Yeah, I heard about Barack’s interview, but that’s not the issue here. No, it’s not Walker either. Just listen!

Badger Herald, … I’m leaving you. … It’s over.

Don’t get me wrong; Things have been great for the last three years. We’ve been through a lot together: murder, tea party rallies, explorations of the nuances of tax incremental financing, and that was only the first year. Since then you’ve stood by me while nameless neckbeards and mouthbreathers have hurled insults at me online and backed me up whenever I managed to string together enough marginally-logical sentences to form a column. For that, I thank you.

But I need to go now, to spread my journalistic wings and finally get paid reasonably to do what I do. It may sound cliché, but it’s not you; it’s my overblown sense of self-worth and need for health insurance.

It’s hard for me to say this, but we both need to move on.

We’ve experienced the best and the worst in each other. From your commitment to open discourse and diligence in the dissemination of relevant campus journalism to my penchants for peach schnapps and bad puns, I’ve accepted that we’ve had our differences.

You weren’t like the others, though, you have to understand. The journalism school? How could I ever compare you to that Twitter tutorial? Who ever found inspiration on an RSS feed? Am I supposed to create a Google Alert for a soulmate, express my love through a series of smoothly-designed infographics? Never.

You’re surrounded by all these talented people with a deep love for fundamental truths and public service, whereas I’ve been known to consider string cheese a reasonable meal. You deserve better. And if not better, then at the very least someone more enthusiastic about the digitized future of the craft and the death of print journalism.

This isn’t to say we can’t still be close, though. We can bond over our mutual dislike for a certain student organization masquerading as an independent newspaper. And when you face said “newspaper” on the football field, the softball diamond or the newsstand, remember; they put themselves through that embarrassment without compensation.

Maybe someday, years from now, I’ll open up a Google Doc and wonder if you’re looking at the same one.

So goodbye, Badger Herald; may your ledes be descriptive and your headlines ever-concise. And should we ever cross paths again, remember me not for my consistently missed deadlines, but rather my biting commentary entirely reliant on puns.

It’s been real, Badger Herald, and you’ll always be close to my heart, but it’s time we offend other people. I’ll not soon forget you, or my editors who so valiantly put up with my bullshit.

BH4LIFE.

Jake Begun (jbegun@badgerherald.com) is a senior majoring in history and journalism.

That’s why we’re so disappointed.

Not only has he been such a non-presence in student life, he has somehow managed to offend every shade of student leaders from the moderate right with his handling of the Multicultural Student Coalition debacle to the left, with his handling of the Adidas situation.

Maybe Ward, in trying to please everyone, pissed off everyone. But more than likely he was just trying to show up to class and not get called on. For this reason, we give the chancellor the "Uhh, Ward?" award since students either don't know him or don't like him.

In the last year the University of Wisconsin has become a crucible of racial tension that should embarrass every student and Madisonian.

The details are all too familiar by now. Last summer, some Langdon Street residents stupidly hung a black Spiderman doll on their balcony, apparently without realizing its historical implications. In September the Center for Equal Opportunity released pseudo-sociological research that angered minority students who saw it as an affront to their intellectual ability. The Multicultural Student Coalition applied for more than $1 million in funding from the Student Services Finance Committee and, when denied multiple times, unleashed a scorched-earth assault on innocent student leaders who were not party to racism.

And, in what may have been the most crushing blow to any semblance of racial tolerance at UW, a group of brothers from Delta Upsilon allegedly shouted racist and classist slurs at a group of black women cutting through their lawn.

Each moment ranged in intensity and intentionality. The mock lynching appeared to be an honest mistake, the CEO report was mostly expected and the DU incident looks to have been a full-on example of drunken racism. MCSC leadership’s tantrum was a ridiculous emotional assault on students who were painted as racists for simply following the guidelines of a Supreme Court ruling.

Fuck it all. This shit is unacceptable.

The incidents should be seen for what they are: Ugly representations of problems that are real and pressing at UW. If we really are committed to remaining a prestigious institution, avoiding a year like this one might be a good start.

And then we encountered the unrepentant dirtbags who frequently leave anonymous comments on badgerherald.com. Often racist, bigoted and disjointed, the trolls gleefully cruise through our website religiously and vomit absurdity upon absurdity on our editorial content. It’s probably worth noting these sorts of comments are generally the ugly exception to the rule, and the majority of the comments on the site are fine, posted by fellow students and our reporters’ parents.

Because we believe in the importance of free speech and the notion of the “marketplace of ideas,” The Badger Herald allows readers to post anonymous comments immediately, and it’s up to our vigilant editors to frantically “flag” comments that border on abhorrent or personally attack someone.

Unfortunately, The Badger Herald doesn’t have a policy against “stupid,” which is what a majority of the frequent anonymous commenters are, so their comments remain. These commenters are everything that is wrong with open, public discourse: They are poisonous, vacuous and anonymous. We are talking to you, RonDog and ShadrachSmith, but you are not alone in your douchebaggery.

Perhaps trolling the comment section like a subway masturbator has some therapeutic value — a trend counselors are recommending to people with high levels of stress and anger. But probably not.

The regular commenting trolls have become a sort of curious anomaly to this board. Meeting them would be interesting — preferably at a public place with lots of lights and people around. They are, after all, some of our most loyal and vocal readers, if not the most irritating.

Consider this an invitation to our frequent, nasty commenters (and you know who you are): Reveal yourselves to claim your fabulous Headliner Prize.

I am, however, leaving the opinion section, and to me, this is a really big deal. For two reasons especially: 1) This year, the section has become my everything, taken up all spare moments of my time and is usually what I’m thinking about most of the other time. 2) It’s amazing to think that the road I took to where I am now has been a little unconventional, but extremely fulfilling.

I started as an opinion writer the second semester of my freshman year. I decided to do opinion because it looked like I had less competition to be let in. I have always struggled to be an opinion writer because it’s hard for me to form a clearly-defined opinion on politics. I really do like to weigh the merits of both sides. It showed. Out of the whole fall semester, I only got four pieces published, even though I wrote every week.

I almost quit my sophomore year. Twice. I wasn’t actually even hired as opinion content editor. I applied for the position and got turned down. Then on a day that literally changed my life, about a week before school started, I got a call from an unfamiliar Minnesota area code. “This is Signe Brewster from the Badger Herald,” the voice on the other end said. “Are you still interested in the editor position? It’s suddenly opened up.”

Long story short: This year working in the opinion section has been of the most rewarding experiences I’ve ever had. What I’m really trying to say is this: Anyone can be a part of The Badger Herald, and you never know where getting involved will take you. The opinion section is a forum for all the voices of this campus, including yours. Whether you’re a Greek or a grad student, a conservative or a liberal, we want to hear what you have to say. No matter where you fall on the political spectrum or what is important to you, use the opinion page to make yourself heard. We rarely receive a piece that isn’t worth publishing.

Taylor Nye (tnye@badgerherald.com) is a junior majoring in archaeology, evolutionary biology and Latin American studies.

Before the recalls, one might have thought the public employees of the GAB had the good fortune to fade into the comfort and security of bureaucratic irrelevance, sheltered from political pressure and public scrutiny. 

Political events of the past year changed all of that. The GAB was responsible for overseeing the recall petition drive, the implementation of voter ID laws and redistricting. One might say the board spent the past year picking up the flotsam of a legislative session gone bad.

Throughout the recall process both Republicans and Democrats watched the board’s every move, ready to pounce on any mistake, real or imagined. Meanwhile, the board was stuck with the undesirable task of sorting through an avalanche of petitions, determining their validity, providing an accurate count and approving a recall election. To their credit, the GAB handled the recall process remarkably well, processing mountains of paperwork in an efficient manner and remaining transparent almost to a fault — despite privacy concerns, recall petitions were posted online for all to see.

In years to come, it might be said that the GAB got more work done in this legislative session than an embattled state Congress and an ever-defiant Gov. Scott Walker. That’s why it is the lucky winner of this year’s Thrust of Greatness Award.

When I told my family I would be attending UW as a freshman back in 2007, they all placed bets on how long it would take me to become, as my uncle calls it, a tree-hugging, tofu-farting, granola-eating liberal. While I assured them my political beliefs would not be swayed, they all shook their heads in disbelief.

Although I had originally intended to join the College Republicans as a freshman, I was drawn to The Badger Herald. The professional, high-quality journalism that forms the foundation of the paper persuaded me choose the Herald over its competitor — as well as the meager paycheck that accompanied my hard work. I started as a city reporter and eventually worked my way up to the head of the news department.

As a part of the news department, I was never able to express my personal feelings or political beliefs. This was particularly difficult when I was state editor during the 2008 presidential elections. I kept my mouth shut and pushed any opinions I had to the back of my head so I could remain unbiased in my reporting and news articles.

When I graduated from UW in 2010, I was accepted to UW Law School and saw this as an opportunity to remain with The Badger Herald while also being able to finally express my opinion. I was almost hired as opinion editor, but decided to focus on my first year of law school instead.

However, the itch to vocalize my minority, often marginalized opinions, got the better of me and I eventually accepted the position of editorial board chair for the 2011-12 academic year.

As chair of the editorial board, I was able to bring a conservative voice to the board that is not often heard at the paper. This prompted honest, intellectual debate on fundamental issues such as affirmative action, abortion and individual rights. Though I was often in the minority, I am proud to say the board was, more often than not, able to come to a middle-of-the-road consensus based on rational thinking rather than pure politics.

At the beginning of the year, I said, “This city needs to know how all its students think, not just those who think alike,” and I made sure to do that throughout the year in my bi-weekly columns. Though I was often chided by the vocal, left-leaning majority, I also received a surprising amount of positive comments, applauding — and sometimes flirting with — me because of my conservative beliefs.

My time at The Badger Herald should be a lesson to all UW students: Conservatives have a place on this campus. Whether it is writing columns for either student newspaper or supporting political candidates, students should not be afraid to vocalize their beliefs even if they are part of the minority culture on campus.

Also, those with differing beliefs can make great allies and even better friends. Although the rest of the board did not always agree with me, we were always able to come to a consensus through compromise and genuine respect for each other. I will never forget those individuals, who have shaped my life in a permanent and positive way.

I met my future husband and some of my best friends at the Herald. I now bid the paper adieu to leave room for the future liberals, conservatives and moderates who will shape the pages of this great publication for years and years to come.

Alex Brousseau (abrousseau@badgerherald.com) is a second year law student.

Over the past year, the court has caused almost as many facepalm-inspiring moments as the Associated Students of Madison, which undercut whatever little faith we had left in our public officials. The Supreme Court is supposed to be the utmost realm for citizens to seek justice and for laws to be interpreted. It is supposed to be the quintessence of behavior, not the epitome of disappointment it has been thus far.

First, Justice David Prosser called Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson a “total bitch,” and now is facing investigation for allegedly placing his hands around the neck of Justice Ann Walsh Bradley. Despite the fact that eight of the justices were present, only one has recused herself so far from the following proceedings.

Then Justice Michael Gableman refused to recuse himself from cases involving the law firm that had defended him free of charge after ethics complaints were filed against him. It seems as if Supreme Court justices are spending the same amount of time behind the bench as they are on the stand.

But at least the Supreme Court can be proud they get the Little Monsters Award because, despite the fact that they’re supposed to be an example of excellence and exemplary behavior, they instead have chosen like children going through the terrible twos.

After exhausting his list of questions, the researcher’s professional tone changed to one of amazement. After speaking to college newspaper staffs across the nation, we were the only true case of independence he had come across. We were unique.

Working at the Herald day after day, year after year, it is easy to forget that we are different. I’m not talking about the special kind of quirk our staff unfailingly exhibits or even the content we put out each day. I’m talking about that at its very core, the Herald is something different. Part of that is the perfect storm that Madison creates for college media. We’re lucky to be close to the news generators at the campus, city and state level. We’re lucky to have competition in Madison’s professional media outlets and the Daily Cardinal. We’re lucky to have a university that lets us distribute in their buildings, takes our late night calls and touts us as an important part of the fabric that is campus.

Most of all, what makes the Herald different is the principles on which we operate. In our office, there is an unassuming drawer that sits in the editor-in-chief desk. Most people don’t know it is there; I certainly didn’t until the desk was my own. If you open it, you’ll find folders upon folders of documents detailing the decisive moments in our history. There are the moments where we did something in the name of free speech, and there are the often-related moments where we clashed with campus. There are the moments where we struggled, the moments where we succeeded and the moments where we failed. Together, all of these moments make up the institution that is the Herald: an experiment on the University of Wisconsin campus that for 42 years has turned students into journalists and journalists into experimenters.

I am so proud to have called the Herald a home for the last four years, and I am so proud of the incoming staff. The spirit of experimentation is as ingrained in them as it was in our founders so long ago, and it will carry them forward to many more years of success.

Signe Brewster

Editor-in-Chief

The Badger Herald’s history as a student newspaper consistently defies conventional media wisdom. We are accustomed to shifts in the media world. Not only does our staff switch over on a semesterly basis, but we also have the unique privilege of being able to experiment with editorial and online content in a way that only exists in the dreams of regular newspaper editors.

This is one of the main reasons I am excited to take the helm as the Herald’s editor-in-chief for the 2012-2013 academic year. From the moment I became a state reporter very early in my freshman year, the Herald has been the centerpiece of my experience at the University of Wisconsin. The opportunity to lead it through one year is both humbling and exciting.

I would be remiss not to acknowledge the accomplishments of our current editor-in-chief, Signe Brewster, whose term has been characterized by mountains of positive change and a personal humility that is rare in the student journalism world. Just about every Herald employee will tell you how immensely lucky they were to have worked with Signe.

We’re sure to see some interesting stories pop up in the next year. This includes a national election which will once again bring Wisconsin to center stage in national politics, the aftermath of a recall election which could serve as the resolution of a years-long political crisis in this state and the beginning of the search for a chancellor to replace two of the University of Wisconsin’s most divisive leaders in recent memory.

As the news changes, the Herald is up for the challenge of following the most important stories and making sure the student community can get their hands on the most important information as it happens.

News as it happens

If you’re an especially dedicated Herald reader, you may have waited until midnight to check in and see the next day’s opinion columns or news stories before everyone else. By the time next semester arrives, this practice will be a thing of the past. We soon will begin to roll out a brand new and beautiful website, and content will begin to receive updates on a regular basis throughout the day.

Along with this change, also plan to see more brief, up-to-the-minute news stories on our website as information develops. Live coverage through media like live blogs and tweeting will become even more prominent next year.

Explainers

When I was a young reporter, I scratched my head for about a year before finally understanding the full extent of our student government and the university’s administration. This is sure to be a common sentiment for those who don’t call themselves part of the UW community’s political or journalistic circles.

Journalism is, more than anything else, a public service to help wide swaths of a population understand the information floating around on a daily basis. This is why readers can expect more explainer columns in our news section. These columns, which our section editors and experienced reporters will write, should allow readers to cut through the most confusing elements of politics. With them, we hope readers can develop a more complete understanding of what makes certain news stories so important to our community.

Accountability

With national trust in mass media decreasing on a regular basis, the Herald is committed to keeping readers more hopeful for the future of our newspapers’ relationship with the public. For this reason, I have decided to reinstate a weekly public editor column. I hope this change will increase transparency about the Herald’s internal practices and also keep our staff grounded. Newsrooms have the potential to be insular, disconnected places. I do not want to see the Herald stray down that path.

Jason Smathers, who served as our editor-in-chief for the 2009-2010 academic year and currently works as a Capitol reporter, will write this column. Jason is one of the most critical thinkers I have met, and his knowledge of the Herald, its history and the intricacies of journalism ethics will prove to be an important asset to our readers and our staff. He is a friend to many on the staff, but I know him well enough to say he will provide unfiltered and, if necessary, highly critical analysis of the decisions we make next year.

In addition to Jason’s column, our new website will give readers more direct contact with section editors and Herald upper management. Instead of searching through our long staff page, readers will now have the option of submitting feedback directly through our website without the cumbersome practice of copying and pasting emails.

Become part of the Herald

The daunting three flights of steps that lead to our office might seem intimidating, but the Herald is a welcoming organization always dedicated to bringing in new faces throughout the semester. In addition to working as an arts writer, opinion columnist or news/sports reporter, UW students have the opportunity to work in our multimedia department or join our award-winning design staff to put out some truly amazing work.

I’m pleased to say that a team of two talented and capable editors will help lead the Herald through these changes. Taylor Nye, who has guided our opinion section with great skill and enthusiasm for the last year, will take my place at the managing editor’s desk. Pam Selman, a fantastic reporter and our current news editor, will move up to editor-at-large.

Feel free to contact any of the folks listed below if you are interested in working for their department. Our email addresses at the Herald are easy to understand; it’s simply the first letter of the first name followed by the entire surname. For example, mine is rrainey@badgerherald.com

Assuming the world doesn’t end on Dec. 23, I think we’re in store for a good year at the Herald. I look forward to experiencing it with UW students and the Madison community.

NEWS 

News Editor: Katie Caron 

News Content: Leah Linscheid 

Deputy News: Mike Kujak 

City: Molly McCall and Camille Albert 

Campus: Tara Golshan and TBD

State: Leopoldo Rocha and Meghan Zernick

OPINION

Editorial Page Editor: Reginald Young 

Editorial Page Content: Charles Godfrey 

Opinion Blog Editors: Joe Timmerman and Meher Ahmad

EDITORIAL BOARD 

Addie Blanchard (Chair) 

Ryan Rainey 

Taylor Nye 

Pam Selman 

Reggie Young 

Charles Godfrey 

Meher Ahmad 

Sarah Witman

SPORTS

Sports Editor: Ian McCue 

Sports Content Editor: Nick Korger 

Associate Sports Editors: Sean Zak and Nick Daniels 

Statistics Editor: Caroline Sage 

Blog Editor: Spencer Smith

ARTSETC

ArtsEtc Editor: Allegra Dimperio 

ArtsEtc Content: Joe Nistler

MULTIMEDIA 

Multimedia editor: Ramsey Statz 

Associate multimedia editor: Tim Hadick

PHOTO 

Photo editor: Andy Fate 

Associate photo editors: Kelsey Fenton and Jen Small

DESIGN 

Design director: Sigrid Hubertz

COPY 

Copy chief: Tom Guthrie 

Associate copy chief: Kristin Prewitt

While members of Student Council managed to create new and imaginative ways to stall meetings, postpone votes and circumvent the other two branches of ASM, in the end they accomplished absolutely nothing.

They squabbled over reinstating two members who violated election laws, failed to elect a vice-chair for the majority of the year, neglected to fill a handful of empty seats, tossed 100 grand into a pot called “alumni training,” eliminated all funding for a commencement speaker, allocated funding in a non-viewpoint neutral fashion … need we go on?

Worst of all, Chair Allie Gardner managed to alienate the other branches of ASM and set back student rights with a single “aye” when she voted in favor of giving funding the Multicultural Student Coalition.

She treated Student Judiciary’s ban against voting like a parent’s warning to come back before curfew. She silenced students who were experts on the issue from speaking at the hearings. Worst of all, she failed to recuse herself from voting even though she has strong ties to the group. She also set the precedent that ASM will forever be subject to the pronouncements — no matter how inaccurate or ill-stated — of the chancellor.

In short, she and the other representatives who voted in favor of the measure violated U.S. Supreme Court precedent, federal and state law, the ASM constitution and bylaws, and Board of Regents policy F-50. This set back student power several years, undoing the hard work of the 17th session, 16th session and all those preceding.

With every idiotic move by Student Council, this board would laugh and say, “It couldn’t possibly get worse!” How wrong we were.

Good riddance, 18th session. You deserve this award for all your ridiculousness, silliness, preposterousness, irrationality, unreasonableness … again, need we go on?

And if you try, don’t succeed, try something else and still don’t get your way, try pulling out an obscure constitutional power and perverting its original purpose to fit your needs.

Ethical issues? Recall. Misconduct in office? Recall. Fundamental disagreements in governance? Recall. Boredom? Recall. Fly unzipped? Gentle reminder, then recall.

The various groups hyping the need for recalls, the vast majority of them Democratic-leaning, are cramping the hand of democracy with never-ending petition signing. Though there are certainly some merits to the complaints against the Republican-dominated Legislature, the constant effort toward tipping the political scales is less of an attempt at throwing the bums out than it is a study in mob rule.

Electoral do-overs have no place in a rational, civil society. Decisions are made, consequences are accepted and votes are cast in the next regularly scheduled election. Luckily for us though, any measure of civility or reason died more than a year ago to the drone of vuvuzelas and a chorus of “Kill the bill!”

With what is hopefully the final round of recalls taking place next month, Wisconsin may finally be able to pick up all the pieces of its fragmented political landscape and move on.

That is unless the recall elections fail to adequately satisfy the mob, in which case we’ll be in for another long and stupid year.

R.I.P. democratic process, mourn ya ‘til we join ya.

But when it comes to pouring the Kool-Aid for the student body, Berquam can be dumber than a box of rocks. When Berquam decided to think outside the box in late April, all hell broke loose. As a last ditch effort to follow in the footsteps of the city and stomp out the Mifflin Street Block Party, Berquam posted a YouTube video urging students to avoid the party like the plague.

But even the best laid plans of mice and men fail, and Berquam, having tilted at windmills, found her words were as welcome as a skunk at a lawn party. After opening a Pandora’s box of YouTube comments, the university deep-sixed the video. But we have to give credit where it is due: Berquam let bygones be bygones and acknowledged she had stumbled upon her Achilles heel.

Come hell or high water, make no bones about it: Berquam is as cliché as deans come. It’s her job to be a wet blanket on student fun, so why reinvent the wheel? Anything else is about as useful as tits on a bull.

See you later alligator.

I would just like to present to you the perspective of those of us who don’t blindly follow the liberal party line so prevalent here in Madison — a perspective the Herald seems eager to ignore. I voted for Scott Walker today because I believe in a Wisconsin led by a man with no college degree, where we spend more money on our prison system than our education system, where we cut funding to schools and health care in order to fund corporate tax breaks, and in a Wisconsin that has gone from a top 15 job creator to dead last in the nation.

I believe in a Wisconsin where we restrict women’s access to birth control and deny gays the right to marry — because freedom of religion means freedom to impose your beliefs on others. Wisconsin needs a governor who has the courage to stand up to the union thugs and greedy educators with their lavish salaries and pensions, a governor that is willing to pass a voter ID bill that would disenfranchise thousands of voters that are opposed to his policies, a governor that unapologetically rejects compromise and sticks to his guns.

And that’s what we have in Gov. Walker — a man so willing to stick to his guns that at one point last fall you could literally bring a gun into the state Capitol Building — but not a camera or a protest sign. In short — shame on you, Badger Herald. I hope that in the future you will hold your staff to higher standards and consider both sides of the issues. And to all the voters: Stand With Walker — because clearly, “It’s Working.”

Nicholas Klotz (nklotz@wisc.edu) is a senior majoring in economics and international studies.

Why are gays so discriminated against? They consider homosexuality unnatural, or against God. Homosexuals can’t love in the same way as heterosexuals can, they argue. People not willing to invoke these somewhat antiquated arguments say homosexuals will use the legal rights to financial advantage, or that gay Americans can’t be trusted to raise a well-rounded child, or even that the biological incapability of members of the same sex to produce a child should be justification enough of the protection of traditional marriage. Gays shouldn’t be allowed in the military because even if it didn’t disrupt unit cohesion, we can’t afford to experiment with our nation’s defense force. Argument after argument is thrown by opponents trying to justify the notion that change is bad because nobody can prove that it’s good.

We’ve all heard these arguments, and sadly they’re merely symptoms of a far more debilitating disease. There’s a more insidious sentiment that lies in the distinction between same-sex marriage and same-sex civil unions in many states, such as Illinois, where civil unions are legal while same-sex marriages are not. Moreover, the legal rights associated with each are essentially the same. Yet there is also a law in Illinois that explicitly prohibits same-sex marriage. Why would the state recognize a civil union with the same rights as a marriage, but not be willing to call it a marriage? 

There may be many answers, but a quite alarming one can be established simply by asking same-sex marriage opponents: There is an element of status associated with marriage, and gays should not be allowed to claim it. The moral supremacy of traditional marriage is still a deeply rooted idea in the minds of a substantive quantity of Americans and is as destructive to a resilient social fabric as any and all arguments that oppose equal rights and the 14th amendment. Some segments of the population have come a long way: New York legalized same-sex marriage and President Barack Obama’s cabinet are putting increasing pressure on Obama and the Democratic Party to take a hardline stance in favor of gay marriage. 

However, for as long as such fundamental, institutional opposition as moral or social supremacy exists, we can’t possibly hope to make gay rights a given and get to work on legitimate problems.

Gregori Kanatzidis (gkanatzidis@badgerherald.com) is a junior majoring in mathematics.

The panel discussed lengthening the school day and school year because the prime time for juvenile delinquency is immediately after school gets out. However, they noted the danger of bad teachers and bad schools could nullify the effect of this solution. While this may treat the symptoms of the achievement gap, it will not address the underlying issues of poverty and inequity. This may lessen the gap locally, but the problems are much more systemic than the length of the school day. There should be financial incentives for teachers to work in low-income areas. This will provide competition among the teachers bringing the best teachers to the areas that need them most. Good teachers can go a long way toward bridging the gap.

But the gap does not start at school. Data from Early Education for All show by the time children begin going to kindergarten, the gap has already reached roughly half of what the gap is when the children graduate. Attempts to combat this have ranged from ad campaigns to attempting to universalize preschool in San Francisco, which Minnesota Public Radio says has failed. Getting kids involved with the community from a young age may cause them to be more driven than others. The presence of programs geared toward low-income kids in a community may achieve this very effectively, like the proposed prep school in Madison. Those who are involved tend to succeed. Programs to combat the achievement gap can be very useful tools. At my high school and in Madison schools, a program called AVID/TOPS focuses on getting low-income and minority students into college. The program has been very successful. If such a program can be successful at helping bridge as late as high school, why can it not be taken to the elementary and junior high levels to make students more successful and driven? Programs in schools that attempt to bridge the gap do marvelous things.

When parents themselves are not successful in school, they often put less value on their children’s education or do not know how to motivate their children. This again puts burden on the school system and the community to provide a will to become educated.

Bridging the gap is not an easy task but is definitely worth undertaking. The achievement gap is both a cause and an effect of generational poverty and economic inequality. Those who do poorly in school tend to do worse financially, and when pockets of poverty develop, this leads to underfunded schools leading to a lack of education that only perpetuates this vicious cycle. In a New York Times op-ed, Paul Krugman recently projected that by 2035 there will be very little social class mobility. This is unacceptable.

We must address the gap, both in the U.S. as a whole and specifically in Madison. If we do not, we will be met with a continuation of the vicious cycle that has created a great deal poverty and crime. I feel this is done with programs aimed at getting young people involved in their community and programs that motivate students to do well in school. Ultimately, we must either bridge the gap, or our society will suffer.

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

In the democratic society we live in, opinions flow freely. In the continual thread of societal discourse, one opinion can be heard, yet it cannot, and should not, silence the rest. Its impact can, however, contribute to the diverse and ever-changing tides of public ideology. The dissonant nature of this ideology presents us with a paradox. From it, controversy can stem, yet through it, a critical social balance can exist.

This balance emerges from the ashes of contention — contention that is rooted in the universal desire to never stop questioning the truths upon which we have built our society. Without this desire for perpetual debate, ideological hegemony would ensue, and we would be left with one universal “truth.” However, such consensus cannot exist as long as a liberal approach to free speech prevails.

I find so much substance in this reality. Even in the face of ideological chaos, a freedom — an empowerment — can emerge. We need not simply accept what is handed to us so long as we surrender the notion that our own opinions are the only ones that matter. This is the core of what I have come to realize here at the Herald.

As harsh as the commentors’ critiques could be, I learned to realize the value of their criticism. At times, they were blatantly offensive and, by my own standards, ignorant, but all of this is relative. Although I often disagreed with their viewpoints, I have come to appreciate their intentions. After all, they were just trying to be heard, just like me.

Putting forth one’s own opinion can be incredibly intimidating. Having opinions and expressing them are what set humans apart from other beings. Possessing the ability to hold beliefs and communicate them with others is a critical crux of human dignity. However, with this freedom comes inherent vulnerability. Each opinion column I have written for the Herald is a reflection of who I am as an individual. Having said this, I do not define myself solely by my pro-choice stance, my concern for the environment or my liberal political orientation, even though they all contribute to my collective identity. More important than my political party affiliation or my viewpoints on controversial issues is my unwavering belief in tolerance and open-mindedness. I am one contributor to a vast and ever-changing collection of ideas, but my opinion is not the only one that matters. No individual should have the power to determine what is or is not truth. Truth does not emerge from absolutism, but rather from debate predicated on the tolerance of variance, even in the face of offense. Until we embrace this, simply having an opinion is not enough.

I have come away from my time at the Herald with so much more than I ever could have imagined. I feel so privileged to have had the opportunity to work with such talented writers and editors, all of whom are also extraordinary individuals. I like to think that I contributed something interesting or, at the very least, thought-provoking via my writing. But even more than this, I hope that my thoughts and ideas had an impact. Above all, I am grateful to the Herald for giving me the chance to be heard.

Hannah Sleznikow (sleznikow@wisc.edu) is a senior majoring in political science.

I’m hesitant to write a farewell column, because I haven’t officially graduated. I still need to pass a required gym class, which is somewhat iffy for me. But, at the risk of angering the physical education gods, I’d like to take the time to thank those who have contributed to my columns over the past year. Don’t worry. I’ll keep it pithy, like Bill O’Reilly tells me to. 

I, of course, wouldn't be writing for The Badger Herald if it weren’t for the paper’s opinion page editors. When they asked me to write for the paper, they gave me a chance to express my views. If I didn’t write for The Badger Herald, I’d drive my roommate crazy ranting about Scott Walker and Barack Obama. My roommate and I thank you, opinion page editors.

And to my muse, Madison — we’ve had our ups and downs, but we’re still here, babe. Honestly, I haven’t always liked Madison. In fact, there’ve been times when I’ve downright hated her. She can be cold and unforgiving. But Madison is for me what Dublin was for Joyce: the place where pain generates inspiration.

However, my true inspiration comes from my parents. They encouraged me when I doubted myself, and they criticized me when I got too cocky. They gave me advice on what to write about and, to my chagrin, bragged about my writing on Facebook. It’s been a tough four years, Mom and Dad, but the end is in sight.

I could go on and on, but to quote my favorite philosopher, Groucho Marx, “Hello, I must be going. I cannot stay. I came to say, ‘I must be going.’ I’m glad I came, but just the same, I must be going. La la.”

Yours truly,

Jeff Schultz

Jeff Schultz (jdschultz@wisc.edu) is a senior majoring in history.

As the differences between the two parties have grown greater in number, the language used by both has grown stronger. This, in and of itself, is not inherently bad. However, this heated rhetoric has been accompanied by an increasingly common use of half-truths and outright falsehoods in political discourse. Politicians should know better than to tell anything but the whole truth, but the responsibility for bringing truth back to political discourse belongs also to the media who report the lies and the public who believe them.

Of the 19 most recent claims rated by PolitiFact Wisconsin, one has been rated true, five have been rated half-true, five have been rated mostly false, five have been rated false and two have been rated “pants on fire.” This is not a good track record. In the interest of presenting the entire truth, I’ll be clear that I’m not implying only one out of every 19 claims by politicians are true — clearly PolitiFact is interested in fact-checking dubious statements. However, other states, like Ohio, have had five out of 18 statements rated true. While it’s a problem all across the country, the lack of truth in politics is especially problematic in Wisconsin.

It’s important to note that less-than-true statements come from both sides of the political spectrum. On one day, former Dane County Executive Kathleen Falk claims that women no longer can “do something about it” if they are experiencing pay discrimination — false. The next, Gov. Scott Walker asserts, “We gave every public employee in the state the freedom to choose whether or not they want to be in a union” — false. Then Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett makes the accusation that Walker “has caused Wisconsin to lose more jobs than any other state in the country” — half-true. Not to be outdone, Rep. Paul Ryan, chair of the House Budget Committee, alleges that President Barack Obama “has doubled the size of government since he took office” — pants on fire. The problem is not limited to either party.

So whose responsibility is it to fix the problem? It starts with the politicians themselves — after all, they’re the ones making the statements in the first place. They should know better. As leaders entrusted with making decisions for the people who elected them, it’s entirely reasonable to expect them to tell the truth. However, one could argue that politicians are only doing what gets them elected.

If voters started to hold politicians accountable for lying at the polls, then those in office would learn how to tell the truth very quickly. So some of the responsibility falls to voters, as well, to hold politicians accountable for what they say. On the other hand, not every voter has the resources and time at his or her disposal to tell fact from fiction.

Most of all, the responsibility falls on news media. The media are how voters get their information and if the media allow politicians to lie, it becomes hard for voters to tell what’s true from what isn’t. Of course, some statements are neither fact nor fiction but opinion and the media have no responsibility for those. However, when politicians claim, for example, that Obama is not a natural-born citizen, the media need to add that this is simply not true.

There is a valid worry that this could lead to the politicization of reporting. If done correctly, though, this need not be the case. It’s perfectly acceptable for the news media to stay out of contentious issues on which the jury is still out. But if Walker says that all Wisconsonites can choose whether or not to be in a union or if Falk says that women have no way of seeking compensation if they experience pay discrimination, the media need to call them out.

None of this will be easy. It requires efforts by all parties to help restore truth and integrity to political discourse. But if politicians live up to their duties as public servants, voters recognize the power of their vote and the news media appreciate their ability to propagate lies, it can be done. A more fact-based approach to political discourse will lead to better policy and better governing,

Joe Timmerman (jptimmerman@wisc.edu) is a freshman majoring in math and economics.

Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett has proven himself the most reasonable choice in a race otherwise stacked with reactionary candidates whose only concerns are undoing Walker’s blunders. Former Dane County Executive Kathleen Falk is the most unsettling of the choices voters face today. Her campaign has relied almost entirely on distracting the electorate from any issue that did not earn her the endorsement of the state’s unions. Two other Democrats, Sen. Kathleen Vinehout of Alma and Secretary of State Doug LaFollette, are niche candidates with a narrow knowledge base and lack of experience that disqualifies them from consideration.

For University of Wisconsin students, this choice is obvious. While Walker and Falk sit on extreme ends of the debate over UW’s place in the state’s budget, Barrett realizes the university is, most importantly, an educational institution rather than a business or a public employment mill. Both Barrett and Falk speak in similar rhetorical terms about funding higher education, but Falk’s efforts to court the endorsement of many unions at UW has tied her hands behind her back, eliminating any sense of tact. Barrett has fewer political alliances that could compromise his commitment to making UW more accessible to undergraduates while maintaining its quality of education.

Barrett also provides the most useful approach to solving the state’s labor discontent. As cause for supporting her, progressives who support Falk have cited her plan to veto the state’s budget if it does not contain collective bargaining. There is an easy answer to Falk’s proposal: Two wrongs do not make a right. Falk’s suggestion that she will practice obstructionist policy in line with the unsettling lack of democratic respect that has characterized Walker’s term should not be tolerated. It could also prove counterproductive and continue Walker’s reforms if her veto is overridden by an unruly legislative branch.

This election is not about Madison. If it were, we could easily elect Falk and feel no qualms. But the rest of the state is not as progressive as our city, and Barrett’s moderation is essential for Wisconsin.

The choice is simple. Students can either vote for a Dane County progressive who will burn bridges and positively fall to Walker, or they can choose a moderate leader who can help Wisconsin avoid being the joke of the nation.

In the likely event that Barrett wins the primary today, Republicans will continue their attacks that he has led Milwaukee, a city plagued by problems long before his arrival as mayor, into the ground. But we will always prefer a governor with a proven record of bipartisanship instead of one with tunnel-vision progressivism.