Globe Newsmagazine, December 2020, Issue 4, Vol. 92

GL BE IN DANGER. +pg. 19 With rising temperatures and harrowing disasters, the Globe takes a look at the impact of climate change and potential counteraction.

. VOLUME 93 . ISSUE 4.

CLAYTON HIGH SCHOOL. CLAYTON, MO. DECEMBER 2020.

THANK YOU TO OUR SPONSORS! The Globe is an entirely self-funded publication. We receive no funding from the school district for printing. Each issue of the Globe costs approximately $2000 to print.

We are deeply grateful to our sponsors for their support of our publication. They make our work possible. If you are interested in becoming a sponsor, please email us at globe@claytonschools.net.

PANDEMIC PATRONS Mark and Krista Sucher Sultan Meghji Qinghong Wang Julie Taylor Matthew Bower Olivia Marcucci Anneliese Schaefer

Layla Guillen Tim Erlin Michael Reed

Erin Sucher-O-Grady James Zahniser Kimberly Carroll Peggy Guest

Laura Pierson David Lotsoff Jessica Millner

Siram Venugopalan Jannette Rusch Patrick and Chris Win

Ann Zahniser Katie and Mark Sandquist

Raihana Omri

Elizabeth Cuneo Eudora Olsen Dave Zahniser Chris Meisl Ying Ma

Mary Modzelewski

Matt Erlin Kathy and Jeff Wilkerson Radha Krishnaswamy Susana Erlin The Bruegenhemkes

Will Murphy Izzy Greenblatt Kelly Weygandt Marisa Johnson Rachel Zahniser Aimee and Matt Snelling Linda Piecynski

ISSUE SPONSORS ($2000 Level) Gail Workman

GOLDEN GREYHOUND SPONSORS ($200+ Level) St. Louis Suit Company Clayton All in Coalition Van’t Hof Family Cobblestone Quality Shoe Repair The Retina Institute Yeung Realtors

DTLS Landscape Architecture Dale Avenue Pediatrics Windsor Dave Sine Woodworking

WORLD TRAVELER SPONSORS ($100+ Level) The LaGesse Stanton Family Bob and Betsy Cuneo The Stemmler Family Ann Sachar The Chung Family Washington University Physicians Allergy & Immunology Clinics Mary and Dick Anthony Robin and Neil Snelling Maya Jerath and Sanjoy Baruah

Venkatesh Narayan Gita Krishnaswamy Christy Hager DDS Angela and Troy Quinn The Erlin Family The Family of Lary Baker Kay Quinn Malone

12 Teachers Unions Ivy Reed and Alex Cohen examine the history and current importance of teachers unions

35 Shutting Down Sports

Cece Cohen explores the future of winter sports during the pandemic

46 Transition of Power

Angela Xiao writes about the transition of power and results of the presidential election

Jordan Ireland (left) dribbles past Izzy Ross (right) during a girls basketball practice.

PHOTOGRAPHER , MARCI PIEPER CONTENTS 3

GL BE EDITORS-IN-CHIEF

STAFF

REPORTERS

Sofia Erlin and Shane LaGesse

Owen Austin-Babcock

Charlie Miller

CHIEF DIGITAL EDITOR

Stella Bishop

Kirby Miller

Jenna Bush

Isaac Millians

Rachel Chung

Ruby Nadin

Alexandra Cohen

Medha Narayan

Cecilia Dupor

Katherine Perrin

Isabel Erdmann

Abby Rosenfeld

Maya Goldwasser

Alex Slen

Isra Kayani

Samuel Smith

Tatum Ladner

Leo Taghert

Enoch Lai

Andrew Thompson

Chloe Lin

Sophia Thompson

SECTION EDITORS

Sophia Lu

Estella Windsor

Alex Hagemeister and Ruthie Pierson, NEWS

Ella McAuley

Annie Xiao

Emma Baum and Seraphina Corbo, FEATURE

Samantha McDonough

Siddhi Narayan

CHIEF MANAGING EDITOR Angela Xiao

SENIOR MANAGING EDITORS Ella Cuneo Lulu Hawley Noor Jerath Kaitlyn Tran Yiyun Xu

Ivy Reed and Disha Chatterjee, OPINION Kaia MIlls-Lee and Cece Cohen, SPORTS Kate Freedman and Moriah Lotsoff, REVIEW Max Keller, PRO/CON

COPY EDITORS

PHOTO EDITOR Eli Millner

PHOTOGRAPHERS

Vivian Chen and Margy Mooney

Natalie Ashrafzadeh

Haley Lewis

PAGE EDITORS

Cecilia Baer

Amy Ma

Audrey Deutsch

Sophie Matiszik

Davia Goette

Deborah Park

Maci Klaus

Maya Richter

Monica Klein

Emma Stipanovich

Avery Kleinhenz

Kendall Turner

Lily Kleinhenz

Anna Walsh

Whitney Le

Esther Wang

Luka Bassnett

Ana Mitreva

Isabella Bamnolker

Sofia Mutis

Chloe Creighton

Rachel Liang

Sahi Gokaraju

Naveed Naemi

Max Hagemeister

Emma Raine

Sasha Keller

Sophie Srenco

Daphne Kraushaar

Sophie Yoshino

Angela Wirthlin

Professional Affiliations: Journalism STL, Missouri Interscholastic, Press Association, Missouri Journalism Education Association, Journalism Education Association, National Scholastic Press Association, Columbia Scholastic Press Association Please visit chsglobe.com for our editorial policy, mission statement, and ethics code. You can contact us at chsglobe@claytonschools.net with comments, story ideas or letters to the editor.

Time is running out. What are we going to do?

Some people’s biggest fear is spiders. Others are afraid of the dark. My biggest fear is climate change. The thought of being trapped on an uninhabitable planet poisoned by mankind with my future and dreams stolen from me makes me want to scream. But this grim path has not set in stone, not yet.

Scientists know that our planet is approaching the point of no return, but it seems that we’re doing nothing to slow climate change down, much less to stop it. Every day I hear of deadly wildfires scorching the Earth from Australia to Northern California to Colorado. I hear of more and more catastrophic hurricanes flooding and destroying cities filled with people not knowing if they will live to see another day.

I hear of icebergs that have stood for hundreds, thousands, and even millions of years melting, causing animals to die, habitats to be ruined, and sea levels to rise. Even with all of these examples of climate change ravaging the world, there has not been any progress significant enough to promise that Earth will survive this dark time in its lifetime.

In the age of modern politics, climate change has been a topic of debate. Especially in the 2020 election, climate change has been widely discussed as a catastrophic issue that faces our planet. Though in these past debates, I have wondered how the presence of climate change is not considered a widely accepted fact in our society. With the election of Joe Biden to the presidency, measures to minimize and prevent damages from climate change is something that Americans can expect for his four-year term. With the appointment of John Kerry as his Climate Envoy, and Biden’s claim that the United States will re-enter the Paris Climate Agreement as soon as possible, Biden proves to be making strides toward a more hopeful future for us all.

Though the sudden shift in government response to climate change will be terrific, our government should have acknowledged climate change as the threat it is long ago. In 2016, when President Trump took office, he brought our country back in terms of progress against climate change. When he was elected he appointed Scott Pruitt to be the administrator or the Environmental Protection Agency, even though Pruitt was a former lobbyist for big oil and natural gas, he did not believe in climate change and had previously sued the EPA 14 times. Trump also withdrew the U.S. from the Paris Climate Agreement only weeks after we had entered the deal. Even with scientists and the citizens of the United States begging for him to combat climate change, Trump and his administration chose to look at the costs of the agreement instead of at our dying Earth and claimed that the Paris Accord was unfair. I personally find it unfair that the four generations before me, including Trump’s, have essentially begun a chain of events that will inexorably lead to the destruction of the planet, thereby affecting countless generations to come.

His duty as the leader of the free world is not to corporate moneyed interests, but to every future descendant who must live on this planet.

Every decision that is made now does not just

from the editor

affect the world’s youth, it affects generation after generation after generation. Potentially hundreds of billions of people (unless they all die) will never know the Earth as we do. Unless we take action now.

As a child, hearing that my government was more interested in costs and whether the Paris agreement was beneficial for the U.S. than the future of the youth of the world made my blood curdle. I asked myself why our society cherishes money more than the life threatened by climate change, and I could not come up with an answer that was satisfactory, or a solid answer at all.

Now, I conclude that climate change is ignored and belittled because of fear. Some people refuse to accept facts that are scary, or facts that provide people with a sense of uncertainty. But all of the biggest and most important problems in all of our lives provide us with these negative emotions of fear and uncertainty, and yet some people face these barriers head on despite how they feel in order to fix their problem at hand.

Now, I am not saying that anyone who does not believe that climate change is real is fearful of it, or is inherently ignorant. What I am saying is that people who do not think climate

change is real need to be educated about climate change through the undeniable facts that prove it. The facts about climate change are scary. But, if you can acknowledge the fear and use your emotions to make a change, no matter how small, that is when progress against climate change can truly begin.

While we, the citizens of Clayton, the state of Missouri, and the United States, cannot fix climate change, if we work together, we can make a significant difference in our communities. Whether this be by using reusable products, using products which run on clean energy, and even voting for political figures which stand to combat climate change, every little action counts.

Next time you shop, make a major purchase, or walk into a voting booth, pretend that the next one-hundred billion people yet to be born on this planet are all whispering in your ear: save Mother Earth.

alex hagemeister NEWS SECTION EDITOR EDITOR’S LETTER 5

and the band played on Despite the challenges presented by the pandemic, students have adapted in order to allow themselves some degree of normalcy as they return to in-person learning. Sophomore Rohan Webb uses double shields while playing the flute.

Photo by Marci Pieper

NEWS AND NOTES

BIDEN’S CABINET

TRUMP RECOUNTS

President Elect Joe Biden has elected Ex-Secretary of State John Kerry as Climate Envoy. The Biden Team says that Kerry’s job will be to “fight climate change full-time”.

In 2016 John Kerry signed the Paris climate agreement. After President Trump took office, he withdrew from the agreement. President elect Biden claims that he has plans to re-join the Paris accord as soon as he can.

The Trump campaign paid $3 million in order for there to be a vote recount in the state of Wisconsin. After the recount, Biden had a net gain of 87 votes.

Biden’s confirmed win over Trump supports Biden’s victory in the 2020 election. Even though President Trump still refuses to concede to President Elect Biden, Lara Trump claims that he is ‘interested’ in running in the 2024 election.

STOCK MARKET UPDATE During the month of November, the blue-chip Dow has increased by 12.9%. If kept on pace, this will be its best monthly performance since January of 1987. The increase is due to encouraging vaccine trials and developments. After Thanksgiving, the market saw the 30-stock Dow reach past the milestone of 30,000 for the first time.

COVID VACCINE On Nov. 28, Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine arrived at O’Hare Airport in Chicago. After three testing trials, the vaccine is shown to be 95% successful, but Pfizer is still fighting for emergency use approval from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. On NBC news on Nov. 29, Fauci says that it will be months until school age children can be vaccinated against COVID-19 because they want to make sure that the vaccine is safe when used on adults.

NEWS 8

COVID-19 UPDATE World Wide: cases reach 62.6 million, total deaths reach 1.46 million.

United States: cases reach 13.4 million, total deaths reach 266,000.

Missouri: cases reach 309,000, total deaths reach 3,956. Missouri’s case fatality rate is 1.28%. ruthie pierson & alexandra hagemeister NEWS SECTION EDITORS

BACK TO SCHOOL

CHS returned to in-person learning earlier this month, instituting new safety precautions.

During free periods students must report to the commons so that contact tracing procedures can be maintained.

MARCI PIEPER, PHOTOGRAPHER

D

espite COVID-19 cases continuing to rise in Missouri, CHS as well as Wydown Middle School returned to in-person learning on Monday, Nov. 9. Students were given two options.

The school’s in-person schedule consists of a morning session and an afternoon session.

Students whose last name begins with A-L attend school five days a week from 8:10am11:25am. Teachers have time to eat their lunch from 11:30-12:00pm. Students whose last name begins with M-Z attend school five days a week from 12:05pm-3:20pm. The school day consists of four 45 minute class periods. On A-days, students attend periods 1-4. On B-days, students attend periods 5-8. The other option for students was to stay online beginning November 9. Students who chose this option log in via Zoom while the in-person class is in session.

There are many changes to the school day as well as safety procedures put in place to protect the health of teachers, students, and staff.

Students may enter the school building no more than 15 minutes prior to the start of their first class, and they must enter the building through the door closest to their class and go straight to class upon entry. Face coverings are required inside the building and social distancing is enforced. Inside classrooms, desks are spaced at least 6 feet apart and are sprayed with sanitizing spray between each class.

Students are encouraged to use hand sanitizer when entering and exiting each classroom. If a student has a study period, they must report

“

ALTHOUGH I HAVE MISGIVINGS ABOUT IN-PERSON ATTENDANCE DURING OUR CURRENT SURGE IN LOCAL COVID TRANSMISSIONS...

I THINK OUR PROTOCOLS AT CHS ARE PRETTY GOOD.

to either the commons or the library and sit in an assigned seat for the entirety of the period, unless their parent has released them from this period, in which case the student must leave campus.

After the first week, it seems as though the district is taking safety precautions seriously.

“Although I have misgivings about in-person attendance during our current surge in local COVID transmissions (currently at 79 new daily cases / 100,000 population -- over 3x the ‘tipping point: stay-at-home orders necessary’ level, I think our protocols at CHS are pretty good,” said CHS science teacher Chuck Collis.

Students are following the face covering guidelines diligently and social distancing is being maintained and enforced, although the hallways sometimes get a bit crowded.

“With something like 25% of our students electing to learn from home and the rest broken up between a morning shift and an afternoon shift, overall student density in the building is pretty low,” said Collis.

Although students and some teachers interact with a relatively low amount of other students, some teachers come in contact with many more, between both their morning and afternoon classes.

“I know some teachers have higher student numbers during some classes and imagine that traditionally crowded areas of the building may not have low student density during passing periods,” said Collis.

ruthie pierson

NEWS SECTION EDITOR NEWS 9

MISSISSIPPI’S FLAG CHANGE

How did Mississippi and many other southern states adopt this battle emblem that previously represented secession from the United States, and how was it finally discontinued?

The last day for the Mississippi State flag bearing the Confederate emblem is flown over the state Capitol in Jackson, Mississippi, on July 1, 2020.

SUZI ALTMAN, PHOTOGRAPHER

J

ohnny Magee, lifetime resident and African American mayor of Laurel Mississippi, was brought to tears as he issued the executive order to remove state flags with Confederate emblems from the City of Laurel. The previous state flag that included the Confederate battle emblem along with stripes of red white and blue was to be discontinued in the representation of Mississippi. This specific design choice had been sparking debate, controversy and activism for years, and on June 28, 2020 Mississippi legislature passed a bill to change its state flag after 126 years. The flag was to be the last of the state flags to have the Confederate flag symbol in it, showing a shift away from Confederate imagery across America. But, how did Mississippi and many other southern states adopt this battle emblem that previously represented secession from the United States, and how was it finally discontinued?

After the Civil War, white supremacist groups spread Confederate imagery through memorials and newspapers to evoke fear in the nearly four million newly freed slaves. The continuation of the symbol showed that even though slavery was over, white supremacy still

NEWS 10

presided.

The flag became a common image at white supremacy events and protests. During this post-war movement, the previous Mississippi flag, made in 1894, was designed to include the Confederate battle flag, 30 years after the civil war. In this, they joined the abundance of states commemorating the losing side through their state flags.

A specific group of women, called the United Daughters of the Confederacy (UDC), played a major role in re-writing history.

This group of women that at its peak reached 100,000 members is responsible for giving the south countless memorials for Confederate soldiers and leaders. On almost all of the Confederate memorials that are still up today you can still see the protruding stone marking the monuments “UNITED DAUGHTERS CONFEDERACY”.

And even though some of these statues still stand tall, the imprint by the UDC is infinitely more impactful in libraries and schooling.

In a pamphlet written by the historian general of the UDC, Mildred L. Rutherford named, “A Measuring Rod for Text-Books” states that libraries should “mark all books in their collections which do not come up to the same measure on the title page thereof, ‘Unjust to the South’.”

Things that would make a book “Unjust to the South” include books that would glorify Abraham Lincoln and vilify Jefferson Davis, claim the South fought to hold it’s slaves, claim that a slaveholder of the South was cruel and unjust to his slaves, and other aspects of history that would lessen patriotism towards the South.

Confederate flag imagery would also have a resurgence in popularity during the 40’s and 50’s used as an political stance during the civil rights era.

Contemporary issues teacher Amy Doyle remarked on the lobbying associated with history texts.

“Publishers are going to publish where their biggest markets are. And it’s crazy to think that history can just be revised, rewritten in that way to soften what the actual work of what slavery actually was, and the impact that slavery the institution has.”

Mississippians, rooting for the old flag, often support the viewpoint that the Confederate symbol and the main cause of the civil war was about heritage and states’ rights. Something that is provably false through multiple declarations of secession.

Mississippi’s saying stating specifically ”Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery ...”, something that is

not taught or well known in many southern states due to this lens of history created by organizations like the UDC. A 2019 poll performed by The Washington Post showed that 41% of Americans don’t believe the main cause of the Civil War was slavery. The idea that people are protecting the Confederate flag in respect to protecting their heritage stems from this miscommunication and denial of harsh American history.

Doyle adds, “We use the past to inform the present, to help us know where to go in the future. And not having a sense of our history, not understanding why we are where we are, can erode future progress.”

After the killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis, Minnesota, the Black Lives Matter movement was the final tipping point the state needed in order for the change.

Before the Black Lives Matter movement people in Mississippi were trying to get rid of this flag for years, and in 2001 it even came to a referendum vote. Even before the flag was changed many people stopped displaying the flag in public in front of buildings.

“I think that now that we’ve reached a tipping point. I hope we can get to a point where we can recognize and understand fully that it is a symbol of oppression, that while once, yes, it may have this symbol of Southern heritage, it’s no longer that. It’s a symbol of oppression in nature. At least that’s what it has become,” Doyle said.

The flag was removed by the Mississippi legislature based on the idea that the flag should be something that could united Mississippians. With a population of nearly 40% African American residents, a flag with the Confederate symbol in it didn’t represent or unite Mississippi.

But the protests for equality were met with opposition. People in support of the previous flag would staged counter-protests.

This face to face opposition and support of Confederate imagery is commonly found in Mississippi.

Specifically In Hattiesburg, Mississippi there’s a 1910 UDC monument dedicated to Confederate soldiers sitting just across the street from a new statue in commemoration of

“

Counter protesters scuffle over a Confederate flag as several far-right groups, including militias and white supremacists, rally Saturday, Aug. 15, 2020, in Stone Mountain, Georgia, while a broad coalition of leftist antiracist groups organized a counter-demonstration.

JENNI GIRTMAN, PHOTOGRAPHER

WE USE THE PAST TO INFORM THE PRESENT, TO HELP US KNOW WHERE TO GO IN THE FUTURE. AND NOT HAVING A SENSE OF OUR HISTORY, NOT UNDERSTANDING WHY WE ARE WHERE WE ARE, CAN ERODE FUTURE PROGRESS. A member of a small group with the Rock Stone Mountain rally waves a confederate battle flag towards a mass of counterprotesters more than 100 yards away at Stone Mountain Park on April 23, 2016.

BEN GRAY, PHOTOGRAPHER

a civil rights leader, Vernon Dahmer.

Even though there have been repeated protests in favor of Confederate imagery throughout history, it’s impossible to ignore the progress. Flags being changed, monuments and statues have been taken down, and American youth has become more educated on harsh American history.

The importance of recognizing Confederate roots in imagery and understanding what it represents is ever so important in the age of hyper-polarization and division. Especially in previously Confederate states where history and its impacts are often ignored or avoided.

The push to have these monuments taken down is still very relevant.

As early as June 2017 “The Memorial to the Confederate Dead” a UDC Confederate memorial was taken down in St. Louis. The monument was removed from Forest Park, and is currently outside St. Louis City and County limits, due to an agreement between the city and Missouri Civil War Museum in Jefferson Barracks.

Besides Mississippi’s new flag looking visually appealing, the flag is more inclusive and conveys messages about Mississippi’s history and future.

Through it’s imagery of the magnolia flower, the state colors, the 20 white stars, and the one gold star that represents the Choctaw Indian Tribe, a Native American that lives in Mississippi.

The flag is called the “In God We Trust’’ flag, and shows a movement towards more understanding and representation in the future of the United States.

ana mitreva

PAGE EDITOR NEWS 11

UNIONIZATION AND EDUCATION Ivy Reed and Alex Cohen examine the role of teachers unions in advocating for safety in schools and the rights of educators.

FEATURE 12

CHARLES EDWARD MILLER/WIKIMEDIA COMMONS

T

eachers unions have the same goals as any other union: to protect and advocate for the rights of their members. These rights include fair work hours, proper compensation, benefits such as insurance, safe working conditions and fair employment and termination practices. Prior to teachers unions, many teachers were not afforded the same rights as other laborers, let alone those of private sector employees or more powerful figures in education and government.

“Teacher unions are a way to protect those rights that we expect as citizens,” explained Sarah Miller, Wydown Middle School social studies teacher and president of the Clayton National Education Association chapter.

NEA is the larger of the two main teachers unions in the U.S., along with the American Federation of Teachers (AFT). Both unions have national, state and local or district level chapters that work in liaison with school administrations and union leadership.

NEA and AFT both originated with the organized labor movements of the mid to late 19th century and early 20th century. The AFT was first formed in 1916 as an alternative to the NEA, which was formed in 1857 and mostly represented school administrators at the time. As the Labor and Working Class History Association explains, AFT prohibited administrators from joining and proudly presented itself as a labor union, in contrast with NEA’s goals to professionalize education through legislative influence. However, since then the goals of the AFT and NEA have mostly aligned; the two unions have worked together through the NEA-AFT Partnership for the last two decades.

Throughout the 1960s and 70s, teachers’ unions staged strikes and lobbied for more funding, equal pay, protections for pregnant teachers, a uniform salary schedule, and other rights. Both unions were heavily involved in advancing civil rights, refusing to hold assemblies in cities with segregation laws and supporting voting rights for Black teachers.

During the 1960s, teachers unions also worked alongside other labor unions to gain collective bargaining rights, or the ability to negotiate as a group with employers. Teachers unions, along with other public sector employees, had to gain these rights on a stateby-state level, due to the fact that the National Labor Relations Act - a landmark labor law passed in 1935 - protected collective bargaining rights for private sector employees only.

By the time the 20th century came to a close, the NEA and AFT had emerged as prominent and powerful voices in liberal American politics. Today, they advocate for equitable policies in education, fair funding for school districts and protections against active shootings in schools. Both unions maintain involvement in political lobbying and contribute to mostly liberal causes, including Democratic congressional and presidential campaigns. According to the Center for Responsive Politics, NEA has contributed almost $24 million to federal candidates,

parties and outside groups in 2019-2020. AFT’s contributions total $13 million. Out of both unions’ contributions to parties and candidates specifically, over 95% have gone to Democrats.

Within the Clayton School District, many teachers are members of the National Education Association. Each building has NEA representatives, whose job is to represent and advocate for the building’s NEA members.

“My primary role as a rep in this building is to represent the concerns, needs, questions, whatnot, of the NEA members who work at the high school,” explained Justin Seiwell, Speech and Debate coach and NEA representative for CHS. “And I will represent their concerns to either the CNEA, the larger organization that covers the entire district, or straight to our own administrators here in the building.”

NEA members in the district are also represented by Miller in her role as district president, who coordinates between Clayton teachers and the statewide Missouri NEA chapter. Miller sits on the salary negotiation committee, meets with Superintendent Sean Doherty every week to communicate the needs and concerns of NEA faculty members and generally serves as an advocate for teachers’ rights.

Miller added that her role as a member of a teachers union is not just to advocate for teachers, but to work on improving educational policy for students as well.

Seiwell agreed that teachers unions are beneficial for students, not just for teachers: “If I see that my administrators or somebody in my school district is doing something that would disadvantage a marginalized student or a student who’s already marginalized, I feel empowered and a little bit emboldened because I have this massive union backing that I can march right up to my superintendent - I could walk right into his office and say, ‘this is a problem and it needs to be fixed.’ And I’m not afraid to do that. I don’t have to fear for my job.” Many teachers feel that unions provide a level of security that allows them to stand up for their students and safely promote equity in education.

Teachers unions have gained increased prominence this year, as many have made headlines for their political mobilization in support of the Biden-Harris campaign, as well as their stances against school re-openings.

In June, AFT and NEA were among the 454 organizations who joined The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights to sign a letter to Congressional leadership calling for police reform. Many unions were also successful in delaying school re-openings nationwide and were responsible for the implementation of increased safety precautions in schools. However, many union leaders continue to argue that teachers haven’t had enough power in decision-making amid school re-openings. Some members of the Clayton community feel the same way.

“I think [teacher input] could be improved.

I think that the challenge is that the administration is balancing every stakeholder,”

“

I DON’T HAVE TO FEAR FOR MY JOB. said Miller. “ [...] They have a very hard role to play, and walk a very fine line between the pressure from the community and the peer pressure from what their peers are doing across the group of St. Louis County superintendents.

And then they have their pressure of what they feel is the best decision for the kids.”

Seiwell furthered that the level of teacher input has been “mixed.”

“A committee was formed at the very beginning of the summer. They met for a few times and that was it,” he said. “And then we were asked to apply that if we had a personal reason that we would not be able to expose ourselves into the building. There was an application process for if you wanted to teach from home for the entire semester. Beyond that, I think most teachers would argue that there hasn’t been a substantive push for input from teachers as far as what’s workable and what’s reasonable.”

However, both Seiwell and Miller explained that some concerns raised by teachers have been considered during Clayton’s transition to in-person learning. For example, teachers were instrumental in the decision to omit lunch from students’ schedules at the middle and high school level.

Nationally, many major school districts pushed back re-openings until later in the fall under pressure from teachers unions. However, with many districts forced either to delay transitioning to in-person learning or to close their doors again as cases surge in the U.S. for a third time, the debate has continued over whether schools should remain open.

Miller explained that there is still substantial uncertainty surrounding what is the safest decision in terms of reopening.

“There’s not that many studies that really prove either way,” she said, explaining that there are differing opinions on how easily the virus spreads in schools and whether school re-openings are contributing to higher hospitalization rates.

This lack of scientific consensus has led to mass disagreement and unrest over whether a fundamental sector of our economy and society- K-12 education - should continue to function as normal amid unprecedented and possibly unsafe circumstances. Though there may not be a right answer, teachers agree that their voices, experiences and collective power represented by unions matter now more than ever.

ivy reed & alex cohen

news section editor & reporter FEATURE 13

UNMASKING SENSORY STRUGGLES How people with Sensory Processing Disorder are being affected by masks and the pandemic.

ELLA CUNEO, ARTIST

A

s you head out the door in the morning on your way to start the day, you’re probably reaching for your phone, wallet, keys, and in this day in age, of course, a mask. For months, all of us have been forced to adjust to this new normal. We know that the mask may not be your favorite accessory, and can be uncomfortable at times.

However, for some people, wearing a mask causes a whole lot more than a little discomfort.

The uprise in individuals claiming to have medical issues to get out of wearing a mask affects those who deeply struggle to keep a mask on.

Imagine feeling like that small piece of fabric was posing some sort of threat to you.

Dr. Darci Garavaglia, an occupational therapist for SSD said that, “For someone with Sensory Processing Disorder (SPD), wearing a mask can physically cause them pain.” However, this is not true for everyone.

Yara Levin, is 16-years-old and has been struggling with SPD since she was a toddler.

“It really depends on the person, I know some people with SPD who really can’t stand to wear

FEATURE 14

masks at all and I was really worried I would be one of those people,” Levin said.

Sensory Processing Disorder is a neurological disorder where a person’s body has an abnormal or magnified response to receiving sensory information. These types of responses can be placed into a group called sensory overload. The brain does its best to interpret the information taken from the outside world via your five senses, but for individuals who struggle with SPD, there can be obstacles during that processing period.

“I have problems with loud noises, and certain types of noises that can trigger a fight or flight response,” Levin said.

SPD can also be common with other disorders, such as autism, anxiety, attention deficit disorder, or even hyperactivity. Sensory Processing Disorder is not something that can be cured, but that does not mean individuals that are diagnosed are bound to have it the rest of their lives. There are many tools and strategies used to help people with SPD get used to new senses such as masks because they are important in protecting the life of both the individual and society. Luckily, there are ways

to combat this.

According to STAR Institute, one in 20 people deal with SPD everyday. But, just like most disorders, there is a spectrum. For some people, getting comfortable with the mask could be as simple as seeing other people wearing them in public while not in distress. However, it might take something called Sensory Integration Therapy for others. Dr. Garavaglia explained, “Sometimes you can help a person get through their aversion by slowly introducing themselves to what they are adverse to.”

This technique was designed for people living with SPD to slowly become comfortable with new noise, tactile, taste, and visual sensations.

For a tactile sensitivity like mask-wearing, parents and caregivers across the country have found that letting their child hold and touch the mask in a non-vital situation can be very helpful. Allowing them to feel it on their skin repeatedly can help those with SPD develop a greater sense of comfort.

It is important to remember that one mask certainly does not fit all! When figuring out why a child is struggling to wear a mask, Dr. Garavaglia said, “First we need to make sure

that students have a mask that is comfortable and fits them.”

Parents have had success using something called “A Social Mask,” which allows the child to see through the mask and be able to better read facial cues. For others, the ear loops can pose quite a challenge, because they are constantly rubbing against their ears.

Innovative parents have solved this problem by placing hooks on hats, headbands or glasses, and allowing the straps to rest there, instead of behind their ears.

Although Levin does not have an extreme problem with wearing masks, having them go behind her ears can be very uncomfortable.

To help with this her mom has helped to sew her masks that tie behind her head. Even with these solutions, getting used to a mask can be extremely time consuming for certain people because coping with the new stimulus from a mask takes patience and strength.

Everyone’s journey with SPD is unique, and while the process may not be easy or simple.

Dr. Garavaglia reminds us, “We need to be understanding and tolerate that not everyone reacts the same way to different things.”

daphne kraushaar & maya goldwasser

An example of a mask with alternative attatchment opetions.

PAGE EDITOR & REPORTER

FEATURE 15

VIRTUAL B’NAI MITZVAH In the midst of the pandemic, an ancient coming-of-age-ceremony is now being fused with modern technology

Aimee Creighton, an eighth grader at Wydown Middle School, leads her virtual ceremony

A

fter years of becoming familiar with the teachings of the Torah, learning how to read Hebrew and memorizing the tunes of ancient prayers, Jewish 13-year-olds are finally ready for their Bar or Bat Mitzvah.

Many expect this coming-of-age ceremony to be an important marker in their life. They envision themselves carrying the hand-inked Torah through the congregation, chanting the ancient words and delivering their speech as they lead a ceremony full of song, dance and prayer, surrounded by candlelight and spices.

Imagine their surprise when they find their holy ceremony will be formatted as a zoom call with rabbis.

The COVID-19 pandemic has halted religious services across the country. Many churches, synagogues and mosques have shut down to enforce social distancing and keep the virus from spreading. Despite this, services have continued virtually. Members can still connect with their religious community, and special ceremonies can still take place.

In a message to Central Reform Congregation’s Confirmation class, Rabbi Susan Talvi said, “At no time in our lives have we felt the connectedness of creation in the form of public health. As much as we would like to believe that we are in charge, we know that we are interdependent and that we need to find ways to help others through this pandemic.”

FEATURE 16

CHLOE CREIGHTON, PAGE EDITOR Some of the most significant ceremonies no longer able to take place in synagogues are Bar and Bat Mitzvahs. Bar Mitzvah translates to “son of the commandments.” This ceremony marks a boy entering adulthood.

While the first Bar Mitzvahs took place hundreds of years ago, the same coming-of-age ceremony has only been offered to Jewish girls in recent decades, with the rise of the Reform movement. Bat Mitzvah translates to “daughter of the commandments.” B’nai Mitzvah is plural.

During the ceremony, a Jewish young adult leads a service in the presence of friends and family. They chant their Torah portion in Hebrew and give a speech about the portion’s significance, entering the realm of adulthood.

In the midst of a pandemic, the centuries old coming-of-age ceremony is now being fused with modern technology. Instead of standing on the Bimah in front of a congregation, teenagers having their Bar and Bat Mitzvahs virtually will host a live video call in which they chant prayers, read their Torah portion and give their speech. One rabbi or more will join the call to guide the service.

Most virtual services feature musicians to sing prayers and play music. Some synagogues even provide a real Torah for the day of the service, though for liability reasons, these are generally smaller and more transportable.

Still, knowing friends and family are watching on distant screens is not the same as being in

front of them at a synagogue. Many middle schoolers preparing for virtual Bar and Bat Mitzvahs are disappointed that they are missing out on an in-person ceremony and celebration.

The stress of the pandemic makes preparation more difficult. Young teenagers may fear their video will cut out in the middle of the service, their pet will crash in on their ceremony, or they will forget their prayers and have no congregation to support them.

Even among these challenges, some Jewish middle schoolers have taken time to reflect and more fully prepare for their coming of age ceremonies.

“I’m excited for my Bat Mitzvah because I feel more prepared to lead it,” said Aimee Creighton, an eighth grader at Wydown Middle School.

Though middle schoolers planning to have virtual Bar and Bat Mitzvahs face many restrictions and challenges, one thing is for certain: They will never forget their ceremony.

Most Jews have Bar and Bat Mitzvahs, but only a select few will have had their coming-of-age ceremony during a pandemic. Their experience will be unique. The obstacles they overcome will be proof of their maturity, perhaps giving them a new perspective on entering adulthood.

Through virtual Bar and Bat Mitzvahs, new Jewish adults will have the opportunity to bring light to a dark time.

chloe creighton

PAGE EDITOR

THE CEO VS. THE CLIMATE

Isabella Bamnolker explains the deceptive use of greenwashing in marketing.

I

magine you were told to go inside your local supermarket and pick out one of two different dishwashing soaps, one which was the regular soap you used and one which was labeled as “environmentally friendly” with “plant-based” and “all-natural” additives.

Which one would you use?

Think about how many times you’ve come across a brand you thought was “better” and more beneficial for our earth, just because of the pretty moss green packaging and cardboard cover.

In a world where people are busy and want to help the environment, buying these products seems like the perfect way to do their part. It’s fast and easy. We live in a world where everyone is moving around. We are built on a society of consumer-based activism, or so it seems. Buy this to help the children. Buy this to find the cure to world hunger. The planet is warming. People are dying at the cost of wildfires. Carbon emissions are increasing. It seems as if humans are the cause of why the environment is worsening.

This brings it to people in brand name companies, companies that are the massproducers of waste. Waste that contributes to global warming. When companies like Huggies, H&M, and Tide see that our environment is crumbling and that we consumers really want to help, the connection becomes a marketing plan.

So when does innocent curiosity about helping the environment become an advantage for the big companies? Who do the actions we think are helping the wildfires on the West Coast and the melting ice caps actually help the CEO or the climate?

To figure out why greenwashing is inherently malicious, we need to look at the meaning of greenwashing.

“Companies act as if they are focusing on green initiatives through marketing. In reality, it’s almost like the tip of the iceberg,” said Justin Hildebrand, marketing teacher at Clayton High School. “It’s face value, like here’s what we are showing you; but in reality, our carbon footprint is actually growing in size.”

Greenwashing was first coined in 1986 by environmentalist Jay Westerveld, in response to advertising that Bruce Watson of The Guardian describes as enabling companies “to present themselves as caring environmental stewards, even as they were engaging in environmentally unsustainable practices.”

With the introduction of the green movement among young generations such as Gen Z and millennials, companies are adapting to our ever-changing environment and our perspectives on the world.

“Companies are more likely to shed a light on the positive things they are doing and try to ignore the negative things. As a consumer, you are way more likely to purchase something

“

Green branded products have become increasingly popular and sometimes fool consumers. (Maya Richter)

COMPANIES CAN EASILY MARKET A SHAMPOO BOTTLE THAT IS 80% BIODEGRADABLE AND LABEL IT AS 100% BIODEGRADABLE. that you like or from a company you perceive as good,” said Hildebrand.

Even brands such as Phillip Morris, one of the largest tobacco companies have been doing it for ages. The company has run anti-smoking and anti-tobacco ads because of its positive effect on consumers.

“Public relations will create something saying ‘Listen, we sell this stuff but we don’t think you should actually use it. Which is hypocritical because they are selling you the tobacco products,’” said Hildebrand.

If you tell people that you are doing something to combat the negative effects of your own products, people will be more likely to buy from your company because of its

progressive standpoint.

Hildebrand adds, “I think companies respond to whatever is in popular culture. If you know the environment is at the forefront of people’s minds…companies respond quickly to demonstrate they are on board with it.”

But we would never have these strategies without help from the consumer. The consumer is what drives the profitability of a company.

Every time a consumer makes a purchase it acts like a vote and companies get a clearer picture of who their audience is and what they want.

This insight hinges on consumer research.

“It’s [greenwashing] short term because we have an educated market out there. As consumers understand more of what that means and they have become more sensitive to environmental issues,” said Carol Johanek, a business-marketing professional and lecturer at Washington University in St. Louis. “What you don’t want from a business standpoint is for customers to see you as being deceptive in any way, shape or form.”

Johanek use the shampoo bottle as an example. If 100% of your bottle is biodegradable, it’s going to cost the consumer more. Companies can easily market a shampoo bottle that is 80% biodegradable and label it as 100% biodegradable. But the customer can’t tell that. But greenwashing goes even further than that. It’s more than just a simple change of percentages on the final piece.

How do companies figure out who their consumers are and how is greenwashing so successful in product-marketing?

“The message of greenwashing in Gen

FEATURE !7

Photo illustration of cosmetic product bottles spewing black, industrial pollution into the air (Amanda Raymond).

Z, Y, and X resonates with them. Because those generations are more involved with the environment. Companies want to be saying the right thing. They want those generations to hear it, because those generations align themselves more than any other generation.

The both of them (Gen Y and Z) lean towards brands that are responsible corporately and socially responsible. That can make a difference between someone saying I want to buy L’Oreal versus some other shampoo. L’Oreal knows that. And so, they want everyone to know that.

L’Oreal could write something (a grant to an energy plant), but it’s not going to get the same brand association that they want the people buying their products to know,” said Johanek.

Marketing tricks such as greenwashing are discreetly placed by specific customer research.

Databases called psychographics define the people who are buying a specific product. Some factors include where consumers live and their

FEATURE !8

shopping attitudes “That’s how we know if they are concerned about the environment. What products do they use? Do they only use products that are recyclable or biodegradable? We have a lot of data on who is purchasing that particular product,” said Johanek.

Does this apply to people in their 70s and 80s? Not as much as people in their 20s and 30s. The issues of greenwashing will not come up as often in older generations, simply because the people in that demographic group are not as involved in green-issues.

Gen Y and Z are known for having strong attitudes toward environmental issues and are frustrated with disregard for these issues by corporations.

Topics concerning the environmental impact for marginalized groups is especially important to Gen Y and Gen Z (especially communities of color who are directly and

indirectly affected by natural disasters. For example, Hurricane Katrina disproportionately displaced neighborhoods of color).

These generations are strongly advocating for environmental change and environmental justice.

“This comes back to the short term business [of greenwashing]. You have a dissatisfied, disgruntled person who is in the younger generation. Because environmental issues are the most recently valued all over social media.

It’s a short-term way to attract customers; long term it can be damaging. Younger generations are already distrustful of a lot of the large corporations that behave very poorly,” said Johanek.

Does “green-marketing” actually work in shaping people’s trust in products labeled as environmentally friendly?

“It’s hard to tell. Unfortunately, people believe what they see on Facebook and social media. Not as many people do their due diligence and enough research to really learn the truth. This is the power of marketing in any spectrum; whether we are talking about politics, media, business, whatever it is. People believe what they read and see online,” said Hildebrand. “The advertising rules are so relaxed that if you proved that you didn’t have malicious intent, you can pretty much advertise essentially whatever you want and however you want.”

This sets a tone for consumers and can create something called brand loyalty. Once you have a perception of a company projecting progressive ideals on environmental issues, for example, you will most likely continue to shop with them. “[Consumers] will say if you’re doing these few good things, I don’t really care what else you’re doing because look at how awesome a company you are, look at how many positive initiatives, looking at how much we’re doing to help the environment in this one area, so we must be doing that across the board and so people don’t question people don’t challenge, and a company, especially a large company that has a lot of power and influence may do the bare minimum when they maybe should be doing more,” Hildebrand said. “But there’s no public pressure, there’s no political pressure for them to improve because we live in a capitalistic society, and especially publicly traded companies, they need to make money, and they are beholden to their shareholders and their board, and they will do as little as they can, and will spend as little money as possible, as long as they can maximize profits.”

In the end, American consumers must look closer to see how they are being marketed to.

“I feel like there are a lot of people who want to be more environmentally friendly, but also don’t want to do their research. So companies doing this (greenwashing), takes away from people who could really be helping the environment… I think it’s definitely the company’s fault,” said Clayton High School sophomore Avie Mallon.

isabella bamnolker

PAGE EDITOR

climate change baby

in danger.

COVER 19

INTRO Global temperature rise, warming oceans, shrinking ice sheets, glacial retreat, sea level rise, ocean acidification— a few minutes on NASA’s climate change evidence page is enough to leave one more than worried for the future.

The Earth’s average surface temperature has risen just over 1.1 degrees Celsius since the late 19th century, and it only continues to rise.

This steady rise is caused by the industrial release of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere which trap heat from escaping, and threatens to drastically affect life on Earth. This, we have known for a while.

While an expanse has begun into renewable energy sources, environmentally-friendly

practices and an increase in the efficiency of manufacturing and production, not enough is being done. We are far from curbing climate change, especially as developing countries begin to industrialize and climate change deniers permeate the population.

Despite being a global problem, Climate Change is often overlooked, or undervalued.

It has historically been an issue of the future, rather than the present. Now, its effects are beginning to be felt.

This year, wildfires have razed over 4% of California, derechos have devastated the Midwest and hurricanes have been felt along the coast of the US, all during a global

pandemic.

The reality of Climate Change is that it’s happening. The Earth is heating up, natural disasters are ramping up in frequency and scale, irreversible damage is being caused, and we aren’t doing enough to stop it. However, a complete meltdown is preventable. The 1.1 degree Celsius increase is not the end of the world, in fact, it’s more than manageable. The goal of the Paris Climate Agreement, an accord between almost two hundred countries, aims to prevent global temperature rise from getting above 1.5 degrees Celsius. This 1.5 degree goal is more than achievable, but it will require global cooperation and sacrifice.

shane lagesse

CO-EDITOR IN CHIEF

ALTERNATIVE ENERGY Try to picture the total amount of energy you’ve spent in your lifetime. Visualize every time you’ve turned on the lights, every time you’ve plugged your phone or laptop into an outlet, or even every time you’ve opened the refrigerator. Now imagine all of that energy fitting inside something as minuscule as a soda can. While this may seem like some farfetched fantasy, it is actually a reality that can be achieved through the utilization of nuclear energy.

“Some atoms are slightly unstable in such a way that if you hit them with a neutron, they’ll absorb [it] and [release] a whole bunch of energy,” said Kathryn Huff, an assistant professor in the nuclear, plasma and radiological engineering department at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign.

This process is called nuclear fission, which occurs in a highly regulated nuclear plant.

The first step involves making tall, skinny rods out of uranium, about the diameter of a pinky finger. These will then be placed in water inside the reactor. Then, an external source of neutrons is shot through the plant, where it will come into contact with the uranium rods and start up the reaction.

“Each fission [reaction] produces more than one neutron. [Fission reactions] can [actually] produce up to 10 neutrons. In induced fission of uranium-235, you will most likely get two to three, 2.41, on average, but you in principle can have up to 10. So, these new neutrons that are produced, they will on their turn induce fission.

And then the fission reaction will become what we refer to as a chain reaction, and they’ll be able to sustain this [process] through the reactor,” said Angela Di Fulvio, also from

COVER 20

UIUC. After the fission reaction occurs in the uranium rods, the energy and heat is then transferred to the water around them.

“You pump that water around in a circle and outside the reactor, it passes through a heat exchanger and the heat is removed from the water and sent as steam. You let that water become steam, but you keep the water that’s in the reactor. [It’s] kind of running in a closed loop: it enters the reactor and then it leaves the reactor hot, and you keep that pump going,” explained Huff. “[The steam] goes through a secondary pipe towards the turbine, [which] is basically just like a big fan. It pushes the blades of that fan around just like the wind pushes a wind turbine. The turbine is attached to a magnet, the magnet is inside a coil of wires, and when a magnet spins inside wires, electrons move through those wires, and electrons moving through wires is how we turn the lights on.”

Nuclear energy is also incredibly dependable.

Currently, about 20% of the power used in the US is supplied by nuclear energy.

“I think one of the things that we have taken for granted in the United States is the reliability of the electricity on our grid. When you walk into your house and you turn on the lights, they turn on no matter what’s happening outside or anything like that. But as we introduce more and more renewable energy into our grid, we don’t necessarily combine it with as much storage technology as we need to back it up in the case that the sun doesn’t shine or the wind doesn’t blow, or in case the coal trains don’t make it to the coal plants,” said Huff. “Nuclear is very reliable because you only have to refuel the plant once every year and a half. And you

can keep a batch of fuel or a couple batches of fuel onsite without taking up a lot of space. You could run a nuclear plant for years. They’re not really affected by external forces.”

While nuclear energy may not produce any carbon emissions, it produces something that could be even deadlier: nuclear waste.

When the nuclei of uranium atoms split apart, they will form smaller nuclei, and thus, new elements called fission products. The new fission products are unstable, and will release energy, making them very radioactive.

To contain these dangerous products, they are first kept in the reactor for a few years, then transferred to a cooling pool and kept underwater for another few years. When this process is finished, they will still be in the form of solid rods. These rods will be taken out of the reactor and either be disposed of at a disposal facility or recycled, like they do in France.

“During the reactor process, you only split a small percentage of the [uranium] atoms. But if you chop it up and you get just the uranium atoms that haven’t been split yet, then you could make a new fuel rod and put it back in the reactor,” explained Huff.

Outside of just energy production, nuclear energy has played another important role in influencing not just other fields of energy, but many other vital aspects of science.

“A field that benefits from nuclear energy is medicine, because the nuclear reactors can also be used to create isotopes that can be then used for nuclear medicine patients, for cancer diagnostics and treatment,” said Di Fulvio. She also mentions robots used in nuclear power plants, which also have applications in many other fields.

“It’s a good thing that nuclear power is heavily

Maricopa Orchards in California is looking to utilize more solar energy

AL SEIB/LOS ANGELES TIMES/TNS regulated, and other industries should take a hint,” said Huff. “People fall off roofs installing photovoltaic cells. There are wind turbines that catch on fire and have killed engineers installing them… We don’t have a very good safety record.”

Another option for alternative energy are biofuels, or plant-based sources of energy. An example of a biofuel is lignin.

Lignin is a compound found in the cell walls of many plants, making them woody and tough.

As of now, lignin is most commonly seen being removed from trees when making paper.

However, it has excellent potential for replacing petroleum, a substance used for fuels and creating plastics which has contributed largely to global warming.

“Right now, [the paper industry] produces about 60 million tons of lignin as a byproduct [every year],” said Marcus Foston, an associate professor of engineering at Washington University. He is part of a team of engineers working on a project to develop a process to break down lignin with low-temperature plasmas in order for it to replace harmful petroleums. “A lot of times it’s just burned in various processing plants. The idea is that if you burn it, you can get some heat out of it. Whatever we get out of lignin, it needs to be more valuable than the electricity that we replace it with.”

Due to how common it is, lignin is an incredibly abundant and accessible resource that can be utilized. However, it has proven extremely difficult to break down. “Lignin is a really complex material. The sequence of building blocks that makes it up is very variable. It can change from tissue to tissue, or plant to plant or species to species,” said Foston. “This means that the ways in which we may want to extract it or use it becomes very difficult to understand on a first principle or basic level.”

Once lignin is able to be broken down, the next step is to figure out how it can actually

be used. “About 70% of a barrel of oil goes to production of fuel. 3.4% of that barrel of oil goes towards petrochemicals, which produce the commodity products and chemicals that we use all the time. [Fuels and petrochemicals] are inevitably linked,” said Foston. “When we think about lignin, we think about it the same way.

[We ask ourselves], ‘Can we burn it to make electricity? Can we compress it to make it into a more usable, more dense solid, that’s more easily transported?”

The convenience of a substance is incredibly important to keep in mind if it is to be used by the public. When it comes to manipulating the physical state of lignin to get it ready for use, there are a lot of different options.

Examples include turning it into a liquid through pyrolysis or converting it to a gas with gasification.

The principles behind the use of biofuels has applications to many other environmental issues. “A huge amount of plastic recycling actually doesn’t go into recycling. And that’s because there’s no economic motivation [behind it],” said Foston. “[Right now,] we’re breaking down biomass into smaller fragments that will be used for fuels and chemicals. We can think about how we can do the same thing to plastics.”

Renewable energy sources are drastically better for both the environment and people living in it. It’s predicted that with our current usage rate of fossil fuels and natural gas, we will run out of these resources by 2060. However, with solar energy, individuals utilize an inexhaustible source of energy: the sun. Many homeowners have been purchasing rooftop solar panels to produce their own electricity.

“People come to solar for a variety of reasons.

For some it’s the environmental savings, the environmental security and [for others it’s the] financial savings,” explained Eric Schneider, director of business development at StraightUp Solar, a St. Louis based company that operates in Missouri and Illinois. “What other appliance

in your house pays itself back?”

StraightUp Solar is a certified B Corporation, which means that the company strives to help communities and enact positive environmental change as well as make a profit. The company participates in the Midwest Renewable Energy Association’s Grow Solar program, which offers neighborhood communities opportunities to pool money and share the benefits of solar at a cheaper rate.

There are many financial and economic incentives to purchasing solar energy, which generally garner bipartisan support. “At least a couple years ago, solar installer jobs [were] the fastest growing job in Missouri, and it’s typically one of the fastest growing jobs around the country,” said Grace Tedder from EFS Energy, a St. Louis based solar company. “Solar is [also] becoming cheaper as an energy source, especially for utility scale solar, which is where you just have massive amounts of land with tons of solar panels on it. It is cheaper than operating these old coal plants, [which] need to be shut down.”

There is also a 30 percent federal investment tax credit for solar energy, but this credit has not been renewed by the Trump administration, and it has decreased by 4% since 2019 and will expire at the end of 2021 if not renewed earlier.

While solar energy is incredibly advantageous as an energy source, Tedder believes there is still a need for improvement. “A lot of times, the raw materials [used in solar panels] are extracted in really harmful ways from a lot of developing countries, and there’s a lot of human rights issues that go along with that,” said Tedder. “That’s not necessarily a reason to [think that] solar is bad and we have to use coal, because coal and fracking for natural gas is actively worse. But it doesn’t mean that [solar energy] is perfect. And there’s a lot of work that needs to be done there to still improve on that.”

Although people on both sides of the political spectrum support renewable energy incentives, electric utilities with legal monopolies use immense lobbying power and funding to resist change at the state level.

Most utilities are heavily backed by donors from the fossil fuel industry, and lobbying is very prevalent at the state level. In 2019, over 118 million dollars was spent by electric utilities while over 125 million dollars were spent by the oil and gas industry, while less than a million dollars were spent by renewable energy groups.

Because of their political influence, lobbying groups have much control over state legislature and regulations on their own monopolies.

Often, these corporations use confusing policy wording to influence voter decisions on proposed amendments.

In some states, it is illegal for anyone to purchase energy from any third party seller.

Utilities in many states implement a paying system for consumers with solar called net metering. When a consumer’s solar system overproduces during the day, excess energy is returned to the grid if it is not stored in a battery. At night when the system is not producing, the utility credits the homeowner

COVER 21

with the amount of energy they initially overproduced.

If homeowners produce more electricity than they consume for the entire day, utilities have varying responses. In Illinois, consumers are paid back the full retail value of the electricity they produced. In St. Louis, however, Ameren pays back consumers the wholesale price, which is far less than the retail price. “[Illinois has] had several incentives to where if you’re going to put solar on your home or your business, you can get some money back on that to help subsidize the cost of it… They’ve had some good incentives to help make it easier for home and business owners to put in solar. I was actually there visiting a job site, and all around me I could just stand there and count houses that had solar on it,” said Tedder. “[In] Missouri, [there are] some incentives, but not as much as Illinois, so it’s not as financially easy to get solar. There’s [a lot less solar] and it was crazy to see the implications of the policy that visibly represented.”

Some monopolies have done work as stated on its website.

These initiatives are necessary to move forward in the fight against global warming, but there are many unanswered questions.

For example, why won’t Ameren Missouri pay consumers full retail value for excess electricity they produce?

And although 2050 is the net zero carbon neutrality date agreed upon by the European Climate Foundation, some people are skeptical of the time frame. “Achieving that type of neutrality by 2050 in many ways from a scientific standpoint… it’s not soon enough” explained Bob Pashos, solar support specialist at StraightUp Solar, who is also an active member of the B Corp committee.

“To me it’s an example of how different utilities are still dragging their feet to some extent, in terms of cooperating with that transition from fossil fuels to clean energy, there’s no way to get around it.”

The simple truth: solar is a competitor, which by definition, monopolies can’t allow.

Ultimately, even the small efforts count in the battle against global warming. “Whether you’re in high school or college or none of the above, [you can work] with groups that are climate focused or get involved with advocacy for clean energy and solar policy in Missouri. There’s lots of different opportunities for that,” said Tedder.

“I do have a lot of concerns myself about the climate emergency… [It’s] a real global emergency that really does require very strong, powerful action in order to make the kind of difference that we need to make,” Pashos said. “[But] there’s other things I do too… giving presentations, taking part in rallies, writing my congressmen… Although I have some concerns about the time frame, I believe in doing everything we can.”

DERECHO “I remember thinking, yeah, this is the midwest, it will pass in 15 minutes and it’ll be fine,” said Katie Bell. Little did she know, that in August of 2020 Midwest a derecho would leave her without power for four straight days.

Derechos are severe weather storms which are categorized by fast-moving and highly intense windstorms. On August 10th and 11th of 2020, the derecho took over the midwest, specifically in Iowa but also impacting areas in South Dakota, Nebraska, Illinois, Wisconsin and Indiana.

The storm lasted approximately 14 hours with the peak wind gust measuring 126 miles per hour and approximated gusts reaching 140 miles per hour. Because of the raging winds, 21 tornadoes were confirmed in rural areas and there were four fatalities due to the storm.

The estimated damage cost left by the storm is 7.5 billion dollars, that includes damages to residential and commercial property, agriculture, public utility infrastructure and more.

Bell was in her Pure Barre workout studio in West Des Moines, Iowa, when all of her clients began to cancel. She recalled looking out the front window of the studio and seeing the sky grow dark very quickly. After it was safe, Bell left to return home, only to find streets riddled with tree limbs and powerlines knocked out by the winds.

“It’s led to a lot of continued consequences

for people. We were just finally able to get our fence repaired [around the beginning of November]. Roofing companies, fencing companies, companies like that have been extremely backlogged,” said Bell. “My husband is a general surgeon and he and his partners have had to fix a lot of hernias for people that were caused by them trying to move tree limbs.”

While many people think about the consequences of major storms, 2020 brings its own set. Due to the coronavirus, many families had stocked up on food and supplies. With the lack of power, and therefore the lack of refrigeration and freezing, food spoiled quickly, causing an even greater amount of loss.

The intensity and frequency of storms have increased over the past fifty years. According to the National Climate Assessment, there has been 71% more heavy rain since the 1950s. Many scientists attribute this to global warming. As the average temperature rises, more water evaporates from the oceans and heads into the atmosphere. In turn, this causes more atmospheric moisture for storms to use as rainfall and higher intensity storms.

Bell, living in the midwest her whole life, said “I’ve never seen anything like it.”

Storms such as derechos will continue to rise in strength and intensity if there are not stronger efforts put in place to prevent global warming.

ella cuneo

SENIOR MANAGING EDITOR

vivian chen & thomas gustafson

COPY EDITOR | PAGE EDITOR

COVER 22

A tree fallen from the high wind gusts. Photo provided by Katie Bell.

So, What can I do?

We have been telling you all about the impacts of climate change, now you’re probably wondering what you can do to help! Not everyone has the money or resources to invest in renewable energy sources such as solar panels, so here are some easy things you can do to limit your carbon footprint and help save our earth.

Speak Up

Reach out to your representatives in the government and tell them how you feel.

They are there to vote in the way most people think, the more support from the government on bills and laws related to climate change, the more likely they will vote to protect our Earth. Speaking up can also include encouraging and educating your friends on the effects of climate change.

Reduce Water Waste

$16.47 billion. That is the price of around 72,619 average United States homes. That is also the estimated amount of damage caused by Hurricane Matthew in 2016.

Hurricane Matthew hit the Southeastern United States in early October, 2016. Matthew made its fourth and final landfall in South Carolina as a category one hurricane.

Hurricane Matthew was classified as a category five Atlantic hurricane as a total of its impact around the world as it also hit areas near the Atlantic such as Venezuela, Colombia, Puerto Rico, Cuba and many more.

Donna Stubbs has lived in a small community about 50 miles inland from Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, for most of her life and has experienced a variety of hurricane storms. But Matthew was different.

“We were isolated. I’ve lived in this community for 70 years and this is the first time I’ve ever felt that way. All the roads were flooded around us and we could not get out for three days,” said Stubbs, “Just knowing for three days that I could not get out-- that I couldn’t get out of a five mile radius-- well that’s a scary feeling.”

Stubbs recalled that her and her husband, three weeks after Matthew, decided to head down the road to another small town called Fairbluff. When they got to a bridge that was over the river near their town, they saw a truck.

Water was up to its windows… three weeks later.

The damage caused many people’s homes

to be damaged. Stubbs said, “The people just left. They moved away, they moved in with neighbors. A lot of jobs were lost because of the flooding from Matthew.” Even four years later Stubbs will be walking around and “think ‘woah, there’s another house that they fixed!’”

Hurricanes, such as Matthew, tend to cause lots of flooding and wind damage. Similar to a derecho, hurricanes have been greatly impacted by global warming. The warming of the planet, causing the evaporation of water and therefore more rainwater, increases the intensity and frequency of hurricanes.

“We’ve had hurricanes all my life, until Matthew, I think 1954 Hurricane Hazel was the worst. I was 5-years-old and I can remember it.

But, you had one maybe every five or six years back then. Since 1990, it seems like they just come more frequently and seem to be more severe,” said Stubbs.

Especially for Stubbs, her hurricane experience is unique. While most hurricanes impact areas near the coast lines, Stubbs lives 50 miles inland… meaning the ocean is not where they get the majority of their flooding from.

“The people on the coast expect to deal with hurricanes because of their location. As they rebuild, they are rebuilding to a different standard. 50 miles inland, not so much,” said Stubbs.

Limiting the amount of water you use by turning off your faucet while brushing your teeth, turning off the water in between washing dishes, taking shorter showers, etc.

Cautious Purchases

Only buy the food you know you will eat, try to not let things spoil, make the correct amount of servings, and limit the amount of food waste. Also, use the least resource-intensive products such as locally sourced food and produce from nearby farmers. Also, use reusable things such as reusable water bottles and towels rather than plastic water bottles and paper towels, and reusing papers.

Conserve energy

Unplug everything not inuse, your phone charger and lamp does not need to be plugged in 24/7, this will save the environment and your electricity bill.

Smart Transportation

Limit how much you use your car. Try to walk, bike, use public transportation, or carpool with friend.

ella cuneo

SENIOR MANAGING EDITOR

HURRICANE MATTHEW

ella cuneo

SENIOR MANAGING EDITOR COVER 23

WILDFIRES “I remember waking up on the first day, here, in Boulder, where I could smell wildfire and I thought ‘Ugh, not again,’’’ said Rosalind Cuneo. Cuneo, after finishing her masters thesis on motivated reasoning in a climate affected population, moved from Seward, Alaska, to Boulder, Colorado in May of 2020.

In Alaska, Cuneo remembered seeing the sun turn orange and a grey overcast took over the skies for days. Her car smelled like a campfire for weeks during the Swan Lake Fire, so when she arrived in Boulder and the Cameron Peak Fire spread across the area, she was forced to face the infernal nightmare again.

Wildfires have destroyed more than 3.2 millions acres of peaceful landscapes and homes in 2020, causing apocalyptic skies in the western United States, driving out tens of thousands of people and animals, and causing billions of dollars in damages. One season of such destruction may be manageable, but what happens when natural disasters of this magnitude become a yearly occurrence?

While wildfires have impacted people’s lives in a variety of ways, including health complications.

“I got headaches and you feel like you have a cold and kind of sick. This year with covid, there’s an extra layer of; am I sick because of a virus or am I sick because there is smoke in the air?” said Cuneo.

The small particles from ash and wildfire smoke can cause burning eyes and worsen chronic heart and lung diseases… but it can also mimic symptoms of covid-19 including

runny nose, scratchy or sore throat, headaches and other illness. Pregnant women, children, and those with asthma or heart disease are especially susceptible to the risks of inhaling wildfire smoke. In 2020, wildfires have added an additional anxiety because of the coronavirus. If a person were to get truly sick due to the smoke or ash, would it be worth it to risk going to a hospital?

In 2020 alone, more than 4.2 million acres of land have burned, resulting in at least 31 deaths and the damage and destruction of 10,488 structures. While the size of the economic dent the wildfires have caused is yet to be determined, experts estimate that the figure currently stands at $10 billion.

People and animals all over the country have been hurting from the pure destruction of the wildfires.

“... One thing the majority of people don’t hear about or see is the loss of livestock, horses and wildlife,” Shadow Creek Ranch near Silverthorn, Colorado’s General Manager, Buck McNichols said.

The victims of wildfires come in all forms, a large amount of which are deer, coyotes, elk, foxes, rabbits, cows, and horses. Thousands of cattle die each year from adverse weather, and while it is possible for animals to run away and seek shelter or be moved away by farmers, wildfires spread quickly and can easily trap both people and animals.

In recent years the increasing size and frequency of wildfires have sparked debates over the most efficient and effective ways to handle the consequences and implement prevention techniques, particularly in states like California and Colorado, where wildfires are

Deer Creek Wildfire’s flames rise above the trees near Shadow Creek Ranch. Photo provided by Barb Kollar.

COVER 24

more common.

McNichols said, “... our federal and state governments have neglected to properly manage the forests for decades and now are spending billions of dollars to combat these disasters from damaging life and property.”

McNichols hopes that if the government manages the forests, which entails clearing dead branches and leaves reducing the amount of flammable objects, it will limit such intense fires.

“We knew immediately that it was an issue for the ranch as it was incredibly dry and we hadn’t had moisture (rain or snow) in a long time,” said Shadow Creek Ranch Office Manager, Barb Kollar.

A variety of factors have contributed to the rise of wildfires in recent years, including increasing temperatures and changing rain and snow patterns. Dry soil, dead or dry vegetation, and a warmer climate increase the chances of a fire starting and spreading quickly as a result of lighting.

At a campaign rally in August of 2020, President Donald Trump said, “They’re starting again in California. I said, you gotta clean your floors, you gotta clean your forests.” The ‘you’ referring to state and local governments.

Of the 33 million acres of forest in CA, about 57% is owned and managed by the U.S. Forest Service or the federal Bureau of Land

Management… meaning it is managed by the federal government. In comparison the local and state governments control only 3% of the forest. The same applies to a lot of the nation. Forests can be owned by the federal government, meaning the responsibility of preventing the fires does not only fall on the state governments as President Trump implied.

California resident Luigi Corbo also believes that taking more preventative action would be beneficial, saying, “We need to work towards managing (the fires/disasters) a little bit better.

In California there needs to be more forest management. We know that we are going to have these fires come up, and maybe [we should be] clearing the forests, getting all the dead shrubs and dead trees out. We need to do that on a more frequent basis.”

While trimming dead brush and trees could offer a temporary solution, it is not effective in preventing or halting the spread of such fires. This method can even lead to unintended consequences such as exposing fire fuel such as dead leaves and pine needles to greater sun drying and wind penetration.

Making greater strides towards renewable energy will help reduce the risk of fires by lowering the stress on electrical transmission lines and reducing carbon-intensive energy sources. The energy that can be generated from solar panels, wind turbines, and small-

scale hydro power plants does not produce greenhouse gases from fossil fuels which become trapped in the Earth’s atmosphere and contribute to global warming.

Oregon resident Richelle Corbo believes that it would be in the best interest of the United States to be leaders in the development of renewable energy sources. She also makes the point that it is important to consider the lives of miners and other workers in the fossil fuel industry.

“Our federal should not be supporting the fossil fuel industries, but supporting the innovation of new industries because it will create good jobs in this country for the future,” said Corbo. She believes it is understandable for people not to want to lose their jobs, and that these workers, as well as many others, could make the transition to high-paying jobs in the growing renewable energy industry.

Making strides toward renewable energy and even some shorter term solutions can help limit the impact, spread, and intensity of wildfires across the United States, but if we do not invest in long term solutions, the risks will only be exacerbated.

“As the weather warms, the conditions that lead to wildfires become more common and make wildfires more likely,” said Cuneo.

ella cuneo & seraphina corbro

SENIOR MANAGING EDITOR | FEATURE SECTION EDITOR

Top left photo and bottom right photo show smoke filled and ashy skies from the Cameron Peak Fires in Colorado, photos provided by Rosiland Cuneo.

COVER 25

A CAPITALIST CLIMATE For now or for the future?

Stronger hurricanes, bigger floods, hotter droughts, rising sea levels, and thousands of deaths; these are only a fraction of all of the side effects of climate change. What if this could have been prevented by companies changing their sources for materials, and by the government mandating a switchmaking mandatory switches to cleaner sources of power?

For decades, there has been controversy over whether the government and big corporations should change their methods on how they get their energy, fuel their products and services, and make their goods. Though some companies and the government have taken some steps to make resources more eco-friendly, they are hesitant to fully commit to environmentally friendly options for power and materials.

Many companies and politicians are concerned that changing sources of energy and materials would lead to massive amounts of lost money, and by result, a crashing economy.

While people arguing for companies to pay for cleaner energy take the opposite approach to the subject: why would an economy matter if there is no habitable planet for people to spend money on?

The biggest concern for making this leap towards sustainability is money, of course.

Millions and billions of dollars would need to be invested into cleaner sources for power and products, and with the huge price tag of being climate friendly, it is not a small undertaking to pave way for the future of their company to be green.

The connection between switching to renewable energy and more environmentally friendly materials and climate change is only the tip of the iceberg when it comes to the effect of climate change and the economy, though switching to cleaner resources is a way to stop climate change from getting worse. Agriculture, real estate, infrastructure, and human health are all threatened by climate change too; and disturbance to these areas of the economy will cause massive hardships in the United States and around the world.

Changing energy sources for big companies is a priority to make sure carbon levels are reduced. Switching to renewable energy like solar power, wind energy, or electricity would provide our planet with clean energy that would not pollute the earth is a necessary step that we need to take in order to reduce carbon emissions. The cost of making the United States run 100% percent on renewable energy would cost an estimated $4.5 trillion dollars.

Although this is quite a hefty price tag, the cost and benefits of switching to renewable energy is more efficient and cost-effective in the future.

In terms of repairing, wind and solar power

COVER 26

are very cheap to repair compared to other forms of energy production methods. Not to mention that there is an unlimited amount of wind and solar power. At the rate that we are currently using fossil fuels, it is estimated that all of our fossil fuels will be depleted by 2060 and if we keep on using fossil fuels until there is no more, almost all of the ice in Antarctica will have melted, which will raise sea levels by 200 feet. Companies can also switch to eco-friendly materials to make their goods. In 2018, 292.4 million tons of waste was generated in the U.S., and every year 14 billion pounds of trash is dumped into the ocean. The effect of mass amounts of waste on the planet is dangerous as well. Garbage can chemically cause harm to soil, water, and air. Trash emits

“

WHAT PRICE IS TOO MUCH TO PAY TO SAVE HUMANITY AND THE EARTH? methane, a harmful gas that is 28x more potent than carbon dioxide and hurts air and the atmosphere. This is especially a problem when it comes to uncontrolled and unmonitored litter. Although buying disposable products is cheaper than buying sustainable quality products, there is a bigger benefit to producing and buying sustainably.

Companies can benefit from producing and selling sustainably because eco-friendly businesses are increasingly becoming more popular compared to companies that produce generally single-use goods. Companies can also assure the quality of their products more efficiently if they are multi-use products, as multi-use products tend to be a higher quality than single-use items. This can result in a happier consumer. Consumers can benefit from buying multi-use products because they can stop buying mass amounts of products, which saves time, money, and the environment.

The agriculture and food business in the U.S made up 5.2% in 2019. Considering that the effects of climate change range from droughts to flooding to dust storms, the agriculture and food business could be badly hurt by climate change. Due to extreme weather like droughts and floods, millions of cattle could die, resulting

in millions of dollars lost. Researchers also project that by 2050 the Midwest could lose up to 25% of its current soybean and corn crop because of extreme heat.

The National Academy of Sciences reports that there will be a 5% - 15% decrease in crop production for every degree Celsius the global temperature rises. The decrease in crops will no doubt affect the economy. By limiting the supply of any given crop the price will increase, making wheat, corn, soybeans, rice, oats, and other crops less accessible to consumers.

Grocery stores and other companies in the food industry will suffer because of the decrease in supply of crops.

New York City, Miami, New Orleans, and almost every coastal city is at risk of being damaged by rising sea levels due to melting icebergs. The threat of rising sea levels will devastate the real estate market and leave the economy in shambles due to stronger hurricanes and bigger floods. In cities like New Orleans and New York City, damage due to flooding can be detrimental to the housing market and to the residents of the city.

In 2016, economists predicted that coastal property damage as a result of climate change “could surpass that of the bursting dot-com and real estate bubbles of 2000 and 2008.�

The weather caused by climate change could potentially scare people enough to move away from the shorelines in massive groups, leading for housing prices to plummet. Damage to roads, cables, and docks are only a handful of infrastructures that are at risk because of climate change. Damage due to climate change is estimated to cost billions of dollars. Houses, airports, roads, and underground cables for internet and communication will all be

CHOLE ELMER/PENN STATE UNIVERSITY/MCT

SEAN GALLUP/GETTY IMAGES/TNS damaged by rising sea levels. Though some of these structures are water resistant, they are not fully waterproof, and will therefore need maintenance which will cost billions of dollars.

The damage caused by natural disasters will end up costing the government and companies of all sizes substantial resources, and will have a negative economic impact.

Due to rising temperatures, more people will suffer and die from heat-related illnesses.

Not only will this devastate families around the world, it will also limit the productivity of companies due to the loss of workers.

Heat-related illnesses will affect people of all health conditions and ages at an increasing amount per year.

An estimated 9,300 additional people living in American cities are expected to die from extreme heat if temperatures increase by 4.5’C by 2090.

Looking at this tragedy from an economic

standpoint, annual losses just from heat-related deaths are expected to be $140 million by 2090.

Another human health crisis that climate change affects is pandemics. Through the loss of their habitat, animals will start to go to humanpopulated areas and potentially make the spreading of their own viruses to humans more common than they already are.

Another way that climate change causes pandemics is through melting icebergs. Ancient bacteria and diseases trapped for thousands to tens of thousands of years under layers of thick ice are starting to surface due to icebergs melting. RNA fragments of the Spanish Flu (the virus that caused the 1918 pandemic) have been discovered in Alaska’s tundra through frozen corpses buried in mass graves.

It is also likely that samples of Smallpox and the Bubonic Plague (known as the Black Death which wiped out one-third of Europe’s population in the 1300’s) are located in Siberia.

Compared to the death rates of the Spanish Flu (>2.5%), and that of the Bubonic Plague (around 50%), COVID-19 can be considered a less-deadly virus. Although the result of one of these viruses reappearing are unknown, an outbreak of any of these ancient viruses in our modern society would cause havoc that would result in our economy suffering with the many shutdowns, job losses, and deaths that another epidemic or pandemic would result in.

The U.S.’s and the world’s economy is strongly connected to climate change; whether it be through the result of not environmentallyfriendly materials and resources used to make good and provide services on the Earth, natural disasters causing agriculture to become damaged, people becoming injured and or killed, infrastructures and houses being destroyed, or even shutdowns due to new epidemics and pandemics.

alexandra hagemeister

NEWS SECTION EDITOR

TIM JOHNSON/MCT COVER 27

THE POLITICS OF CLIMATE Climate change is expensive, and combating it is a process. If renewable energy was as widely available and efficient as fossil fuels, everyone would use them. Unfortunately, it isn’t, and large corporations (100 of which, according to the Climate Accountability Institute, are responsible for over 70% of carbon emissions) are more than hesitant to transition from fossil fuels to renewable energy. If regulations are not passed and enforced to limit carbon emissions on a corporate level, the efforts of the individual are futile.

Therefore, it’s up to the world’s governments to keep the world from burning up.

However, the government’s only able to do what its voters tell it to. 65% percent of American adults believe that the federal government is doing too little to combat the effects of climate change, according to a study conducted by Pew Research. 63% say that global climate change is in at least some way affecting their local community. Over 70% agree with taxing corporations based on carbon emissions, 80% are for tougher restrictions on power plant carbon emissions, and 90% favor planting one trillion trees to absorb carbon emissions.

Yet while the issue of climate change remains a growing concern on a national level, it can fall behind when compared to other policy decisions in the political scene.

“Often people, when asked, will say that climate change is really important to them,” explained Dr. William Gochberg, a postdoctoral research associate in the political science department at Washington University. “But then when you ask them to rank it alongside other issues, sometimes it’s seven, eight, or ten items down the list. It’s tricky to figure out exactly how willing the general public is to see action taken on the part of lawmakers.”

Climate change lacks the immediate sense of danger provided by war, disease or poverty.

Aside from those who experience climate change-related natural disasters; its gradual effects are only visible when viewed over longer periods of time, often minimizing its sense of urgency.

In addition, the matter has become increasingly partisan since it entered the realm of politics and activism in the mid 1900s.

According to Pew Research, 79% of liberal democrats consider that the Earth is warming mostly due to human activity, compared to 63% of moderate democrats, 34% of

COVER 28

moderate republicans, and 15% of conservative republicans as of the election in 2016.

Much dispute about climate change is due to the multi-million dollar plans from companies such as ExxonMobil, Chevron, and the American Petroleum Institute to create an “uncertainty” around climate change and provide alternative views and science.

Environmental policy also suffers due to its widespread impact compared to its concentrated burden.

“If you think about clean energy, it’s what’s called a public good in political science and economics, where everyone would benefit-having cleaner air,” explained Dr. Gochberg.

“But, certain industries would really lose out from that kind of policy. So, they being a smaller group that would face certain losses have a lot of incentive to organize against that kind of policy.”

In the 2020 election, the environment was a heated topic of debate to which the candidates held polarizing beliefs. The Biden campaign put great emphasis on the environment and climate reform, contrary to Trump’s laissez-faire approach to the fossil fuel industry and climate change.

Over the past four years, the Trump administration has pulled out of the Paris Climate Agreement, loosened regulations on air pollution, and greenlit seismic airgun blasts for oil and gas drilling-- moves which have favored the US economy over potentially harmful environmental repercussions.

Biden ran a contrary campaign in 2020: he pledged to rejoin the Paris Climate Agreement on his first day in office and laid out a plan to reach net zero carbon emissions by 2050. He put emphasis on limiting the fossil fuel industry, expanding into renewable energy sources, putting money into public transportation, and upgrading old buildings to be more energy-efficient.

With Biden’s victory in November, the future of climate policy looks vastly different than it has been under the Trump administration. The president-elect has already chosen to appoint former Obama administration secretary of state John Kerry as his special presidential envoy for climate, marking the first official dedicated to climate change on the National Security Council.

Kerry, who spoke on November 24 at an event in Wilmington, Delaware, explained that

Former Secretary of State John Kerry speaks during a campagin event for Joe Biden in February of 2020. Kerry has been appointed Climate Czar by the President-Elect.

Justin Sullivan/Getty Images/TNS

34% 79%

13%

63%

79% OF LIBERAL DEMOCRATS, 63% OF MODERATE DEMOCRATS, 34% OF MODERATE REPUBLICANS, AND 13% OF CONSERVATIVE REPUBLICANS BELIEVE THAT THE EARTH IS WARMING DUE TO HUMAN ACTIVITY AS OF 2016

“no country alone can solve this challenge.

Even the United States, for all of our industrial strength, is responsible for only 13% of global emissions. To end this crisis, the whole world must come together.”

Kerry’s remarks tie in one of the largest barriers to combating climate change: it’s a global issue. The fight against global warming requires action from every nation and cooperation on issues regarding energy and pollution.

In addition, it becomes difficult to determine how much “blame” each country should receive and how much action each country needs to take based on their current and past emissions.

It would be unfair to hold a developing country beginning to industrialize to the

same level of responsibility as a wealthy, industrialized country such as the United States. Doing so would severely disadvantage their economic growth when compared to the lack of restriction the same wealthy nations felt as they industrialized and grew economically.

“There is the issue of historical emissions, which have by far come from the richer, industrialized nations,” explained Dr. Gochberg.

“It’s hard to pressure Nigeria or Bangladesh, etc., to reduce emissions without offering some path towards economic development that other countries have pursued while emitting lots of greenhouse gases.”

Accordingly, it is important that the United States assumes its position as a leader, helping combat climate change on a global scale

alongside a domestic effort to reach carbon neutrality. Providing aid to developing countries is necessary, spreading renewable and climate-friendly practices.

The politics of climate change are expensive, both domestic and international, and heavily debated. Unfortunately, the Climate can’t wait for the world’s leaders to come around to carbon neutrality and renewable energy— time is of the essence, and on a local, national, and global level, it is important that the United States leads in the fight against global warming.

shane lagesse

CO-EDITOR IN CHIEF

A person hoists a poster in front of the U.S. Capitol during a cliamte protest in Washington, D.C.

Eva Hambach/AFP/GettyImages/TNS

COVER 29

WHY TRUMP LOST Reporter Enoch Lai reflects on COVID-19, the BLM movement, and an unsuccessful first term as reasons to explain Trump’s 2020 loss.

Former Vice-President Joe Biden is now President-Elect. He has spoiled Donald Trump’s bid for a second term amidst a global pandemic.

But, how did he get to the position he is in today? And what does this mean for the American people looking forward amidst an uncertain future?

WHAT GOT TRUMP ELECTED? Trump’s election in 2016 was bizarre and unexpected. Many polls showed that Trump was not in a good position to win the presidency compared to his Democratic opponent, Hillary Clinton. Despite losing the popular vote by a considerable margin on election day, Trump won the Electoral College and secured his position as President of the United States. Trump may have won because he was so polarizing. He was a norm-busting political outsider who was prepared to say what couldn’t be said by other politicians; he wasn’t the typical politician. He was upfront, and many American people thought that he would deliver promises instead of talking cheap like other politicians. Trump had no political experience, which both helped and hurt him. Without political experience, no one could tell how he would perform as a member of a political office. But at the same time, he had no bad track-record in political office to begin with as opposed to other politicians. He was a political novice at best, but people didn’t care. They wanted someone new, and they were tired of the same rambling politicians they were used to. Trump promised leadership and action, and people believed him.

WHY DID TRUMP LOSE? The fact of the matter is that Trump is the first president to lose his re-election bid in 28 years. His 2020 opponent, Joe Biden, won the Electoral College and gained the most votes ever cast for a presidential candidate; Trump came in second. This presidential election has been one of the most contentious and polarizing elections in U.S. history. The ironic fact is that Joe Biden won with the same number of electoral votes that Trump won with in 2016 (306), along with winning the popular vote. Although Trump claims he lost his bid for re-election due to “voter fraud,” there is no evidence that widespread voter fraud exists or even that it would make a significant difference in the outcome of the election. Why is Trump in this awkward situation where he cannot accept his own defeat and will end up as an (arguably) failed one-term president?

The elephant in the room is COVID-19.

COVID-19 has been devastating to the lives and the economy of the United States. The United States has nearly 1/5 of the world’s COVID-19 cases, despite having only 1/25 of the world’s population. The U.S. recently reported 180,000 cases in a single day, likely due to a cold, dark winter coming up ahead.

As people are staying inside, cases have been skyrocketing to a deadly level. The United States’ response to COVID-19 has been (and still is) the laughingstock of the world. The US was the best positioned to take on a pandemic, and we have handled it worse than any other country.

While Trump may not have been the only factor in this COVID-19 explosion, he definitely did not help the situation.

Before COVID-19, the economy was strong and growing. Trump would be seeking a second term under good conditions; in 2016

OPINION 30

he promised to improve the economy and kept that promise. While the Democrats were still casting for their nominee, Trump had established himself as a great political opponent before COVID-19 hit the U.S. Then COVID-19 hit, exposing the nation to crisis.

It is wrong to claim that COVID-19 would be a disaster for every president which encounters it. That is simply not the truth. Presidents aren’t inevitably doomed by crisis. In fact, presidents often emerge from national crises stronger.

Crises can often bring out one’s greatness.

Franklin D. Roosevelt’s rescuing of America from the Great Depression made him nearly invincible to other political opponents. George W. Bush’s initial response to 9/11 boosted his popularity; it was enough to win him a second term. COVID by no means would destroy Donald Trump. It was his botched handling of this crisis which secured his fate.

His general lack of leadership stuck with Americans on election day. When confronted with the crisis, he could not resist the familiar impulse to spin it out of control. To him, it was one more occasion to divide the American people. Despite the desperate call for shutdowns, he compared COVID-19 to the flu, saying it would “miraculously disappear” while Americans were dying. He wanted to reduce panic, but that cost tens of thousands of lives.

“Don’t be afraid,” he said, contradicting many health experts. But now over a quarter of a million Americans are dead. After COVID-19 spiraled out of control in the spring months, he reluctantly embraced a brief regimen of partial shutdowns and social distancing. He declared the mission accomplished and said that the country would be back to normal by Easter, troubling many health experts who believed

“

PRESIDENTS AREN’T INEVITABLY DOOMED

BY CRISIS. IN FACT, PRESIDENTS OFTEN EMERGE FROM NATIONAL CRISES STRONGER.

this was just an arbitrary date of celebration and a claim made out of the delusional thought that COVID-19 was over.

Who were the American people to believe?

Thus, pro-science and pro-Trump factions formed. The President’s lack of leadership extended even further, by making the wearing of masks and social distancing a partisan issue. Well documented “anti-maskers” were empowered by Trump in the middle of a global pandemic. Through nearly six weeks of bizarre and contentious COVID-19 briefings, cases and deaths skyrocketed. They are still skyrocketing today.

The COVID-19 pandemic was a chance to prove Trump’s leadership. It was a chance to ensure his second term. Instead, it has shown the American people that the president can’t lead; he can only divide. Despite his extensive campaigning rallies around battleground states, Trump has lost his original charm. COVID-19 hurt Trump’s bid for re-election.

President Donald Trump departs next to former White House adviser on coronavirus Scott Atlas after his news conference at the White House.

YURI GRIPAS /ABACA PRESS/TNS But what else led to Trump’s loss?

When George Floyd, a Black man, was killed with his neck under the knee of a Minneapolis police officer, the nation was shocked. Trump could have sought to heal the country after his tragic death. Taking advantage of a nation in crisis, he could have stood in favor of the Black community, looking for ways to solve racist policing issues involving the lives of many Black people around the United States. But rather than seeking to heal the country, Trump did what he does best: divide it.

He reacted to the largely peaceful protests across the country by ignoring them completely. Focusing on the inevitable looting that unfortunately erupts from largely peaceful protests, he declared himself as the “law and order” president.

Despite highly tense racial situations, all he did was condemn the violent nature of some of these protests. His mistakes were further proven through his actions. In Washington D.C., peaceful protests were cleared out by tear gas for a photo-op.

Not once did Trump try to empathize with the agony of the people who have been subjected to racism and white supremacy for hundreds of years. By sending the military to control the peaceful protests, he showed that he was unfocused.

He did not see these protests as a call for action and a time to heal, but rather a polarizing and violent movement which will disenfranchise law enforcement or “law and order” as a whole. To many people, this

discouraged them from voting for Trump, but also caused resentment towards Trump.

The explosive cry for racial justice changed the outlook of the election. For many, it started as an election about candidates, but has evolved into an election about racial equality.

Although the Black community is largely Democratic, Trump could have proven that he was for the Black community despite being seen by many Americans as racist after his Charlottesville episode.

Once again, it’s not that these events guaranteed Trump’s doom. It was his actions in the midst of this crisis that discouraged many demographic groups (especially Black women) from voting for him.

The events over the summer boosted voter participation in such a way that even if Trump gained more votes than last year, his opponent would still maintain the upper hand in an election.

Swing voters often decide the presidential election; firm left-wing voters and right-wing voters will almost always cast a ballot for their party. But on election day, undecided voters pondered, “was our president really presidential?” Was the man who called white supremacists “very fine people” presidential?

Was the one who interrupted the moderator and his opponent 128 times in the first presidential debate alone presidential? Was the man who failed to condemn white supremacist groups like the Proud Boys, and told them to “stand back and stand by” presidential?

Americans had grown weary of Trump’s act

-- the endless tweets, conspiracy theories, and tantrums.

The president’s refusal to accept the results of the election despite there being no evidence of “election fraud” suggest his creeping authoritarianism, but also proves that he truly is unpresidential.

Trump’s incompetent leadership, along with his divisive appeals to racism and white supremacy, stuck with undecided voters.

What’s the bottom line?

Trump was elected because he was a normbusting political novice who was prepared to say what had previously been unsayable. But it is for these same reasons that Trump did not win his second term.

Americans have seen his leadership skills.

They have been exposed to his polarizing, defamatory, and even outright disgusting comments. They came to the conclusion that he did not deserve a second term.

While COVID-19 spikes all across the nation during the cold winter months, let’s hope that the next presidential administration will be able to guide America through its greatest crises.

Whether it be the adverse effects of climate change or the current pandemic, let’s hope that America can adapt and can prepare for what’s next.

enoch lai REPORTER OPINION 31

NON-PARTISAN COURT REFORM Court packing has been an occurrence throughout American history, but is it merited after the recent election?

Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett testifies during the third day of her confirmation hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Capitol Hill Wednesday, Oct. 14, 2020 in Washington, D.C.

J

ustice Amy Coney Barret was sworn in on Oct. 27, 2020. Her place on the Supreme Court has forever destroyed its integrity in its current form.

Going back to the very beginning of our nation, the Supreme Court has always been political. Starting with the Judiciary Act of 1801, lame duck President John Adams and his allies in Congress attempted to create over 50 new federal judgeships and end the practice of circuit riding for Supreme Court justices.

Circuit riding was when the justices were expected to travel throughout their circuit or district, serving as a circuit court judge. Both of these measures were intended to limit the power of the Supreme Court.

President Adams, a Federalist, was also attempting to limit the political power of the incoming government, composed mostly of Democratic-Republicans led by then PresidentElect Thomas Jefferson. When President Jefferson took office shortly after, he signed the Judiciary Act of 1802, dismantling the positions

OPINION 32

(YURI GRIPAS/ABACA PRESS/TNS) of the so-called “midnight judges” and reinstating the practice of circuit riding. This was the first of many partisan fights within the federal judiciary up to the Supreme Court.

While partisan bickering over the court continued throughout the early 1800s, there has only been one other time in our nation’s history when the Supreme Court has been as misrepresentative of public opinion as it is today.

In 1837, President Andrew Jackson manipulated the judicial circuits so that most of them were in Southern states. In 1857, a mostly Southern, Democratic, pro-slavery Supreme Court heard Dred Scott v. Sanford, the case that finally determined whether enslaved people counted as property or people.

The court delivered a ruling that stated that enslaved people were indeed property, which was unpopular with much of the public.

When President Lincoln came into office, he had to fulfill his campaign pledges to remedy the situation and free all enslaved people. He

signed the Judiciary Act of 1862, redrawing the boundaries of the circuits and paving the way for a tenth circuit to be added a year later. Lincoln also began appointing justices because they were abolitionists, not necessarily because they lived in their assigned circuits.

After Lincoln’s death, his fellow Republicans contracted the size of the court in response to Andrew Johnson, a Democrat, becoming president.

When Republican Ulysses Grant became president in 1869, Congress brought the Supreme Court up to its current total, nine justices, so that Grant could add more justices once again. Theoretically, modern-day Democrats could do the same thing: add more justices for Biden to appoint and then shrink the size of the court again if there was another Republican president.

However, a modern day court packing scenario could be problematic.

Court packing is a term that originated in the 1930s, after FDR introduced the Judiciary Act

of 1937. It refers to the legislative branch adding or subtracting seats from the Supreme Court.

President Roosevelt was very popular following the 1936 election. However, he was angry with the Supreme Court for rejecting his New Deal policies. Most of the justices who disagreed with him were older. So, he proposed the Judiciary Act of 1937, which said that the president could nominate someone additional to the court to replace any justice who refused to retire by the age of 70, up to a total of 15 justices.

This would’ve shaken up the balance of the court, to keep Roosevelt’s policies safe.

However, this policy was deeply unpopular, and was never passed.

This scene could easily happen again if Democrats tried to add seats to the Supreme Court.

Most moderate Democrats have said that they would not support a plan to pack the court. This legislation would be unlikely to pass even if the Democrats were to gain a majority in the Senate. Also, if the Democrats were to miraculously pass this plan, Republicans would simply retaliate the next time that they gain power by adding or subtracting seats to suit their own interests.

There are a few different problems with the way the modern Supreme Court functions.

The life terms of Supreme Court justices were intended to help them remain apolitical.

However, the opposite has become true.

Presidents want to choose justices who will advance their own interests for as long as possible, so they choose very partisan, very young nominees.

Justice Barrett is 48-years-old and will likely serve on the court for upwards of 30 years. This will push the court out of alignment with public opinion for generations.

Next, by refusing to seat Obama nominee Merrick Garland in 2016, Republicans created a dangerous precedent. Yet in the early 19th century, the second session of Congress began in December each year, after the election.

Much of what was accomplished by these Congresses was as lame ducks. So prior to

an election, Merrick Garland most certainly should have received a hearing. By establishing this precedent, Republicans made the Supreme Court even more political, showing that when people choose a president, they also choose a justice.

This strategy is very dangerous and incentivizes the parties to try to delay or force hearings to suit their own interests, like with Justice Barrett.

Our current Supreme Court is beholden to partisan interests.

In addition, the Supreme Court is becoming a weapon for minority rule.

Republicans have lost the popular vote in five out of the last six election cycles. Yet they have gained the presidency in three of them.

According to data from Tufts University, 61 percent of young people voted for the Democrat in the last election. The Republican party has no future unless it appeals to younger and minority voters, or suppresses those votes.

It seems like they are choosing the latter.

Republican-held state legislatures across the nation have gerrymandered congressional districts to suppress the votes of minorities by packing them into smaller districts or splitting them into many districts. According to research from Azazea, five of the most gerrymandered states advantaged Republicans.

Also, Republicans on the courts have also revived voter suppression laws and weakened voter protections designed for minority groups, particularly Black people. By blocking suits intending to increase access to absentee and mail-in voting during a pandemic, the mostly conservative Supreme Court tried to disenfranchise voters that were likely to vote for Democrats.

The Republican party is fighting to retain its grip on America, and it is using the conservative majority on the Supreme Court to do so. Unsigned stay orders preventing protections for the right to vote close to an election are suppressing youth and minority vote that would remove Republicans from office. The Republican party has weaponized the Supreme Court to keep itself in power.

“

THE LIFE TERMS OF SUPREME COURT JUSTICES WERE INTENDED TO HELP THEM REMAIN APOLITICAL. HOWEVER, THE OPPOSITE HAS BECOME TRUE. PRESIDENTS WANT TO CHOOSE JUSTICES WHO WILL ADVANCE THEIR OWN INTERESTS FOR AS LONG AS POSSIBLE. Non-partisan court reform is the solution to our Supreme Court problem.

There are several systems that have been presented in the last year or recycled from earlier. One is to limit the justice’s terms to 18 years, allowing them to serve elsewhere in the federal courts after their time has passed.

Each president would be guaranteed two appointments to the court. Another idea is to balance the court, having five justices from each of the two major parties and an additional five justices that both parties agree upon.

Neither of these systems are perfect. However, with some modifications, they could be just what America needs.

The federal government should adopt an assisted appointment method for Supreme Court justices, in addition to the shortened terms and two-per-president rules stated above.

Similar to how certain counties in Missouri choose state court judges, the president would choose a candidate from a short list provided by a bipartisan commission. That person would then be confirmed by both the House and the Senate. Finally, after a year on the bench, the justice would have to stand for retention by popular vote in a general election. This process has many checks and balances, as it includes all three branches of government. Also, it is accountable to the public from start to finish.

This is the solution to the court packing conundrum. Don’t pack the court. Prevent minority rule. Make the Supreme Court accountable to the American people. Advocate for bipartisan judicial reform.

alex cohen

REPORTER OPINION 33

THE 2024 ELECTION It’s never too early to worry!

T

he 2020 election is basically over, and no one is happy. Donald Trump’s Republican Party has lost the White House, at least one Senate seat, and, in the presidential election, the states of Georgia and Arizona – Republican strongholds since the mid-1990s. And while the Democrats have won the presidency, their party is likewise unsatisfied with the prospect of a divided Senate–not to mention the loss of several House seats in an election that was predicted to be a Democratic landslide. In this unfortunate situation, it is perhaps worth considering the effects that this year’s race will have on the next presidential election, in 2024.

Republicans Preliminary polls for the 2024 primary suggest that among Republicans, the four most likely contenders for the next presidential nomination are Vice-President Mike Pence, Donald Trump Jr., former U.N. ambassador Nikki Haley, and Senator Mitt Romney. 2024’s Republican line-up is likely to be split between imitators of President Trump’s populist style and more traditional figures. Trump’s imitators could include Donald Trump Jr., (the president’s son), and media personalities like Tucker Carlson (who finished with 7% support among Republicans in the recent poll). The party’s traditional wing would be composed of politicians like Romney, who ran for president in 2012 and was the only Republican senator to vote to convict President Trump at his impeachment trial. As it stands, Trump’s stronger-thanexpected showing in this year’s election would seem to validate his style of politics (perhaps leading to Trump-like success in 2024), though it’s unclear whether the president’s signature approach can be pulled off by another candidate.

Another unknown factor is whether Donald Trump himself would run for president again four years from now. If he won, Trump would be the first president to serve two nonconsecutive terms since Grover Cleveland in 1892. It certainly seems possible. A recent article in the New York Times reported that the president could announce his 2024 campaign as soon as Joe Biden’s presidential victory is confirmed. In that case, Trump would be the clear front-runner for his party’s nomination, as it seems unlikely that Pence (the polls’ current leader) would opt to run against his former boss. A Trump candidacy might be a blessing in disguise for the Democrats, who, certain of their opponent, would have four years to devise a capable electoral strategy.

The scene at Benjamin Harrison’s 1889 inauguration (Wikimedia Commons).

NEWS 34

Democrats The Democratic primaries this year were divided between moderate candidates like Joe Biden and Pete Buttigieg, and progressive figures like Senators Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren. Biden and the moderates eventually won, but in the absence of a resounding Democratic victory in this year’s general election, it is likely that the party’s old feuds will spill into the open. The two wings of the Democratic Party have already begun to attack each other for the failures of the election. On the progressive side, Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has criticized her peers for poor campaigning, a charge rebutted by moderate claims that progressive messaging was the cause of recent Democratic defeat.

While it is certain that this conflict will continue into 2024, it is unclear who the standard-bearers of each side will be. The president-elect, Joe Biden, would be 81 years old at the time of the election, and is therefore unlikely to run again. The moderate side of the party could instead be led by Kamala Harris, the vice president-elect, or returning figures like Pete Buttigieg or Senator Amy Klobuchar.

The Democrats’ progressive wing is more interesting, as many of its current leaders, including Senators Sanders and Warren, may be too old to run again in 2024. Age is also a problem for younger progressive leaders like Ocasio-Cortez, who, if elected in 2024, would be the youngest president in history (by eight years). The age problem therefore leaves a vacuum at the head of a resurgent progressive movement.

The character of the 2024 Democratic primary will depend on the success of the Biden administration. If Biden can collaborate successfully with Republicans in the Senate, his more moderate approach can be expected to do well in 2024. However, if the next four years are ones of gridlock and political polarization, Democratic voters may yearn for a more radical candidate four years from now.

luka bassnett PAGE EDITOR

CORONAVIRUS CONUNDRUM After a member of the Girls’ JV Basketball team tested positive for COVID-19 many athletes reconsider playing a winter sport.

Junior Willa Melander prepares for her dive.

A

fter a player on the girls’ basketball team tested positive for COVID-19, the Junior Varsity and Freshman/ Sophomore teams were told they had to quarantine for two weeks.

Since then, two more players on the team have tested positive.

While a similar situation has not occured for the girls’ swimming and diving team, many of the divers feel unsafe at practice.

Junior diver, Willa Melander said, “I’m really worried about getting COVID-19 through diving. I’m afraid of spreading it to my family members, causing them to get really sick. I know many of the other divers feel the same

“

I feel much safer at school than I do at diving. If I were to get coronavirus, I think diving will definitely be the cause of it.”

WHITNEY LI, PHOTOGRAPHER way.”

Melander attributes the fact that they are inside to her feeling unsafe.

“I played field hockey in the fall and I felt much safer there than I do at diving,” Melander said. “We were outside at field hockey and could easily space ourselves apart, so I felt pretty safe. It is much harder to social distance at diving since we are inside and are all waiting in line for one board.”

Adelaide Griffey, who also played field hockey in the fall and is a member of the girls’ JV basketball team, agrees with Melander.

“Field hockey is a moderate contact sport that can easily be distanced and it takes place

SPORTS 35

Senior Anna Upshaw takes a free throw against Ladue in the Coaches vs Cancer game last season.

LUCIA JOHNSON, PHOTOGRAPHER

SPORTS 36

in the cool outdoors. Basketball, on the other hand, is a high contact sport that takes place in the warm indoors. I felt a lot safer playing field hockey this fall because of the spread-out nature of the sport,” Griffey said.

For in-person school, everyone has to stay six feet apart and wear masks at all times. While at sports, especially high-frequency contact sports, the players come within close contact of each other for longer than 15 minutes.

Junior diver, Abby Sucher said, “I feel much safer at school than I do at diving. If I were to get coronavirus, I think diving will definitely be the cause of it.”

However, the school district has placed many safety measures to prevent an outbreak happening within sports.

The swimming and diving team has split up practice in different sessions to try and mitigate the risk of exposure. The divers are split into two groups, with a group of five divers diving first and a second group of three divers practicing second. They also wear their masks whenever they are not on the board.

Similarly, the basketball teams have to wear their masks at all times. Teams also practice separately to reduce the number of people each player comes in contact with.

Some players think the district should be doing more.

Sophomore Isabel Erdmann said, “I think the district needs to find a way to provide students and athletes with access to tests because it is very hard to find a place to get one, which obviously increases the likelihood of the virus spreading if you don’t know you have it.”

Having to quarantine and miss the season for two weeks can easily damper all the training a team has already done. To avoid that, the girls’ basketball team held daily zoom workouts.

“It was nice just seeing everyone in the same situation and state of uncertainty. We were able to empathize with each other,” Griffey said. “It was also nice to be able to keep up with our conditioning while still seeing each other.”

Similarly, many of the divers work out on their own when they feel unsafe attending practice.

Winter sports have definitely created a conundrum.

“It’s really hard because I want to keep my family safe, but I want to continue diving because I love it. Seeing everyone at diving everyday really helps to keep my spirits up during this hard time,” Melander said.

While many athletes are quitting their sport for this year to remain safe, others feel that the risks Covid-19 offers don’t outweigh the opportunities for social interaction through their sport.

“While it is scary knowing that someone I’m standing next to could have COVID-19, I would never quit my sports for it,” Sucher said.

cece cohen SPORTS SECTION EDITOR

winter sports preview swimming Swimmers to watch: Sophie Thompson Kellen Mottl Jillian Thomason Goal: To qualify more swimmers for state

diving Divers to watch: Willa Melander Abby Sucher Sophia Martin Goal: To learn more dives

wrestling Wrestlers to watch: Josh Julian Nate Martin Goal: To have more wrestlers advance to state

boys basketball Players to watch: Golden Akannam Ozzie Keil Curtis Smith Goal: To win districts and beat Ladue Last season’s record:13-13

girls basket ball Players to watch: Morgan Nettles Regan Wade Kim Cheng Goal: To improve upon last year’s record and win districts cece cohen & kaia mills-lee

SPORTS 36

SPORTS SECTION EDITORS

COLLEEN’S COOKIES Moriah, Jenna, and Dheera review Colleen’s Cookies, a must try for every sweet tooth.

Left: Blueberry Scone from Colleen’s Cookies, Right: Harvest Sandwich

C

MORIAH LOTSOFF AND DHEERA RATHIKINDI | REVIEW SECTION EDITOR, PAGE EDITOR

olleen’s Cookies is an adorable little cafe located at 7337 Forsyth Blvd, just a few minutes away from Clayton High School and Washington University.

Colleen’s Cookies features baked goods made from scratch, yummy meals, and beverages including tea, espresso and smoothies. The interior is warm and inviting for customers, and the staff members are incredibly kind.

Unfortunately, due to the pandemic, Colleen’s dining room is closed, but they are offering curbside pickup or contactless pickup. If you are interested in ordering Colleen’s online, go to colleenscookies.com and select the bar at the bottom that reads “Order Online.” It’s very easy to get a sweet and yummy bite to eat from Colleen’s Cookies.

One of the dishes we tried off the breakfast menu was the Breakfast Burrito with sweet potatoes and spinach. It was priced at $8.50.

With eggs, pico de gallo, cheddar & pepper jack cheese, and onion all wrapped in a hot tortilla, this burrito is an excellent choice for a healthy, filling breakfast. The burrito was a little lacking in flavor, but this may be due to not adding any meat. Another dish that we tried was The Harvest sandwich from the lunch menu. It was priced at $12. This sandwich is packed with vegetables, making it perfect for vegetarians.

The Harvest sandwich is made with carrot bacon, portobello, roasted red pepper, avocado, pickled red onion, arugula, hummus, fresh

38 REVIEW

tomato, and ciabatta. The carrot bacon and pickled red onion made this sandwich apart from others. The hummus worked very well with the peppery arugula and creamy avocado.

This sandwich is a great option for a light, fresh lunch.

In addition to their meals, Colleen’s Cookies has a wide variety of bakery options available.

The s’mores cookie is only one of their cookie options. In our personal opinion, the best cookie has a hard exterior that surrounds a gooey middle filled with toppings. We were definitely not disappointed. The s’mores cookie, costing only $1.75, was filled with chunks of chocolate and marshmallows that were melted and combined to give it the classic s’mores flavor. Another cookie we tried was the gooey butter cookie, priced at $1.75. This cookie is rich and decadent, just as anything gooey butter should be. Be warned, it is only for those who have a sweet tooth since it is very sweet.

Another bakery item featured at Colleen’s Cookies are their scrumptious macarons.

We had the pleasure of trying a few of these delicious cookies and we would recommend them to anyone interested in going to Colleen’s Cookies (even non-macaron lovers). We sampled the strawberry, the birthday cake, and the salted caramel and they were all very tasty, but my favorite was definitely the strawberry.

It was sweet like the other cookies, but also had a slight tartness from the strawberry which we enjoyed. All of Colleen’s macarons are $1.95 and absolutely delicious. They also have seasonal macarons. We didn’t have the pleasure of trying one, but I’m sure they’re

splendid if they are even half as good as the others. Currently, the seasonal macaron is a Pumpkin Pie Macaron, so if you get a sweet tooth over the fall season be sure to stop by Colleen’s Cookies and check it out. Other macarons include the Nutella Macaron, the Raspberry Champagne Macaron, the Blueberry Cheesecake Macaron and Grapefruit Lavender Macaroon.

We have a weakness for a good scone and these scones exceeded our expectations.

First, we purchased a blueberry scone which cost $3.50. The crumbly pastry had a perfect balance of cake to blueberry, with neither flavor overpowering the other. In addition to the blueberry, we also got the caramel apple scone and it is to die for. Priced at $3.50, the scone was deliciously sweet and balanced; the apple-filled scone fit perfectly with the caramel glaze that garnished the top. The smell made me long for rainy days on which I can curl up with a good book in front of the fire. It would pair perfectly with a coffee or tea. Once again, these bakery items were amazing and we would definitely purchase them all again.

Although Colleen’s Cookies came up a bit short on their meal items, the bakery items were unbelievably delicious and the staff was incredibly welcoming. We definitely recommend this adorable cafe to those seeking a place to enjoy a sweet treat.

moriah lotsoff, dheera rathikindi & jenna bush

REVIEW SECTION EDITOR, PAGE EDITOR & REPORTER

DASH & LILY New series on Netflix both brings the holiday spirit and charms.

Austin Abrams as Dash and Midori Francis as Lily star in the new Netflix series, “Dash and Lily.” (Photos from the official Netflix movie site.

I

will openly admit that when it comes to holiday movies, my standards are low. I would (and do) blame Hallmark, but Netflix’s recent dive into similarly predictable and at times, nearly problematic movies, have really sold the idea that “holiday movie” is synonymous with critical disaster.

It was thanks to the reassurance of Netflix’s surprisingly satisfying book adaptations that I binged the new holiday limited series, “Dash & Lily,” with cautious optimism. It seems that the good quality of Netflix’s book adaptations is the dominant trait when it came to this

show, because I enjoyed it immensely. After all, it doesn’t get much better than a scavenger hunt through the hidden gems of a holidaybedazzled New York City.

Alone in New York City for the holiday season without his parents’ knowledge, Dash (Austin Abrams) is fond of scouring old bookstores, dramatically drinking liquor, and trying to avoid his prep school classmates. No, he’s not Holden Caulfield (though it might not be a coincidence that he first finds Lily’s notebook between copies of Salinger’s Zooey and Franny). He does, however, have a grudge

against Christmas. In the days leading up to Christmas, he happens upon a notebook of clues stashed at the Strand bookstore. What starts out as an attempt to distract himself from his least favorite time of the year quickly becomes an all-consuming adventure through New York City as he’s never seen it before, accompanied only by the instructions of the mysterious Lily. His growing determination to connect with Lily in real life is derailed by the return of his ex girlfriend.

Lily (Midori Francis) isn’t introduced until the second episode, titled, appropriately, Lily (the first episode is called Dash). Despite her bubbly personality and loving family, Lily is desperate for a connection with someone her own age. At the encouragement of her older brother, Langston, and his new boyfriend, she leaves a notebook full of literary clues in the Strand, expecting nothing to come of it.

Except someone responds. Suddenly Lily isn’t just spending her days with the neighborhood caroling troop; she’s crafting dares for an anonymous boy she’s never met. And by night, Lily’s social circles explode as she follows through on Dash’s dares. Just as she begins to realize her feelings for Dash, though, she reconnects with a childhood acquaintance that complicates her relationship with Dash and her newly built confidence.

As Dash and Lily grow closer through their anonymous correspondences, the people who surround each of them are revealed to be compelling characters in their own right. This is especially true for Dash’s best (and only) friend,

Boomer. An enthusiastic pizza shop employee, Boomer becomes the point person for both Lily and Dash early in the show. Boomer is a remarkably good friend, to the point that you sometimes wonder if Dash is really the best he can do. Nonetheless, the consistent stability of Boomer, as well as Lily’s brother Langston, and her eccentric great-aunt, Mrs. Basil E., make it possible for viewers to see just how much Lily and Dash are impacting each other.

The culture of Lily’s family throughout the show creates a stark contrast to the emptiness of Dash’s life. Lily’s Japanese heritage plays into this a little, but her family also has a host of other traditions that she thrives on. When her parents leave on a suspiciously abrupt “second honeymoon” to Java for the holidays, the disruption of the family’s usual traditions initially devastates Lily. Even absent, though, Lily’s parents are a far warmer presence than Dash’s distant and argumentative father.

I haven’t read David Levithan and Rachel Cohn’s Dash and Lily’s Book of Dares, which the show is based on, so it might have been a fault of the adaptation rather than the story, but one of my few issues with “Dash & Lily” was the ages of the characters. Both Lily and Dash are supposed to be about 17 years old.

Francis and Abrams are 26 and 24 years old, respectively, but they are able to convincingly portray teenagers. Less understandable is the nearly 30-year-old Glenn McCuen as Lily’s childhood bully (who would, presumably, also be 17). McCuen was not a passable 17-yearold, and it was almost laughable to see him in scenes surrounded by much younger looking “peers.” I felt that the problem of having older actors portraying the characters, as well as the extremity of some of the adventures the characters go on could have been resolved by aging the characters up a few years. Even something as simple as the replacement of Dash’s prep school and Lily’s public high school with an elite university and a local NYC college would have made these characters feel more grounded in reality.

It will be interesting to see what Netflix pursues in regards to the show. The specific material of the show- the holiday season- might make future seasons predictable and repetitive, but “Dash & Lily” also has the potential to become a holiday staple for Netflix, in the vein of the “Christmas Prince” franchise, with a new season releasing each year. The show managed to wrap up all of the strings by the end of the final episode. Still, the story was left open-ended enough to adapt the 2016 sequel to “Dash and Lily’s Book of Dares,” titled “The Twelve Days of Dash and Lily,” which takes place a year after the events of the first book.

It may have its flaws, but “Dash & Lily” is everything most holiday movies aren’t: clever, inclusive, and original. You may have missed it in the barrage of holiday themed Netflix specials, but with its eight under-thirty-minute episodes, “Dash & Lily” is a great choice for a quick hit of holiday cheer. Grab some hot chocolate and get ready to fall in love.

emma baum

FEATURE SECTION

REBECCA FALLS FLAT A remake of a classic is better left unwatched.

Lily James and Armie Hammer start in the Netflix “Rebecca” remake.

(Photo from the official Netflix movie poster).

Sometimes, movie remakes can offer a fresh perspective on a story such as the 2019 version of “Little Women” or a modern take such as 1996’s “Romeo + Juliet,” a modernized version of the classic Shakespeare tale. However, the new Rebecca, released October 21 on Netflix fails to do either.

Based on the 1938 book by Daphne du Maurier, the movie centers around an unnamed woman who has just married a wealthy widower, Mr. DeWinter. She moves into his mansion and finds that she is overshadowed by the memory of his first wife, Rebecca. She feels Rebecca’s lingering presence everywhere from the monogrammed decor to the domineering and obsessed maid, Mrs. Danvers. She gradually becomes more frightened that she will not live up to Rebecca, and through a series of twists and turns, we discover more about the household’s past.

The original movie, directed by the famous Alfred Hitchcock, was released in 1940. The leading roles were played by Joan Fontaine and Lawrence Olivier, some of the biggest stars in Hollywood at the time and still considered some of the greatest actors. While the 2020 remake is star-studded as well, with Lily James and Armie Hammer as Mrs. and Mr. DeWinter and Kristen Scott Thomas as Mrs. Danvers, the performances fail to live up to the original most likely due to the script’s downgrade.

The direction falls flat too as Ben Wheatley has taken on the monumental task of remaking a classic Hitchcock film. It lacks the mysterious and claustrophobic atmosphere of the original, and instead feels like a generic BBC special.

The ending of the movie has also been altered and doesn’t pack the same punch as the first.

However, not everyone browsing through Netflix has seen the original, so perhaps on its own, is the movie worth watching?

There are some positives such as the beautiful scenery and the fact that this version is in color.

The costumes are also gorgeous but do seem out of place for the time period as they don’t quite feel like they are from the early twentieth century, but are also certainly not modern.

So far, it has been received poorly by critics, garnering a 41% score on Rotten Tomatoes while the 1940 version has a score of 100%.

Undoubtedly, it’s best to stick to the original which can be found for free on YouTube.

Rebecca isn’t the only remake that seems to be pointless. With all of the recent Disney live action remakes that have been pretty poorly received, why are studios continuing to pursue them?

Money. Experts and analysts say remakes are cheap and easy to make. There is no need to hire a team of writers to come up with a new concept and story, no need to be creative. They profit off of the success of the preexisting brand, alluring its fanbase.

Remakes seem to be the fast fashion of the movie industry. While they are cheap to produce, the quality ends up being poor as well, ultimately making for forgettable and stale films. Audiences are ready for a change and appreciate creativity which is why projects such as “Little Women” (2019) have come by so much success. sophie yoshino

EDITOR

THE QUEEN’S GAMBIT Page editor Max Hagemeister reviews a new highly popular Netflix limited series.

T

he Queen’s Gambit, a limited series released by Netflix on October 23, 2020, follows the life of Beth Harmon, a highly intelligent woman orphaned as a young girl in the mid-1950s. She finds hope and meaning in her life from the game of chess. Throughout the entire series, there are recurring themes of substance abuse and addiction, as well as illustrating the pressure women faced during the time period to settle into traditional gender roles.

The story begins when Harmon, a quiet young girl, is taken to an orphanage after her single mother died in a car accident. While at the orphanage, Harmon is often bored in her classes and activities because of her extraordinary intelligence. One day, she was cleaning erasers in the basement after finishing her work ahead of the rest of her class. She noticed the orphanage’s janitor, Mr. Shaibel playing an unfamiliar game. Upon being asked about the game, Mr. Shaibel informed her it was chess. Eager to learn, Harmon asked Mr. Shaibel to teach her how to play, to which he reluctantly agreed. As time went on, Harmon began to learn and quickly master the game of chess, at one point simultaneously playing and beating an entire chess club at the local high

PHIL BRAY/NETFLIX school. Chess was everything for Harmon. She worshiped it like it was a god and practiced it every day for hours. One of the reasons she became such an expert was because she played games in her head. However, she was only able to do this while under the influence of the tranquilizers that were given daily to each of the orphans, a common practice during that time period. While the tranquilizers enabled her to imagine and practice games and strategies, they also created an addiction for Harmon that would haunt her for the rest of the series. As the series continues, we see her develop into a young lady who begins to turn her love of chess into a career, traveling to tournaments every week.

Very frequently, Harmon struggles with traditional gender norms and how others around her perceive her. The topic of feminism, while not directly mentioned, is seen through Harmon’s strong demeanor.

In the world of chess, especially during the 1960s, men held an overwhelming majority over women. It was not seen as ladylike to play a game such as chess with a mostly male population. Nonetheless, Harmon goes to tournaments, unphased by her male competitors, and crushes almost every single

one of them, one by one.

Another theme displayed throughout the series is substance abuse. Addicted at a young age, Harmon establishes a reliance on alcohol, cigarettes, and tranquilizers to soothe her.

While the substances help her improve her chess skills, they also cause her immense mental, physical and emotional damage. The show does a great job showing Harmon’s struggle with addiction and the global issue of substance abuse for all ages.

Overall, The Queen’s Gambit is phenomenal.

What I love about television shows is the opportunity to connect with the characters and see extensive character development. The Queen’s Gambit provides all of that and more.

The way the show emotionally attached me to Harmon created an enjoyable experience for all seven episodes. Casting Anya Taylor-Joy for the role of Beth Harmon was a fantastic choice. The way she portrayed Beth helped showcase her strong demeanor and perseverance throughout all of the hardships she has been through. The combination of great acting, a dynamic story, and topics relevant to today’s society make this show one that stands out.

max hagemeister PAGE EDITOR REVIEW 41

ARTEMIS FOWL Disney’s recreaton of the beloved story fell far short of expectations, leaving many fans highly disappointed.

A

rtemis Fowl, directed by Kenneth Branagh, was released on June 12, 2020 on Disney+ due to the pandemic.

The film is about Artemis Fowl Jr. as he tries to regain his kidnapped father from a mysterious yet evil Opal Koboi. Set in Ireland, he attempts this with some help from his butler Domovoi, Juliet, the fairy Holly Short, and the tall dwarf (one of the core gags in the movie) Mulch Diggums. However, the only way to recover Artemis Fowl Sr. is to trade him for the Aculos, a powerful magical item that in the wrong hands, could possibly destroy the world.

The movie was based off of the much loved Artemis Fowl series by Eoin Colfer, which was written in 2001. In the first book, Artemis Fowl, a descendant of an age-old crime family, attempts to steal gold from fairies. Through the series, he slowly finds his way back to good and creates better relationships with the people around him. Artemis also faces a weight of maturity from his missing father and an insane mother.

Adapting a book to a movie is perfectly fine, and altering the scenes and plot is usually a welcome change so the movie won’t be a sceneby-scene carbon copy. However, in this case, the books were completely converted to a much more family friendly version and squeezed into an hour and 30 minutes. The result? A sad offbrand “Spy Kids” with magic, or in the words of it’s own author Eoin Colfer, “Die-hard with fairies.” Artemis Fowl the movie ends up short, unsatisfying, and merely eye-candy-- a waste of a $125 million budget.

Even the effects, dazzling as they may be, were not necessarily great. One particular favorite effect the movie loved to do was a slower frame per second effect, which brought a choppy sorry-my-zoom-is-crashing feel to the movie. The first time it came up, I checked my wifi and if someone was using the microwave because of the choppiness. Not only this, but during action scenes, spiralling camera work and dutch angles a la Twilight were always prevalent. I was queasy.

Unfortunately, the action sequences and effects weren’t the only thing that made me nauseous. Artemis Fowl was overly Disneyified, complete with the dead mother trope and horrifyingly sappy quotes such as “Are we friends, Artemis Fowl? We are. Forever friends.”

This, again, is jarringly different from the books, where Artemis Fowl is emotionless and seemingly the villain.

Many people have spoken about how the movie suffers from the same syndrome that the Percy Jackson movies suffered from- high expectations with a large fan base, only for the plot to be mutilated and left with a dry, yet overstuffed, storyline.

©Disney+/Courtesy Everett Collection Lara McDonnell in “Artemis Fowl”

Disney managed to fail to bring magic to a story chock-full of goblins, trolls, and fairies. Artemis Fowl is the English teacher’s nightmare: completely tell and no show. They claim that Artemis is a “criminal mastermind”, yet give him no space to truly let his feigned intellect shine. Worse, they claim he doesn’t make friends easily, which correlates with the book. However, a couple minutes after he meets Holly Short, he’s all too willing to trust her and the first to suggest them being friends, merely because both have a missing/dead father.

If they decide to make this movie more wholesome and kid-friendly, with none of the villainy of Artemis Fowl from the books, then add the wonder. Add the fun and the magic, the stakes and the excitement.

But don’t make it this.

“

Disney managed to fail to bring magic to a story chockfull of goblins, trolls and fairies.

Artemis Fowl is the English teachers worst nightmare: completely tell and no show. rachel chung

NEWS 42

REPORTER

PRO/CON: SACKING STATUES Sofia Erlin explores the potential positive impact of statues being removed.

Latina/o/x and LGBTQ community leaders in San Diego demand the immediate removal of the statue of former San Diego Mayor Peter Wilson for his support of Proposition 187 in 1994 that sought to cut off state services, including healthcare and public education, to those in the country without documentation. (Jarrod Valliere/San Diego Union-Tribune/TNS)

A

s the debate rages on about whether or not Confederate monuments should be removed, one assumption is taken for granted: that statues are valuable and should exist. Statues remind us of the past, of figures who deserve recognition.

But who decided that a bronze bust was the best way to honor someone’s legacy?

According to sculptor Deran Wright, a typical bronze bust statue costs anywhere from $90,000 to $140,000. In Forest Park alone there are over 21 statues and monuments. In this article, I’m going to focus specifically on statues that serve to memorialize a single person, not memorials or sculptures. Forest Park has only six of these statues: Edward Bates, Apotheosis of Saint Louis, Frederich Jahn, Thomas Jefferson, Franz Seigel and Frank Preston Blair Jr. A rough estimate of the cost of these statues is upwards of $2,000,000.

Although these statues are expensive, many defend them arguing that they preserve history and honor important historical figures.

However, out of the six named, how many did you recognize? Do you know why Frederich Jahn deserves a statue? Edward Bates, Franz Seigel or Frank Preston Blair Jr? How many times have you passed these statues and taken the time to read their plaques or research them online? The truth is, statues only help us remember people we already recognize.

And even then, they fail to represent the complexities of historical figures. The statue of Thomas Jefferson doesn’t explain his policy choices as president or his hypocrisy of

speaking against the horrors of chattel slavery while enslaving over 600 human beings during his life. Instead, all it does is remind us of what Thomas Jefferson looked like and signals to us that he was a hero without providing any evidence to support the claim.

Besides failing to educate, statues also promote the harmful great man theory of history. The great man theory, popularized during the 1800s, argues that history is shaped by the impact of singular heroes. These leaders are born with naturally superior intellect, leadership abilities, strength, bravery, etc that allow them to singlehandedly change the world.

While this theory fits in well the individualism of America, it erases the powerful collective movements that have shaped our history. For example, a statue of civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr fails to include the contributions of the thousands of activists who helped further the civil rights movement. These statues send a subliminal message to viewers that they can’t change history. That they are not a uniquely talented individual who has the potential to change the world.

However, it is true that some people stand out in history because they are phenomenal.

Doesn’t Martin Luther King Jr deserve to be remembered for his specific contributions?

Each hero is different, and most of them probably do want to be remembered for their work. While I already pointed out that statues don’t teach history, they reinforce things people already know, it makes sense that someone would want a statue in their honor.

However, to truly honor these remarkable individuals, wouldn’t it be more fitting to their cause to use the money to further their work? For example, the Friederich Jahn memorial in Forest Park celebrates the “father of gymnastics”. But the granite and bronze memorial doesn’t represent gymnastics at all.

Wouldn’t it be better to have built an outdoor fitness center for the park patrons to continue Jahn’s legacy? Or to use the money to fund gymnastic training for low income gymnasts?

While I understand that every statue is not going to be taken down, sold for money, then redistributed, I think it’s important to reevaluate the practices we take for granted.

We choose statues to honor history because it’s what we’ve always done. But, statues don’t teach history and they don’t necessarily honor legacies in a productive way. They are expensive, and to be honest, a little boring.

We could fill our parks and public spaces with interactive art pieces or whatever else the community felt was necessary. As we work to build a better future, we need to imagine that another world is possible and not just continue with business as usual.

sofia erlin

EDITOR IN CHIEF

sonali dayal, ARTIST PRO/CON 43

PRO: REMOVING OLD STATUES While statues are an excellent way to remember our past, the glorification of certain historical figures can often do more harm than good.

T

he purpose of statues is to honor and commemorate figures from history.

But the problem comes in when statues serve a different purpose: glorifying people with treacherous pasts. Putting a person on a statue honors them and not just their good parts but everything they did. Many people across the country are demanding that statues of racist or bigoted figures be taken down.

In the past 3 years, cities across the U.S. have been slowly removing statues and memorials of the Confederacy. Progress has been made in Charleston, South Carolina, and New Orleans, Louisiana with the removal of Robert E. Lee statues located in parks of both cities.

Robert E. Lee is an infamous general who fought for the Confederacy during the American Civil War. Many protestors were angry about these statues because they were putting a Confederate general, who fought for slavery, on a pedestal.

When learning history, we can learn about terrible people who did terrible things without leaving them in bronze. For instance, Germany tore down all statues from the Nazis as soon as the new government was put in place. Although the Nazis are different from the Confederates,

they both stood for hate and violence against a race.

Even though these Nazi statues were removed, Germany has not forgotten about the Holocaust - they have hundreds of statues of remembrance of lives taken in concentration camps during World War II. In order for Jewish people to feel safe and included in Germany, taking down these statues was a bare minimum because it proved that those leaders were no longer controlling the country. This is a great example of how a country can remember history without having statues of horrible people.

Saint Louis has a long history of racism and division, and this can be seen in the city’s sculptures as well. After many protests in June of 2017, the Memorial to the Confederate Dead was removed from Forest Park. This memorial was in remembrance of the Confederate soldiers who had died in the Civil War. The takedown occurred because the Black community spoke out against how this memorial was supporting and glorifying slave owners.

This past summer, a statue of Christopher Columbus was removed from Tower Grove

Demonstrators gather around a toppled Confederate Statue titled Silent Sam at UNC-Chapel Hill, August 20, 2018.

JULIA WALL, RALEIGH NEWS & OBSERVER

PRO/CON 44

Park. Columbus is a coveted historical figure because of his involvement in the colonizing and killing of many Native American tribes.

St. Louis and Clayton are on the land of the Kickapoo and Osage, two tribes who had existed long before European invaders came to this continent and colonized it.

St. Louis’ Forest Park is home to many statues. A significantly notable statue is located at the top of Art Hill: Apotheosis of Saint Louis, which is a statue of King Louis IX of France. King Louis IX is the namesake for Saint Louis as a whole. However, as a leader, he had extreme flaws. He was antisemitic, burned Jewish books and expelled his Jewish subjects. While his impact on St. Louis cannot be overstated, his controversial history means his likeness would be more at home inside of the art museum rather than towering over Forest Park.

In front of the Missouri History Museum is a statue of founding father Thomas Jefferson.

Although it is hard to expect all statues of historical figures who owned slaves to be taken down, Jefferson has an especially wicked history. He not only owned hundreds of slaves but also had an ongoing nonconsensual relationship with a teenage slave he owned named Sally Hemings. Founding Father or not, He is not the type of person who we should glorify with a statue.

This summer also saw nationwide Black Lives Matter protests after the death of George Floyd. In Richmond, Virginia, this led to a Robert E. Lee statue being taken down and moved into a museum instead. Although the removal of all of these statues is great progress, there is still much to do in Saint Louis and the country. There are still around 700 confederate statues and memorials throughout the U.S., further immortalizing those who stood for slavery hundreds of years ago.

Overall, statues of racist and bigoted leaders need to be taken down so as to not overly glorify them. Young people who see these statues are learning to blindly honor and praise these controversial figures of history.

For minorities who have been negatively affected by these figures’ actions, the statues remain as a reminder that they are not fully safe, valued, or respected by the larger community. Instead, these statues should be replaced with diverse historical figures who are a more accurate representation of America and could immortalize those who worked hard to forge a brighter future for this country and for everyone living here.

maya goldwasser REPORTER

CON: KEEPING OLD STATUES Statues can give a glimpse into our ugly past and teach us about our mistakes.

Minnesota State Troopers circle around a toppled statue of Chirstopher Columbus in St. Paul, Minnesota on June 10, 2020

LEILA NAVIDI, MINNEAPOLIS STAR TRIBUNE

T

hroughout our history we have used statues as a way of honoring those who were important figures in American history, helped spawn new innovations and ideas, or people who were simply the best in their profession.

While the legitimacy of statues has decreased over the past few years and the seeming distaste for them has grown, it poses an interesting series of questions. Should statues continue to be a thing? Should we hold certain people up to a pedestal and seemingly idolize them by making a statue of their likeness?

Personally, I don’t believe the statues themselves are the real problems, but rather the public setting in which they are placed.

As opposed to being placed in a museum or art gallery as a reminder and artistic symbol of history the statues in question are scattered around states and cities. This public display of our messy past not only makes it seem like we adore these sometimes controversial people but also forces everyone in the community to gaze upon them.

Rather than completely eliminate these statues we should simply put them in a museum and remove them from public spaces.

This will eliminate some of the controversy/ assumed idolization of these figures and revert them back to being reminders of our accomplishments and ugly past.

One example of monuments that are viewed as controversial are the statues of Christopher Colombus. While I acknowledge that Christopher Columbus did tons of horrible things and was by no means the first person to discover America, he is still an integral part of U.S. history. And since we can often learn from our past, even if it is ugly, it would be beneficial to keep some of these statues. Not only Columbus, but almost every historical figure with a statue to their name can teach us something about our past.

For the future, let’s talk about erecting statues of people who made advancements in the world of entertainment, science, and technology.

While idolizing a person can be dangerous, putting up statues of people like Walt Disney or Alexander Graham Bell are not nearly as controversial as others. This is due partly to the fact that these statues are not directly connected to an ugly part of American History, but rather acknowledge the groundbreaking achievements these people made throughout their life.

With that being said, I don’t think the monuments of our forefathers should be removed from the public eye. Rather than destroy statues we should allow them to be accessible to the public in some way. By keeping them in museums or other historical areas, it is made clear that these figures are not idols but rather important historical figures.

We are simply acknowledging their deeds and viewing them as beacons and reminders of our past. When we destroy statues it erases historical evidence and monuments of those that made an impact upon society, be it a negative or positive one. Preserving statues sets our history in stone, pun intended.

neema naemi

PAGE EDITOR

PRO/CON 45

CONCESSIONS &TRANSITIONS JEAN BEAUFORT, PHOTOGRAPHER

“

Winning is easy. Losing is never easy.

Not for me it’s not,” said Donald Trump, the 45th President of the United States, when asked about conceding the recent election. Arguably, losing isn’t easy for anyone, especially the many candidates who have conceded presidential elections.

No presidential candidate understands this better than 2000 Presidential Candidate and the incumbent Vice President, Al Gore. Gore was narrowly defeated by George W. Bush in an election plagued by allegations of fraud, recounts, and issues regarding the punching of ballots.

Ultimately, the election boiled down to the state of Florida where Bush led by 537 votes.

Because of the proximity of Bush’s margin, a recount was ordered. However, this recount was halted by a 5-4 Supreme Court ruling stating that it was unconstitutional. Bush was declared the winner of Florida’s 25 electoral votes and subsequently the Presidential Election.

After the Supreme Court’s ruling, Al Gore conceded the election.

In his concession speech he said, “Let there be no doubt, while I strongly disagree with the court’s decision, I accept it. I accept the finality of this outcome, which will be ratified next Monday in the Electoral College. And tonight, for the sake of our unity as a people and the strength of our democracy, I offer my concession.”

Gore could have easily pursued more legal challenges to Bush’s victory, taking his argument to the House and Senate. Instead, he opted to call for unity and put his partisan feelings aside. While Gore certainly wasn’t happy with the results of the election, his concession represents his respect for both President Bush and American Democracy.

20 years after Gore’s concession, incumbent Donald Trump has taken the complete opposite approach. Despite Joe Biden winning 306 electoral votes as opposed to his own 232 electoral votes, Donald Trump has continually challenged Biden’s victory.

Presidential candidates, like Trump and Gore, have the right to seek legal avenues to certify

STAFF ED 46

the results of elections. However, considering Biden’s margin of victory, it is nearly impossible for the results to be overturned.

Nonetheless, Trump has filed lawsuits in the battleground states, none of which have been successful. Similarly, he has requested recounts in these states, but after these recounts, vote counts haven’t significantly changed in their respective areas. Throughout this entire period of time, Trump has flung claims of fraud around, none of which truly have any evidence behind them.

On November 4th, Donald Trump said, “This is a fraud on the American public. This is an embarrassment to our country. We were getting ready to win this election. Frankly, we did win this election. So our goal now is to ensure the integrity.”

al gore “For the sake of our unity as a people and the strength of our democracy, I offer my concession.”

donald trump “This is a fraud on the American public.

This is an embarrassment to our country.

We were getting ready to win this election.”

This claim is purely baseless, as Trump never “won” this election. He was leading the race on the night of the election but that was prior to the majority of absentee and mail-in ballots being counted.

Three weeks after the election, on November 23, Emily Murphy, administrator of the GSA and Trump appointee, officially recognized Joe Biden as the winner of the presidential election.

That night, Donald Trump finally allowed his administration to begin the transition of power.

However, this delayed transition has put President-elect Biden at a serious disadvantage.

The federal government consists of a $5 trillion-plus budget and 2 million full-time workers. With such a large and complex government, even the most peaceful transitions of power are taxing.

With the Trump Administration’s slow recognition of Biden’s victory, this transition becomes even more difficult. For almost three weeks, the President-elect Biden and his team were deprived of access to federal agencies, processing of Biden’s new appointments, and federal funds. Each of these components are key to a functioning government come January 20th.

By hindering President-elect Biden’s ability to serve our country and pull us out of a pandemic, Donald Trump has betrayed his supporters, critics, and an entire nation. Despite this, Trump continues to fight back against official results.

On November 27, he tweeted, “Biden can only enter the White House as President if he can prove that his ridiculous “80,000,000 votes” were not fraudulently or illegally obtained.

When you see what happened in Detroit, Atlanta, Philadelphia & Milwaukee, massive voter fraud, he’s got a big unsolvable problem!”

The foundation of our nation’s democracy lies in public trust in the government and its systems. By continually questioning the legitimacy of a fair and free election, Trump has blatantly disrespected democracy. He has sowed distrust about the democratic system in the minds of many Americans. And unlike Trump’s looming departure from office, this distrust will linger in America.

FREE Jewish Books

and Music for your kids

PJ Library sends FREE, high-quality Jewish-themed books and music each month to children between the ages of 6 months and 11 years.

Families with kids 6 months-8 years, register at PJLibrary.org; 9-11 years old, register at PJOurWay.org.

Contact Jennifer Baer Lotsoff with questions at JLotsoff@JFedSTL.org, 314-442-3867.

The Clayton Education Foundation’s Teacher Innovation Grants foster creativity in the classroom and provide inventive learning experiences for students that are not covered by tax dollars alone.

With funding from a 2019 Teacher Innovation Grant from the Foundation, the Clayton High School Symphonic Band commissioned a piece of original music. Gary Gackstatter, a nationally published composer and professor of music at St. Louis Community College - Meramec wrote the piece, based on the character Jean Louise “Scout” Finch from “To Kill a Mockingbird.” Academy Award Nominated Actress Mary Badham, who portrayed Scout in the 1962 movie, narrated the piece.

Working with the composer, narrator, and Director of Bands Rob Nichols, the student musicians participated in the composition’s creation, as well as performing its world premiere at the 2020 Missouri Music Educators Association’s annual conference.

Photos Courtesy of Kristi Foster Photography

Donate Today!

www.claytoneducationfoundation.org The Clayton Education Foundation is a 501(c)(3) not-for-profit organization; all gifts are tax deductible.