Even Texas, traditionally one of the most conservative states in the country, is beginning to come around, with gay couples challenging the state’s ban of same-sex marriage in a court case to be heard late November or early December. Only time will tell whether the repeals against gay marriage bans will continue, or whether the Supreme Court will once again confuse others by staying bans, removing bans, and repeating the process.

By Shradha Singh, Staff Writer

As the midterm elections come to a close, the future of legal marijuana seems to be just beginning. The 2014 elections, which some had already described as the “marijuana midterms,” ended with two states, Alaska and Oregon, allowing the legalization of recreational marijuana, along with the nation’s capital, Washington, D.C. They join Colorado and Washington, who decided to grant adult use of cannabis in 2012.

This result conveys a marked shift in attitudes toward legalizing marijuana. In 2005, a Gallup poll found that only 36 percent of Americans favored legalizing pot, with 60 percent against. Now, almost ten years later, the same poll recently found that 58 percent of Americans believed marijuana should be legalized, with only 39 percent opposed. This is the first time ever that a majority of people have supported legalization, and this view has been reflected in the past elections.

Reasons for this change has been suggested to be in part due to the impact legislation would have on the crime rate. According to the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), marijuana arrests account for half of all drug-related crimes in the United States. Most of the arrests made for marijuana (roughly 88 percent) are simply for possession rather than the actual sale of cannabis. These numbers are also heavily skewed by race, with blacks being about four times more likely to be arrested for marijuana possession than whites, even though they use the drug in the same amounts. Add to that the fact that states spend an average of over three trillion dollars each year trying to enforce marijuana laws, and it becomes understandable why many Americans might desire change.

Economics is another factor in the shift in opinion. The demand for marijuana, even on the black market, is extraordinarily high (pun intended). According to the National Survey for Drug Use and Health, there are about 7.6 million regular, meaning those who use daily, and 23.9 million semi-regular pot smokers in the United States. Should this drug be legalized, economists estimate that the entire market could be anywhere from 10 billion to 46 billion dollars each year. Even if California alone were to tax and regulate the sale of cannabis, the state would rake in over one billion dollars per year.

In fact, the only reasons against marijuana legislation in states like Florida (the only state to veto pot use), even for medical purposes, seems to be the social stigma that surrounds the drug. In that election, nearly 58 percent of voters were in approval of allowing the use of the drug. However, this was not enough to meet the 60 percent majority needed to permit the constitutional amendment. Of those who voted against, 63 percent were ages 65 years or older. And, as proved by past polls and statistics, approval of marijuana seems to decrease as age increases. In the end, it was the lack of enough younger and more liberal-minded voters that made the difference.

Today, twenty-three states and the District of Columbia have legalized the use of medical marijuana. And like Alaska, Colorado, Oregon, and Washington, many of these states are also considering the possibility of legalizing recreational use of marijuana. The states of Massachusetts, Arizona, and Nevada are already proposing marijuana initiatives in the 2016 elections. But the most important state for us to watch for is of course, California. Originally set to become the first marijuana state in 2010, it is now trying to resurrect a pot initiative, also to be voted on in 2016. If this initiative passes (and with 60 percent of Californians in support it seems likely), it is expected that a windfall of states will follow, possibly leading to legal cannabis use all across the country.