daily herald the Brown
vol. cxxii, no. 85
INSIDE
Page 2
Ira Glass ’82
NPR host discusses radio, new movie in exclusive Q&A
No U. employees give big to Romney campaign By Caroline Saine Senior Staff Writer
Page 4
Public health Program progresses toward becoming accredited school Page 3
Brown-India Initiative launches talks, seminars today
53 / 32
tomorrow
54 / 44
since 1891
friday, october 12, 2012
University employees have donated almost exclusively to President Obama in this election cycle. Forty individual donors have contributed a total of $37,872 to Obama’s campaign. Only one donation of $500 was made by a former University employee to Republican presidential challenger Mitt Romney. Twenty-six professors contributed $24,439 to Obama’s campaign, according to Open Secrets, a nonpartisan site tracking campaign donations that is run by the Center for Responsive Politics. This overall donation value includes other self-identified members of staff who listed Brown as their employer. Faculty members have also donated $14,577 to the Obama Victory Fund, a committee that fundraises
for both Obama’s 2012 campaign and the Democratic National Committee. The Federal Election Commission does not require candidates to report donations of less than $200. For this reason, only larger donations were included in calculating these figures. The University’s political spending follows a larger trend in national fundraising at higher education institutions. Earlier in the election season, faculty members at Ivy League institutions had donated a total of $375,932 to Obama and $60,465 to Romney, according to data compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics, Bloomberg Businessweek reported in a May 17 article. Only at Harvard Business School did Romney hold an advantage — he received $14,000 compared to Obama’s $11,400 as of May, according to Bloomberg. In 2008, / / Obama page 3
pa i n t t h e r a i n b o w
Tom sullivan / herald
Students gathered on the Main Green yesterday, armed and ready with rainbow paints to celebrate National Coming Out Day.
Federal budget cuts may threaten U. funding Civil By Alexa Pugh Senior Staff Writer
Cuts to federal funding for highereducation research and financial aid currently set to take effect Jan. 1 could pose a significant threat to University finances, officials said. The cuts are part of a mandatory $1.4 trillion overall reduction in spending outlined in the Sequestration Clause of the Budget Control Act of 2011, which was originally passed after Congress decided to raise the debt ceiling last year. Despite the threat of these cuts, legislators have been unable to reach a compromise on how to reduce the national deficit. The Office of Management and Budget released a report Sept. 14 that announced a projected 8.2 percent across-the-board cut to
domestic discretionary spending, which includes significant reductions in funding for higher education, that will take effect if Congress does agree on a long-term plan to balance the budget by the end of the year. Though the possibility that the sequester will take effect is still uncertain, the University’s research funding could take a serious hit if cuts do occur, said Beppie Huidekoper, executive vice president for finance and administration. The University currently receives approximately $160 to $170 million in federal research funding annually. Of that figure, $40 million goes toward indirect cost recovery for things like lab space, utility fees and administrative costs, while $130 million covers direct costs such as lab equipment
and stipends and salaries for graduate students and professors. Assuming a worst-case scenario in which the cuts take place immediately and across-the-board, the University would face a $13 to $15 million reduction in annual federal research funding that would be distributed between direct and indirect costs, Huidekoper said. The University has a commitment to graduate students and faculty to maintain stipend and salary rates for as long as possible, she said. The University would prioritize covering these costs with money from department’s emergency reserve funding and the modest contingency built into the University’s operating budget. But the ability to pay for research equipment, / / Cuts page 3 facilities and
By the numbers Cuts to research funding in worst-case scenario
8.2 percent
national discretionary spending cut
$160-170 million annual federal research funding the University currently receives
$13-15 million
amount of federal research funding the University stands to lose
Kristof stresses importance of elevating women By sona mkrttchian senior staff writer
emily gilbert / herald
Prizewinning journalist Nicholas Kristof spoke to a crowded auditorium about the importance of education and women in developing countries.
Nicholas Kristof, two-time Pulitzer winning journalist and op-ed columnist at the New York Times, gave a somber but empowering lecture last night to a full house in Salomon 101, advising students to step out of their comfort zones — and off the Hill — to facilitate the traditional college education and develop a sense of personal pride through purposeful humanitarianism. Kristof co-wrote his latest book, “Half the Sky: Turning Oppression into Opportunity for Women Worldwide,” with his wife Sheryl WuDunn. Only hours before the lecture, the book reached the top of the Times’ bestseller list — a feat Kristof attributed to the recent release of a documentary of the same name based off the book and developed by PBS. Though the book was published in
2009, it has recently inspired a larger movement against human trafficking and female oppression, placing pressure on U.S. politicians to bring the international issue to the top of the domestic agenda. The PBS documentary was released earlier this month, and a new Facebook application — which will transform user activity into tangible humanitarian aid — is forthcoming, Kristof said. From the beginning of the lecture, Kristof ’s overarching message to students emphasized the importance of education as a mechanism for change. He began by describing the effects of a $10,000 loan to a small, rural school in China at the beginning of the 1990s, an event he cited as the impetus behind developing the book. The loan was intended for the sole purpose of educating girls in the village in an attempt to counteract gender dis/ / Kristof page 8 crimination
engineering track to be discontinued By Maddie Medina Contributing Writer
The civil engineering track will no longer be offered for students in the class of 2017 and beyond. Prior to this decision, Brown was one of four Ivy League schools to still offer a civil engineering program. Engineering students declare their concentration and track sophomore year. Civil engineering currently consists of two paths — structural or environmental engineering. The number of civil engineer concentrators has been in the single digits in recent years, with eight listed concentrators in 2011, according to the Office of Institutional Research. Shifting faculty research interests led to the decision to eliminate the track. “A lot of the research has moved toward small scale — understanding material behavior at the scale of nanometers up through microns,” said Rod Clifton, professor of engineering and former engineering concentration adviser. “Faculty members don’t see as much research opportunity for things associated with building bridges, highways.” “I was hoping it wouldn’t happen,” Clifton added. “It wasn’t clear that we were going to have the faculty it would take to supervise and do the teaching for the civil engineering program, so in that sense I could see it coming.” The decision to remove the civil track was discussed with alums, students and faculty boards, including the College Curriculum Council. “Faculty research interests have / / Civil page 2 evolved, and,