UW family science professor Bruce Barrett’s resolution has begun a long-overdue discussion of how our investments contradict this university’s claims to promote sustainability. Through our endowment investments, we are profiting from activities that, if left unchecked, will cause crop failures, storm damage and extreme heat waves threatening our current students’ economic prospects. If our university is truly committed to its stated mission to “preserve and transmit the knowledge, wisdom and values that will help ensure the survival of this and future generations and improve the quality of life for all,” we are seriously off track, and divestment is an important corrective.

Some faculty senators suggested that divestment is not an effective way to approach the issue. It is true that divestment alone cannot end the grip of fossil fuel interests on U.S. energy policy. But when we divest, we will free up funds to reinvest in better energy use and in Wisconsin businesses. Financial analysts have found that this can be done at negligible loss of investment returns. We move forward the national conversation on our fossil fuel addiction. Moreover, we will bring ourselves more in line with the spirit of the Wisconsin Idea.

Support for fossil fuel divestment is growing at UW, as on more than 300 other campuses nationwide. More than 1,300 UW students, faculty, staff and community members have signed a petition demanding divestment. One-hundred-and-twenty faculty members have signed an open letter calling for the same.

This autumn we will hear further deliberations in the Faculty Senate. We will see bigger actions by the student organization Climate Action 350-UW. We will be part of a national movement for climate sanity. As I take my degree and move on, I look forward to returning to a UW that is once again at the national forefront, just as when it was among the first major universities to divest in protest of South African apartheid.

John Zinda (jzinda@wisc.edu) is a doctoral candidate in the department of community and environmental sociology. 

Choosing to approach a campus weekend with the subtlety and tact of 70-year-old yelling from his porch, MPD busted up any party not crowded indoors. Come on guys -- we know you are usually a reasonable and respectful bunch when it comes to student house parties. Do not change just because you wanted to beat out Mayor Paul Soglin for this award.

They really went the whole nine yards in pursuit of this award. For that, we have to give them credit. Sending threatening letters to those “kids with their rap music,” choosing ultimatums rather than discourse with house owners and, our favorite, enforcing noise violation restrictions that would have more of a place in our grandparents’ retirement communities than on a college campus.

Of course, we can’t talk about their mishandling of the event without talking about how MPD threw Revelry under the bus by saying the world would be a better place as soon as it replaced all those “illegal house parties.” MPD showed ignorance worthy of this honor, by both misrepresenting Revelry’s intentions and basically saying that holding house parties is illegal.

Congratulations, MPD, for choosing to protect lawns everywhere from the menace of a few students’ feet, a couple of speakers and, God forbid, a keg. We salute your arbitrary application of regulations and indifference to the desires of your downtown community. That’s what grumpy old men do. If only we had played a little “Aquarius/Let the Sunshine in” and smoked some weed like you guys did at the first Mifflin, everything would have been swell. Instead, we were those damn kids drinking and listening to rap. We were basically asking for it.

About one month into David Ward’s tenure as interim chancellor, the Anglo-American made it clear that he was as disinterested in any form of engagement with the Madison community as a fifth-year senior with a high-paying job waiting after graduation.

Throughout his time in office, Ward has managed to anger any and every constituency important to UW, from conservatives who assume he’s just another liberal academic to campus activists who stormed his office.

Ward’s unpopularity is not the result of his controversial policy. On the contrary, it is simply due to his overwhelming passivity.

Ward made it clear at the beginning of his term that he was acting more as a steward of UW than a leader, but early on he seemed to have misinterpreted his role as the university’s leader and public spokesperson. He rarely, if ever, made a noticeable effort to explain his decision making directly to undergraduates, and his blasé attitude when confronted by activists (“not these workers, not today.”) tarnished his reputation further.

So we are not giving Ward a headliner award, but instead a “Never-in-the-Headlines” Award. His passivity has created a power vacuum at UW, leaving incoming Chancellor Rebecca Blank not with shoes to fill, but with shoes to cobble.

The District 8 alder race did not start out on a terribly substantive note, with candidate Christian Hansen challenging incumbent Ald. Scott Resnick’s nomination signatures, while at the same time making an error in his own. Unfortunately, the campaign never got much more interesting — and never became much of a campaign at all.

Hansen racked up a few endorsements from progressive organizations early on, but his campaign never managed to gain much momentum. Ultimately, a single image summed up the race as well as any words could: the photo of Resnick sitting next to an empty chair being held for Hansen at a candidate forum, from which Hansen was conspicuously absent.

The race was cut mercifully short when, on March 4, Hansen bowed out of the race, citing a lack of time and financial resources.

It’s a shame that University of Wisconsin students weren’t offered any choice in this election. While Resnick has proven himself to be an excellent alder for the largely student district, this does not mean he should be free from facing competition. An election is not really an election only one candidate is running. Although the result would likely not have been different — hopefully not too many students could have been wooed by Hansen’s drone-based fear mongering — everyone would have benefited from an actual race.

No, seriously. This guy made drone-awareness a central tenant of his campaign.

Even though Hansen may not have been the most gifted campaigner, he could have made any magician — no, illusionist — green with envy of his ability to apparently slide right out of existence. For this, Christian Hansen wins our Stealthy, Like a Drone award.

With our society the way it is, it’s hard to know which college major will give you the best chance of thriving in this so-called “real world.” Books are being replaced by computers, methods of communication are advancing almost every day and it’s oftentimes not enough to just have a college degree when trying to get a job. Thinking about these things brings up the question of what you can do to understand why society is the way it is and how you can contribute to it.

In fact, a whole academic field is devoted, in part, to asking this question and other questions like it. The social sciences are concerned with studying the nature of society and the nature of humans in general. This field encompasses everything from history to psychology to political science.

Choosing a major in this field is sometimes regarded as a soft option, and sometimes these studies are not seen as “real” sciences. However, our society has changed so much from what it has been – it is advancing so quickly that learning how to ask the right questions and offer possible answers could prove to be an invaluable skill.

No matter what job you go into after college, you will most likely find you have to work with people very different than you and learn how to manage them. Alford Young, who chairs the sociology department at the University of Michigan, has some interesting thoughts on how sociology can help you relate to people. He states:

“Sociology is the discipline that gives the greatest attention to social difference...We need to look beyond people’s individual motivations or their psychological foundations and gain a better understanding of how people’s social location with regard to gender or race influences their thinking and behavior.”

Young makes a very good point when he suggests we often attribute social differences to people on an individual level, when in fact each individual is influenced by many components of society. By majoring in one of the fields of sociology, you will likely find yourself more prepared to perceive differences between people you meet and more able to deal with them.

Understanding why humans are the way they are, and why society is the way it is, will enable you to consider another important question: Is it working? Is the society in which you live operating in a way you find to be working? If so, why is it working? If not, what could be done to improve it?

Despite the fact the social sciences field has proven to be a very real and complex area of study, funding for social science research continues to be cut at the national level. In February, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, R-Va., called for cutting National Science Foundation funding for social science. In addition, in early April Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., amended a federal spending law that removed National Science Foundation funding for political science research, except in studies deemed important for national security. According to USA Today, Coburn said the restriction would better focus scarce basic research dollars on “important scientific endeavors.”

A Harvard Business Review article by Duncan Watts, “The Importance of Studying the Obvious,” helps to explain why funding has been cut and questions whether this is the right move. Many people who control NSF funding feel most research projects in the social sciences have little value to society. This is sometimes true. However, many projects in other areas of science are just as irrelevant as far as providing immediate, concrete value to society. So why is the social sciences field singled out?

The main reason, Watts said, is that people perceive findings from social science research as “common sense.” Research results in the sociology field apply to people, not atoms or animals, and as such people feel researchers are telling them what they already know about themselves. The process of proving these “common sense” conclusions, however, is just as arduous as proving any other scientific hypothesis. Moreover, Watts said when findings from studies do not support our intuition, the tendency is to dismiss them rather than be surprised or impressed. This is partly why funding is often cut for social science research.

Though some findings in social science research may seem like common sense, they can actually have important implications in our changing society. Examples are companies like Facebook, Microsoft and Google, who are hiring more and more researchers to ask questions about how their companies relate to society and to merge social science with computer science. More examples of this field’s usefulness can be found in virtually all areas of politics and international relations, including issues of economic development, social inequalities and ethical standards.

These examples support the idea that gaining knowledge of the social sciences is indeed useful. We should seriously question whether funding should be cut for it, and if the reasons given for cutting the funding are valid. While a degree in the social sciences may not seem like the most useful or profitable choice on the outset, it is important to consider how this field of study may contribute to society in new and meaningful ways.

Julia Wagner (jgwagner@wisc.edu) is a senior majoring in English literature.

In fact, Bielema was actually banned from several local bars for being such a sloppopotamus.

Thank God he left, and good riddance. Former University of Wisconsin Chancellor Biddy Martin had better luck proposing her New Badger Partnership than Bielema had coaching big games. They would probably both be insulted by this comparison, but who cares — they are both gone. We were honestly surprised that the Wisconsin Athletic Department did not have to start a fundraiser because Bielema was eating the department out of house and home. I mean, three racks of ribs, coach? And all the bacon?

Bielema’s Rose Bowl career was like a dog shitting outside — it does its business but doesn’t know what to do afterwards. When he got to the Rose Bowl, he seemed more interested in looking for his next source of poon than actually winning the game.

I mean, how the fuck do you use a timeout? Does anyone know? Do you make a "T" symbol? Like a steak? When are the best times to use it coach? This is not YMCA football coach; this is the Rose Bowl!

So, imagine our surprise when this ineffective being with the IQ of a common ground squirrel (approximately 13.7) decided to leave Wisconsin for a school whose mascot is a pig. Sure, he was raised on a pig farm in a town where the sows outnumbered the people, but did that mean that it was time to go "pig sooie"?

Bielema told his Wisconsin players after the announcement it was the best opportunity for him. But we think that Bret just sucked.

Running away doesn’t solve everything. Choosing to take the money and run, rather than creating your own legacy at a major BCS school like current Athletic Director Barry Alvarez did, shows weakness. Who cares if Arkansas can pay your assistant coaches more? Maybe win one of those two Rose Bowl and the donors might find a way to give your program a little boost.

But thanks for running away from your problems, Bret. Sometimes, a breakup with a real “pig” is for the better.

Have you met our friend Gary?

This is a convenient way for technocrats in Bascom Hall to explain to their counterparts down State Street what exactly UW does. Many legislators and policymakers understandably fail to acknowledge UW’s significance beyond an economic lens to take home to their constituents, and the university becomes just another item in the state’s biennial budget. The administration receives enough funding to keep that economic incubator running every two years, and the process continues every odd-numbered year.

Yes, UW is an economic incubator, and yes, Madison would likely be nothing but a gasoline-and-motel stop on Interstate 90/39 without the strip of academia between Park Street and Highland Avenue. But more important than the economics and the systematic churning out of a new workforce is an almost indescribable quality of humanity that emerges from an experience at Wisconsin.

In the last four years, that’s one of the crucial lessons I’ve learned about this university: It educates more with humanity and humility than with the brand of cynicism that dictates education’s only value lays in its economic output. And in spite of a legislative assault on higher education’s humanity throughout the country, UW will continue to be a human institution for coming time.

So I’ll say, at the risk of sounding presumptuous, that UW has made me a better person in addition to giving me marketable skills.

I came here in 2009 from a typical exurban household and since arriving have learned two new languages, fulfilled the dream of exploring a distant nation and learned the virtues of good writing. The promise of living in a larger city like Washington, D.C. or Chicago drew me to a mid-sized place like Madison, where I could put on some urban training wheels before moving to a larger city.

Now I’m leaving Madison for one of those larger cities, happiest that this was a place where -- after experiencing death, divorce and financial ruin within my own family -- I was finally able to develop a kinship with those who I now love as part of my own adopted family. 

That kinship would not have been possible without The Badger Herald, the experience that I will remember as the centerpiece of my experience in Madison. The Herald taught me things not learned in classrooms: the confidence (or arrogance) necessary to prove the strength of your convictions, the humility to know when you have reported incorrectly or wronged someone and the skepticism that defines every successful journalist.

I often carry out a thought experiment in which I never walked into the Herald’s offices and thus never became a journalism student. In an ideal world, my GPA would have been several-tenths higher, my life would be quieter and my appreciation for other parts of student life here would have increased. I’d probably be about 20 pounds lighter, too.

Every time I reach the same conclusion: Because of the Herald and the goodness I’ve seen in the people I work with and have grown to love for the last four years, I love UW. 

My bond with the people who also love the Herald kept me motivated to stay and learn to love the archetypal late nights at the office. This newspaper is a living example of that human quality of UW that technocrats ignore, and like the university, it will continue to hold that example regardless of format. The Herald is consistently steadfast with its commitment to independence from the university’s administration, but it will continue to succeed because of a love for the UW community that cannot be ignored or imitated. 

The staff that has worked with me this year has taught me lessons about journalism, resilience and loyalty in ways I never could have expected. My successor, Katherine Krueger, is not only one of my closest friends but also one of the most capable student journalists I have met at UW. Her tenure will surely be highly successful as the Herald becomes one of the first student media outlets to transition into a new climate for student journalists, and the team she has assembled for the task, led by incoming managing editor Katie Caron, will likely accomplish more in one semester than previous Herald staffs have accomplished in years.

At some point in the next two weeks, I will become one of those thousands of graduates of UW held up as someone with a job — another success for UW’s economic viability. The Herald will drift slowly down my resume as my life continues, and my diploma will collect dust on a bookshelf.

Both institutions, however, have left an unerasable imprint on my conscience that will remain a permanent part of my identity.

From what I can tell, most UW alumni relive their time in Madison through their lifetime Union membership, an annual drunken visit to the Memorial Union Terrace during the summer and a stroll down State Street. I plan to remember my time here that way, too. But I’ll never forget to stop into the Herald’s office and have a chat with the editors of this incomparable student paper.

The Herald will always help bring the UW’s unique human quality to Madison, and UW will always leave that permanent imprint on the lives of the hundreds of thousands of students who pass through in the decades or centuries to come. Being one of those students has been the privilege of my life.

Ryan Rainey (rainey.ryan09@gmail.com) is a senior majoring in journalism and Latin American studies. He’ll be moving to Washington, D.C. this summer to intern for The Huffington Post’s politics section. He’d like to thank his family—Garry Rainey, Christy Rainey, Rylie Rainey, Patricia Post and Bob Reynolds—along with Laura Checovich, Brian Phelps and Katherine Krueger, for the last four years. 

It’s been an interesting past three years, and I definitely enjoyed most of it. To all the real Badgers out there who had my back on all Mifflin-related issues, you guys are swell. To the rest of you, thanks for the page views.

Never change, Madison. Keep partying, learn something and if it won’t kill you, pick up the Herald every once in a while. This is one of the best places to go to school, and I loved every minute of it. The Herald was a big part of that for me, being the organization I spent by far the most time with in my time here. I met some great people, wrote a couple cool things and got insulted in roughly every way possible. Again, thanks for the page views.

It has been an entertaining ride to say the least. When I started I certainly didn’t think that I would be made fun of by the Wall Street Journal or flashed at a bar as thanks for my Mifflin article. But it happened. Seriously. I saw her boobs.

Anyway, love me, hate me or be completely indifferent, I hope you gained some enjoyment out of my work. I did my best, and now I have to leave you all for the world beyond the lecture hall. As long as there is beer, I should be good. Cheers, Madison.

John Waters (jkwaters4@wisc.edu) is a senior majoring in journalism. 

Because Gov. Scott Walker’s 2011 budget cuts resulted in a sharp decline in state appropriations for the University of Wisconsin System, the stakes were high as lawmakers began this year’s budgeting process. Believe it or not, the System appeared to be ahead in the game, and all signs pointed to a significant increase in state funding for UW schools – all system administrators needed to do was play heads up defense, and, you know, not fuck anything up.

You might say it was the bottom of the ninth inning, and the UW System was taking the field with a precarious two run lead.

That is, of course, until UW System President Kevin Reilly dropped the ball. Lawmakers uncovered a revenue appropriations balance of more than $600 million about which System administrators had been less than forthcoming. All of the sudden, state politicians were calling for a revision of the budget to cut funding for UW schools.

Then there’s a ground ball hit to Reilly and … well, shit. For system administrators, this should have been a routine play – after all, they simply needed to be up front with finances. It was their lack of transparency that lawmakers capitalized on for political gain.

Reilly’s flub didn’t end there – his response to irate lawmakers was, on the whole, clumsy. Republican legislators were reaming out the UW System, and rather than focusing on the financial necessity of the revenue balance and defending the System’s administrative decision making, he spent too much time apologizing. If it wasn’t clear that Republican lawmakers came out on top before Reilly made an appearance at the Capitol, it certainly was after his rather acquiescent question and answer session.

Now, as Walker talks about diverting funding from UW to K-12 schools and tax cuts, it is obvious that Reilly’s defensive error blew a late-inning lead. It also earned him this year’s Badger Herald Editorial Board Bill Buckner Award for Faulty Infielding.

The Herald is remarkably different than any other student newspaper in the country. I could point to the Herald’s complete independence from the university, the production schedule it runs on or the environment it thrives in pitted up against another student paper on campus each day.

Yet, what I keep coming back to when I try to explain the meaning the Herald holds for me and why it is so different than anything else I could have done with my college tenure is the dedication Heralders demonstrate day in and day out. It is remarkable.

This dedication has, from time to time, broken each one of us in one way or another, myself included. I have seen my fellow comrades give literal meaning to the adage of pouring blood, sweat and tears into a product.

Whether the circumstances have called for making a newspaper sans Internet at three in the morning, starving yourself for an entire day in order to reserve your spot in committee hearings in the midst of the collective bargaining protests or hiding your mono diagnosis so that the show can go on, the Herald’s editorial team has truly proven itself to be one of a kind.

The Herald takes a lot from its staffers — academics, sleep and sanity are just a few of the frequenters on the “reasons why you shouldn’t do this to yourself” list. Yet the return it provides is something so unique, so special and so empowering that even my parents now recognize the trade-off is well worthwhile.

When I started out as a baby Heralder — an overly eager freshman who made the trek up the still breathtaking Herald stairs (no really, breath-taking) before the first day of my first year of college had even begun — I was what some would call a know-it-all.

What I failed to realize, though, was that the Herald would continue to teach me lessons about journalism, life and tough luck each day for the next three years. I’d like to think I’ve grown quite a bit as a person and a journalist since that first day.

Sure, the Herald has instilled in me a level of confidence and knowledge that sometimes allows me to mirror that know-it-all freshman, but at least now I know — well, most of the time, anyways — the appropriate level of arrogance necessary to succeed.

The Herald has given me the chance to see the city I now view as my own through a lens that would otherwise have been severely out of focus. I have gained invaluable relationships with sources who have taught me more about Madison than I ever dreamt was possible. While Memorial Union Terrace chairs and Saturday mornings at the Dane County Farmers' Market will always hold a special place in my heart, I’ve learned to expand my appreciation of what a University of Wisconsin degree can mean and the significance of the city around me. Some of these sources have impacted my life in ways they might not ever realize, and for that I will forever be grateful.

Our readership has also taught me lessons that I will never forget, whether I wanted to learn them or not. Having spent four semesters on the news team, I’ve felt the shame of getting it wrong, marring a name or being scooped on the story. As an opinion columnist, I’ve realized the world exists outside my bubble and my opinion is not always right or popular, but it is my own.

And most importantly, I’ve gained more than I ever imagined from the Herald itself and the staffers who give their all to make the Herald their own. I’m not one of those overly sentimental people who deem everyone their best friend or remember every event in shining lights. Optimism has never really been my thing. But the only way I can describe these people -- who I have worked and grown with, disagreed with or consistently missed the 2 a.m. deadline with -- is my Herald family.

It’s truly been a blast, and I couldn’t have asked for a better or more inspired team of gentle clowns to run with. And because the Herald never really lets you out of its grip – no matter how hard you try – I know that this column might be goodbye to my writing days, but my love for the Herald will always ring true.

Pamela Selman (pselman@badgerherald.com) is currently the editor-at-large and chair of the board of directors. She will be graduating with a double major in political science and strategic communications. She will be moving to Chicago in July to join the corporate communications team at Edelman.

These are quickly becoming the maxims evoked to scare any freshman thinking about pursuing journalism back to the job security of the business school’s hallowed halls.

But instead of clinging to our daily print edition and our conceptions of what an old school, conventional student newspaper should be, The Badger Herald’s staff made a bold choice: to focus on covering the news that matters to students 24-hours a day while crafting a new print identity for our Monday and Thursday editions. This means you’ll be able to track major stories online as they develop, rather than waiting to see the headline on anyone’s front page the next morning.

Daily print editions of a newspaper, student or otherwise, are not how students (myself included) get their news. As a fully student-run news organization, it no longer makes sense to pour resources into a product that doesn’t serve the needs of our readers. 

As with any major change to an established organization, our announcement of a new publication model has been met with everything from cynicism to punditry — all of which are far easier than trying new solutions to old problems. Innovation is difficult. But as I prepare to take on the role of Editor-in-Chief, I couldn’t be more excited to take the lead in rebuilding the Herald from the ground up. 

The Herald was founded on being edgy, forward-thinking and oppositional — traits you only get from a fully independent student paper. As we create a new media organization that’s focused on digital-first storytelling and interactive content, we’ll also be reconnecting with our roots. The Herald has always been a student experiment, and this is the next chapter.

I am humbled and honored to have the chance to lead such a talented and innovative group of student journalists. I also should thank and praise my close friend and mentor, outgoing Editor-in-Chief Ryan Rainey, for his incredible work this past year. Ryan has navigated rough waters with strength, poise and humor — achieving the incredibly difficult task of ruling with an iron first while wearing a velvet glove. He will be missed, but his drive for pursuing what’s next at the Herald will not be forgotten. I also want to thank my friend and Herald confidant Pam Selman, this year's Editor-at-Large, for being understanding, insightful and one of the toughest ladies I've ever met. It's hard to believe it's been three years since we bonded over the life of an associate.

So next fall, if you’re a writer, a photographer, a designer, a hacker or simply interested in being a part of building an entirely new kind of college media organization, I encourage you to join us.

Big things are happening at the Herald — I’m just excited to be a part of what’s next.

Katherine Krueger (kkrueger@badgerherald.com) is a junior majoring in journalism and political science. 

We had a great group of writers this semester, each with his or her own area of expertise. This is part of what we believe makes our page great — it’s not just a place for political science majors to talk about politics. Among our columnists, we have economics, Scandinavian studies, sociology, math, physics, journalism, history, psychology and yes, political science majors, as well as a law student thrown in for good measure. We have done our best this semester to foster an inclusive environment with a variety of opinions. 

Of course, the editorial page is much more than a place for our writers to hold forth — it’s a place to have community-wide discussions. Thanks to letters to the editor from readers like you, we’ve been able to represent the views of a great variety of people and groups. 

If you’ve enjoyed reading the editorial page this semester, you might consider writing opinion columns next year. If you didn’t enjoy everything on the page,or even if you found a column infuriating, we encourage you to send us a letter sometime. At its core, this page is a medium for conversation, and we want you to be part of it. 

Although we’ll be heading our separate ways for summer vacation, here at the Opinion Desk we’re already thinking about next fall — we'll both be here again next semester. The Herald will be prioritizing online content, and the editorial page will be no exception. 

We look forward to the opportunity to experiment with a more immediate and interactive form of content – we’ll be putting more emphasis on shorter pieces that will be posted much quicker relative to the event they’re discussing. We also want to find new ways of engaging with our readership, whether that be through Twitter or our existing comment section. 

However, none of this means that the editorial page as we know it is going away. We’ll still be publishing full-length columns in print twice a week. We also want to take advantage of this newfound freedom from print constraints by producing more long-form, in-depth pieces. 

Regardless of the changes that take place here, the editorial page will remain, at its heart, what it has always been — a forum for fostering ideas. 

If you have any suggestions for ways to improve the page, or are interested in getting involved, please email us at heraldoped@gmail.com.

Charles Godfrey (cgodfrey@badgerherald.com) and Joe Timmerman (jtimmerman@badgerherald.com) are the editorial page editors.

After months of rallying, making posters and sending out campus emails calling for non-existent pizza parties, a mighty crowd of 12 SLAC members descended on Ward’s office. The sit-in also coincided with the publication of a report from the federal National Labor Relations board ruling Palermo’s did not violate labor laws when the company fired 75 employees following an immigration audit — further emphasizing the futility of the event.

Because SLAC has built a reputation on fighting the good ol’ leftist fight for ages, its latest antics were far from surprising (as was Ward’s continuing refusal to cut the contract).

But if this board had to select one figurehead to accept the Attention Whore Award on SLAC’s behalf, University of Wisconsin’s own hapless jailbird Maxwell Love would be first in line. Love was so set on making an example of himself at the protest that he actually asked to be arrested and was subsequently loaded into a police van after the rest of the student protesters had joined the group’s planned rally on Bascom Hill.

Love is no campus hero for dragging the group’s main cause — justice for the fired Palermo’s workers — even further from the minds of moderate thinkers on campus. Certainly, students exist who might otherwise have been motivated to take up the call for labor rights (particularly in a city as hospitable to organized labor as Madison). Unfortunately, SLAC’s psycho-liberal approach to the issue was exceedingly ineffective in terms of galvanizing mainstream support.

SLAC’s protest failed in bringing any substantive change for Palermo’s workers. However, it succeeded in what was apparently the protester’s main goal: bringing attention to themselves.

Last week I suggested you spend short periods of your summer blogging about what you’re teaching yourself. I asked you to share the stories you create while on your summer adventures, or at least to let others know about the mistakes you make so they don’t make the same mistakes themselves.

I noticed a problem with my appeal for action. Many people don’t know where to begin this summer, or where to find topics to write about. For most people, the plan is to work, relax and drink all summer.

However, I have come to discover that there are students on campus who think there is no one else with the same mindset as them, that there is no one else coming up with cool ideas, no one else who actually wants to get together to make them happen! Ideas like drafting a business plan for your one-of-a-kind business or putting together your own type of TED talk, or anything that involves your passion, whether it is folk music, art or Twitter.

The First Invitation

Roughly two weeks ago, I posted a Facebook status on the University of Wisconsin’s 2013 Spring Transfer Group expressing my interest in working on a few summer projects. I wrote, “I’m looking to collaborate with a few designers/artists/web designers for some weird, memorable projects over the summer. We’re going to work on something remarkable and that represents, what I call, humanitarian energy.”

Less than a week later, I received the following response from a junior majoring in philosophy, Reed Kinning.

“I’ve always wanted to do a big project (of the scope that I believe you’re talking about) but I haven’t met someone with the same enthusiasm,” he replied.

This article — more or less — is for all those who haven’t met someone with the same enthusiasm. I’m writing this article to tell you that we’re here and we want you to join us.

A Group Project

As it is summer and all, it seems applicable to quote Ben & Jerry's Ice Cream, “A dream alone is only a dream. A dream together is a reality.” And this dream is where ideas are happening.

This will be a group like no other; where there is no misunderstanding or lack of interest because you are going to get to do exactly what you are passionate about, what you have dreamt about, what you wish you had other people to help you complete.

And, unlike in class, it’s quite difficult to dislike people who think like you do. So, in one sense, were breaking the stigma surrounding “group project.”

Make a Difference Or Make a Revolution

While Make a Difference Day makes an impact and gets organizations, clubs and a variety of people together to, well, make a difference — it’s only one day. Perhaps it is only me, but even the title seems to imply the results of the event are quickly forgotten once the day is over. I think one day of national good is a bit satirical.

On the other hand, making a positive ruckus by creating content and manifesting ideas produces a substantially larger impact — one might even say an immortal impact. Especially when you make one passionate event after the other, all the while connecting and sharing the events, results and personal experiences of those affected. This is the goal of our team.

This is a summer to make ideas happen. Actually, it’s a revolution. An idol of mine, bestselling writer and marketer Seth Godin, wrote on his Blog, “A friend asked me the other day, ‘… given the sorry state of so much in the world, what’s possible to look forward to?’”

Seth responded, “The state isn’t sorry. It’s wide open. Interest rates are super low, violence is close to an all-time low, industries are being remade and there’s more leverage for the insurgent outsider than ever before in history. The status quo is taking a beating, there’s no question about it. That’s what makes it a revolution.”

And the best part is that we are the leaders of it.

If you are interested in being part of the team and you want to make your ideas happen, email me.

Garth Beyer (gbeyer@wisc.edu) is a junior majoring in journalism.

If passed, this bill would make it legal for bars to sue underage drinkers for up to $1,000. And you would think there are more important things to take care of in court than slapping an 18-year-old with a $1,000 fine.

First off, a significant portion of the revenue of certain bars on campus comes from underage drinkers. I’m sure any University of Wisconsin student could tell you a couple bars off the top of their heads where you could get your visiting high school siblings in easily. If the bill passes and it actually succeeds at keeping underage drinkers from going to bars, then these bars will likely go out of business.

It is also true that bars can go out of business from getting caught for knowingly letting in underage patrons — but if other bars are doing it, how will they stay in business anyway?

The main goal of this bill being passed seems to be to subdue Wisconsin’s drinking culture. I can say pretty confidently that this will not be achieved.

This is because the same people who would have gone to these bars will likely just attend house parties, where drinking and other shenanigans will occur. Not to mention it gets cold as balls in the winter, so it’s always nice to have an extra jacket, even if it is made out of beer.

Basically, trying to pass this bill is a waste of time when the state assembly can be working toward other goals that have bigger implications — like dealing with the issue of gun control or the economy.

To go for the power play, state legislators could solve this whole issue by lowering the legal drinking age to 18 years old. I know people say this all the time, but I’ll say it too because it makes sense — if you can go off to war and get shot fighting for your country then you should be able to have a drink. Also, if people were able to freely drink in bars and designated areas at 18 years old, they probably would not be as prone to binge drinking on the weekends.

Although I will hopefully be 21 years old by the time this law gets passed, I think that the Assembly should rethink the bill. It could put local bars out of business and it definitely will not get rid of Wisconsin’s drinking culture, which firmly stands in the glass boots of Germany. Let’s go back to the basics, change the drinking age to 18 and slow the roll of binge drinking. Let’s do it for the kids … the 18-year-old kids.

Hayes Cascia (hcascia@wisc.edu) is a sophomore with an undeclared major. 

One thing his budget does not include is federal money for Medicaid expansion. Because Walker attempted to radically restructure the state budget with his budget repair bill of 2010, which stripped unions of collective bargaining rights and cut public employment, Wisconsin finds itself in need of major budget changes.

The sorry state of Wisconsin’s budget is the result of mixed up priorities that need to be re-evaluated. This state’s social safety net is disturbingly weak, and yet Walker has cut more than $1 billion in tax revenue throughout the course of his term. We spend too much money incarcerating people and not enough educating them.

In order to set these priorities straight, the state should cut spending on corrections, increase spending on education, accept the money for BadgerCare expansion and restructure its broken welfare system. In order to fix many of the flaws in our system, we should focus on increasing tax revenue.

Wisconsin should get serious about reducing its prison population. According to Justice Strategies, in 2011 an average of 23,000 people were incarcerated on any given day — on average, 2,900 of these prisoners were incarcerated for nonviolent drug-related offenses. Wisconsin leads the nation in racial disparity of drug incarceration rates. In Wisconsin, black people are 42 times more likely to be incarcerated for drug offenses than white people, reports Human Rights Watch.

Drug offenses are far less detrimental to society than violent crime, and treating drug addicts like felons is counterproductive — we should stop incarcerating drug offenders. Money spent on correctional facilities could be spent much more efficiently if it were directed at preventing crime rather than dealing with people who commit crimes.

The state should work toward reducing the college tuition by investing in the University of Wisconsin System. In-state tuition has more than doubled over the past decade. Student debt will hurt the economy — this is a problem almost all states face due to cuts to higher education throughout the 2000s. Wisconsin should lead the nation by attempting to cut tuition in half as a percentage of gross state product per capita.

Walker’s decision to not accept the federal money laid out in the Affordable Care Act to strengthen BaderCare is particularly troublesome. Rather than expanding BadgerCare coverage Walker plans on tightening enrollment requirements. This is unacceptable. The state should be focused on expanding coverage to all, not kicking people off Medicaid to advance an ideological message. The state needs the federal money, and Walker’s decision to withhold that money is irresponsible.

Finally, we should focus on improving welfare in the state. Welfare to work is bad policy — it forces people on welfare without jobs to work for the state for 35 hours a week, and for less than minimum wage. While 11 percent of Wisconsinites falls under the poverty line, less than 1 percent receives welfare, according to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Even in volatile economic times, the welfare system is hardly a safety net for anyone. We should try to offer help to those who need it, and restructuring welfare could benefit a great deal of people in serious need.

While the restructuring we need does involve cuts to corrections, on the whole we would need to generate revenue. Walker’s tax cuts could be rolled back to generate revenues, and some taxes in the state could also be raised. The state sales tax is a low 5 percent, and we could responsibly raise it to strengthen the state’s social services. Because sales tax is regressive, any increase in the sales tax should be paired with a revenue neutral income tax adjustment to assure that the poor are not made poorer.

Our state’s budget priorities are severely misplaced — we should be focused on strengthening programs that help our state. Walker’s misplaced faith in tax cuts will only hurt the state, and his philosophy of small government is disastrous for those who need its assistance.

Spencer Lindsay (sclindsay@wisc.edu) is a sophomore majoring in political science.

As hard as it may be to believe, it actually looked like relations between the University of Wisconsin and the state government were on the mend. Acting Secretary of Commerce Rebecca Blank had just been chosen as UW’s next chancellor — a selection that was praised by, of all people, our very own Gov. Scott Walker. While not all Republicans were on board with the selection, one should not put too much stake in the opinions of folks with as weak a grasp on basic facts as Sen. Glen Grothman, R-West Bend.

However, since then, state-university relations have taken a turn for the worse, with state officials “discovering” a surplus of more than $600 million in the UW System.

Much has already been said about this surplus, including an editorial by this newspaper that summarizes my thoughts on the issue quite nicely.

To put it succinctly, the so-called “slush fund,” which is obviously not actually a slush fund, is on par with what other schools in the Big Ten keep on hand. The only real mistake the UW System made was that it lacked transparency with regards to the revenue balance and handled the ensuing public relations situation very poorly. Had System officials stayed in front of this story, this would be a nonissue, and activists on both sides of the aisle wouldn’t even know this was something they could be bitching about.

However, the time for mending the public relations situation has come and gone, so we’re left doing damage control — and there is plenty to be done.

On Monday, Walker announced his plans to divert some of the $181 million originally intended for the state’s higher education system to K-12 education. He also proposed tax cuts in response to the UW System cash reserve. However, Walker declined to specify what proportion of the UW cuts would go to public education, and what proportion would go to increasing his tax cut.

This is a wise political move. After all, no one wants to come out against increasing funding for K-12 public education. Think of the kids! By not specifying how much of the cut will go where, Walker guaranteed himself relatively favorable coverage (and muted criticism) of the announcement. Even if most of the money goes toward a tax cut — which, while purely speculative on my part, seems likely, the story will likely have died by the time he makes an announcement.

If I’m wrong and a significant portion of the cuts do in fact go to K-12 education rather than tax cuts, and if Walker truly believes that taking UW funding and giving it to K-12 education is the right thing to do, then it will be hard to argue against him. While UW could certainly use the money, so could the rest of the public education system. It’s difficult to push for more UW funding at the expense of young students without reverting to simple selfish arguments. I certainly don’t want my tuition to go up more than it has to, but I also don’t want to keep my tuition low at the expense of a younger generation.

However, if my hunch is correct, and this is just a political ploy by Walker to punish those pesky liberals pursuing a college degree, then it is truly reprehensible. I’ve already written about Walker’s tax cut (hint: it sucks), so I won’t go into much detail about it here. Simply put, the state would benefit far more from funding higher education than giving out a fairly small tax cut.

Education is too important to the future of the state for Walker to be playing politics with it. Unfortunately, it looks like that is precisely what’s happening. I sincerely hope state Republicans and system officials can come to a mutual understanding that will benefit everyone. It would be a shame for a new chancellor to be welcomed in the midst such hostile relations between the state and UW.

Joe Timmerman (jtimmerman@badgerherald.com) is a sophomore majoring in economics and math with a certificate in computer science.

The Official De Re Seal Of Approval Running List Of Life Lessons

Purpose: Avoiding Jams

Life Lesson #1: Always Carry Cash

Life Lesson #2: Never Let Anyone Drive Your Car

Life Lesson #3: Always Know Your Options

Life Lesson #4: Always Be Aware Of Your Surroundings

Life Lesson #5: Keep The Honest People Honest

Life Lesson #6: Always Present A Firm Handshake

Life Lesson #7: Know Your Role

Life Lesson #8: Do What You Do, But Don’t Make It Obvious

Life Lesson #9: Don’t Bite The Hand That Feeds

Life Lesson #10: Pay Attention

Life Lesson #11: Avoid Dead Weight

Life Lesson #12: Always Carry Your Sharpest Tools

Life Lesson #13: Keep Your Eyes Down The Road

Life Lesson #14: Measure Twice, Cut Once

Life Lesson #15: Never Pay For Your Own Business Cards

Life Lesson #16: Dress For The Weather, Not For The Season

Life Lesson #17: Ingratiate Appropriately

Life Lesson #18: Only Date Excellence

Life Lesson #19: Don’t Fly Too Close To The Sun

Life Lesson #20: Master The Fundamentals

Note from the author, Matthew De Re: I hope these Life Lessons will help guide you through life and ensure you will never end up in the jams in which I was once found. So much blood, sweat and tears went into the creation of this list. I struggled so you don’t have to. Use these lessons and use them well. I wish you all the best of luck and On Wisconsin! 

All material subsumed under the title “The Official ‘De Re Seal Of Approval’ Running List Of Life Lessons” (the “Life Lessons”) is a copyrighted work of Matthew De Re and may not be reproduced in any from without express written consent of the author. The Life Lessons are a collection of facts, public domain maxims and life experiences that have been originally compiled, created and fixated in this digital and other physical media. Any inquiries into the nature of this list and its creation, originality or fixation may be directed to Matthew De Re himself and no others.

Matthew De Re (dere@wustl.wisc.edu) graduated from the University of Wisconsin in 2011 and is now studying law at Washington University in St. Louis.

We were all moved by the testimony of these factory workers, who shared that they are often forced to work seven days a week, sometimes for months on end. If a worker takes off more than three days in a six-month period, they may be automatically fired.

One worker testified that she was working long hours without any break until three days before she gave birth to her youngest son. Claudia said she was expected to staff multiple stations across the slick factory floor, meaning that she might slip while pregnant. When she took issue with the conditions of her work, she was told that if she couldn’t manage these tasks, she would be replaced.

These and other abuses, cataloged by the university’s own labor and licensing committee, blatantly violate the University of Wisconsin Labor Code of Conduct. The committee said Palermo’s must rehire all of the workers fired when on strike, enforce safety conditions and regular work hours and recognize the Palermo’s Worker’s Union in order to comply with the university’s code of conduct.

The National Labor Relations Board report to which Ward referred in his e-statement on Monday only upheld one of these conditions. The NLRB is a historically conservative body that was taken to international court in 2007 for not upholding workers’ established federal right to freedom of association. We believe it is the chancellor’s job to enforce all of the codes of conduct that govern our relationships with businesses, not just the convenient ones.

Ward and the university administration stood up for workers in Indonesia who were being mistreated in order to make more Bucky apparel. Why won’t he stand up for workers here at home who make Bucky’s official pizza?

The new chancellor provides a blank slate. We hope that we have been able to clarify the facts and put them into context for those who have not been following the issue since the Palermo’s workers went on strike more than a year ago. We were happy to see that this newspaper came out in an editorial to support rehiring workers, improving conditions and recognizing a legitimate union. We hope the new chancellor follows that lead.

Dena Ohlinger is a member of the Working Class Student Union. Niko Magallon is a member of the Multicultural Student Coalition. Nurys Uceta is a member of Movimiento Estudiantil Chicano de Aztlán.

Sadly, I wish graded participation would have disappeared as a whole when I arrived here, as I consider it to be a childish and ineffective measure of a student’s abilities. It is impossible for anyone to effectively grade a person’s participation accurately because it is an ambiguous action that can be judged and forgotten in numerous ways. The only way to effectively grade participation would be to go around in a circle, ask each person to say a statement and then give a check mark once the statement, regardless of whether it is nonsense, is uttered.

The participation requirement, which seems to be a staple of this university, has several problems. Now, I completely understand participation is used to get students to attend class and speak, especially in discussions. However, if you’re not motivated by the fact that you’re dropping more than $5,000 every semester to get your ass out of bed to go to a lecture or discussion and say one thing relevant to your future, I fail to see why the 10 percent participation requirement of your grade would motivate you. If you feel as though you are so smart you can get by at this school without participating or attending classes, you should be allowed to skip so you can use your talents in other areas. However, if pure laziness seems to plague you, and you fail to be able to show up and try and then fail your class, your grade should reflect it. By requiring students to show up and participate, the participation requirement masks who the student fundamentally is as a person. Are students going to be employees who come to work because what they do its intrinsically important to them or are they just going to show up because they have to?

The second aspect of the participation requirement that makes my blood boil is that no one can judge participation consistently and accurately. Now, I have had my participation judged in many ways, and I will describe this in several levels — you may call this the evolution of participation if you wish. At the most basic level, several TAs and professors judge your participation simply by the fact they want you to show up to class, and grading on participation is an incentive to do so. This is probably the most effective way to judge participation because in this manner, participation is quantitative, and just about anyone at this university can count to 16, 32 or 48 if need be.

What becomes more complicated is the way participation is traditionally judged, which is by the number of times a student says something. The problem with this manner of judgment is that some things certain students say are simply more memorable than others. Sadly, I feel this rarely refers to the relevant and intelligent comments — any relevant and intelligent conversation becomes lost in a sea of unintelligible, incoherent questions and statements from people who have not even opened their books. Why should someone be rewarded for asking for information that they can easily get from reading the material required for the class? I once had a student in my class ask if a woman raped in a fraternity with a high likelihood of rape was “asking for it.” Is this really what we should reward as participation?

Lastly, several courses have adopted the practice of only rewarding students participation points for contributing intelligent and relevant discussion. However, this begs the question of what intelligent and relevant discussion actually is. It’s impossible to know what actually qualifies as intelligent and relevant as it is an objective quality that changes from person to person. Besides, all that happens when this requirement is enacted is that students polish the same incoherent and unintelligible thinking from the previous paragraph. Participation can literally be referred to as the golden turd of final grades.

Participation is a measurement that is beneath the University of Wisconsin. We are made up of the students who are committed to their education. By requiring participation, we undermine them and this university.

Jared Mehre (mehre@wisc.edu) is a sophomore majoring in political science, sociology and legal studies.