Month: November 2014

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it has kicked the issue down to lower federal courts such as the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, which has recently repealed several gay marriage bans brought to its table.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.

By Emma Calvert, Staff Writer

Voter turnouts tend to fluctuate over the years due to many different factors–including the demographic of the voters. Most of those who aren’t turning out to vote are younger voters, ages 18-29, who make up 21% of our country’s population for voting. To improve voter turnout, the government is trying to make it easier to registrate. But in the most recent election, voter turnout decreased significantly.  This is due to our generation, who are eligible to vote, not voting. Only 20.9% of people 18-29 voted, less than a quarter, in the Midterm elections of 2014.  Factors include for the low voter turnout of young people is the difficulty of registration, ease of access to polls, no candidates or measures which seem to be worth voting for, and the fact that some younger people don’t realize that their vote is actually important. A major factor in low voter turnout is that an ID is required to vote, but many younger people lack the “proper” identification, which results in them not being able to vote.

Younger people tend to be more liberal, voting for Democratic candidates, while older voters normally vote Republican. The Republicans winning majority in the Senate during the midterm elections is very likely due to the low voter turnout–if younger, eligible voters had a higher turnout, Democrats could have potentially kept a majority in the Senate or at least closed the huge gap between Republican and Democrat wins.

A little over a third of California voted– two thirds of California’s eligible voters chose not to vote in the midterm elections. The New York Times reported that this was the worst voter turnout in 72 years. Voting is essential for the government to hear the people’s opinion on issues, so our country can progress in the direction its citizens want.

By Carolanne Boughton, Staff writer

After their 6-0 win over Haiti, the United States Women’s National Team only needs one more win to advance to the Women’s World Cup. The American team secured all nine possible points, allowing them to book a place in the semifinals against Guatemala in Philadelphia. The team is confident about the semifinal, seeing that they have not lost a game on home turf in almost a decade. The Americans seem to only be improving in their journey to the World Cup. Carli Lloyd, Meghan Klingenberg, Christen Press, and Morgan Brian all scored while Abby Wambach bagged a pair.

The American team struck early with offensive plays. Haiti remained deep, trying to block the Americans offensive measures. The Americans were able to penetrate the Haitians defensive wall and score. The Haitians never had any true offensive push, having their whole game focused on stopping the Americans offensive strikes.

Near the hour mark, the Haitians defensive wall began to crumble. The Americans put all their energy in advancing the ball and the game was cracked open. The Haitians seemed to have lost all defensive coordination, allowing Press a chance to pounce on a loose ball that rolled to her freely. Press drove the ball home with a well-placed shot.

The Haitian coach, Shek Borkowski, argued that the game was not evenly matched, “It was a very difficult match for us because obviously we’re amateur part-timers competing against full-time pros.You could really discern the difference in fitness levels and the understanding of how to play together. They’re the number one team in the world for a reason.” Borkowski concluded that, “It was just too difficult for us.”

On the other hand, the USA manager Jill Ellis was content with the progression in form from the first two games. “Gradually, we wore them down,” she said. “In the second half I thought we played very well and moved the ball very well. We got some great combinations and some really good finishes from different people, so I was really pleased.”

The Americans powered through three games in just six days. They delivered what was expected of them and now have a 11-0 scoring record. With their great record, the Americans only have one game between them and this year’s World Cup.

By Shradha Singh, Staff writer

“The bigger they are, the harder they fall.” This is certainly not applicable in the case of the  Downtown Plaza. Little more than three months after the city finally made the decision to start construction of the new Sacramento Kings arena in late July, the declining shopping center the stadium’s replacing has already been reduced to little more than bare, smooth earth. All the buildings along L Street, including the Macy’s building, have been demolished, as well as the  structures along J Street and  the north side of the mall.

This stage of construction, which was completed in early October, has set the stage for the building of the Sacramento Kings arena’s foundation, which began recently. Once this is done, vertical construction of the stadium will begin around February or March. Onlookers can expect to see the shell of the arena start to take shape by next spring or early summer. Like the one before it, the new arena, with its 17,500 seats, will be among the smallest seating stadiums within the NBA. However it will be made with profit in mind, with more seats in its lower bowl, driving up ticket prices. There will also be more “premium” and VIP seats available, another way of boosting revenue. The building will also be among the most Wifi connected stadiums in the country, which is sure to please Internet lovers. And, at 745,000 square feet, the new arena will be about 70 percent bigger than Sleep Train.

So far workers have reported no issues in construction, and the project has continued smoothly. This comes as a clear contrast to the years of conflict regarding the placement of an arena in downtown Sacramento that started in 2002. It  was originally proposed to be constructed in the empty railyards. However, the continued reluctance of the city to finance such an expensive venture delayed plans, which only came to fruition in late 2013, after threats to take the team from Sacramento to Seattle. Strong protest from fans, a change in ownership, and the promise of a new arena in the heart of California’s capital were the only things that kept the team from leaving. And despite the addition of other problems, including the city’s successful eminent domain suit against Macy’s to seize much needed land for the building, plans for the arena have still gone on and the team has stayed. Still the danger is not yet over for Kings fans, as the $447.7 million structure needs to be completed by October 2016, or the team will be moved by the NBA to Seattle, as agreed to by the city. Meanwhile, lawsuits are still pending on the $255 million subsidy the city is expected to put forward for the arena, and whether or not the issue ought to be put to a vote on the upcoming June ballot. Only time will tell whether this obstacle will also pose a problem to the stadium, or like the ones before it, this too will pass.