The
Davidsonian
Independent Student Journalism Since 1914
inside
davidsonian.com
Petition for legacy-blind and non-binding early admission policies released
2
Volume 114, Issue 15
February 20, 2019
Nick Nguyen ‘22 reflects upon his first-generation, lowincome experience
4
Beer sales boost profits at men’s basketball games this season
5
Arrogant Yowl editor bids farewell, officially sells out
8
Charlotte Hosts NBA All-Star Weekend Post-HB2 BEN PATE ‘22 STAFF WRITER
T
he NBA’s All-Star Weekend, last held in Charlotte in 1991, returned to the Queen City this past weekend after a long hiatus, bringing with it legendary athletes, excited fans, and unfortunate memories of North Carolina’s recent political history. North Carolina’s Public Facilities Privacy and Security Act—better known as HB2 or “the Bathroom Bill”—was passed in March 2016 in response to a Charlotte city ordinance that added sexual orientation and gender identity to its list of protections against discrimination. Dr. Michael Bitzer, visiting political science professor and expert on NC politics, explained that Charlotte’s ordinance “set up an us-versus-them mentality between Charlotte and [NC capital] Raleigh.” The state bill was designed to counteract the city’s ordinance, declaring municipal expansions of civil protections illegal without state approval. After Charlotte’s ordinance passed, the NC legislature called a special session and passed HB2, creating “a blanket ban on local non-discrimination acts,” according to Bitzer. This particular blanket, however, was aimed directly at Charlotte. Among the first reactions to HB2 was the NBA, which pulled its 2017 All-Star Weekend out of Charlotte and moved it to New Orleans. Groups such as the NCAA also threatened to begin pulling events out of the state if the law was not changed, such that the economic effects of HB2 reached much further than the legislature could have predicted. Bitzer cites a report from the Charlotte Chamber of Commerce putting Charlotte’s losses alone due to Steph Curry and other NBA all-stars join for nights of competition and recognition at HB2 at nearly $250 million. However, Charlotte was certainly not the The Spectrum Center in Charlotte. Photos by Ethan Ehrenhaft ‘20.
only city impacted by the bill; states such as California, Washington, and New York limited or banned travel by state employees to North Carolina while the bill was actively a law, and California and Washington continue to prevent all non-essential travel to the state. This national backlash ultimately drew even international attention to North Carolina, ultimately hurting the economy and the state’s reputation even more. These economic impacts are not the only effects of HB2’s passage into law. While Charlotte was losing money, the state was also losing the support of many of its constituents. Matthew LeBar ‘19, Chair of the Center for Political Engagement, noted the loss of confidence many Davidson students and North Carolinians experienced in the wake of HB2: “[the law] makes a lot of people less friendly to NC politics and a little bit less at home in the state we go to school in.” Additionally, the reaction towards the law in Charlotte for some was one of disgust. “Everyone [in Charlotte] was upset that the law was so clearly targeted at a distinct minority” explained Bryan Kirk ‘22, a Charlotte native. On campus, Ellie Barlow ‘19, Queers & Allies’ resident specialist on HB2, noted Davidson administration’s quick reaction to the law, saying that “transgender people could use the restroom of their choice here at Davidson.” She added that Davidson students’ “behavior wasn’t really altered by the law because there was no enforcement of [HB2] to begin with.” The outrage at the idea behind HB2 and its inception was rooted in the struggle for equality for its opponents. Bitzer explained that HB2 represents “a broader issue about basic, funda-
CONTINUED ON PAGE 2
Health Concerns Prompt Investigation of NC Coal Ash
W
JULIA KNOERR ‘21 SENIOR STAFF WRITER
hile coal ash basin closure remains a pertinent topic of discussion, community members perhaps feel more direct impacts through rising health and environmental injustices across North Carolina. In particular, increasing cases of thyroid cancer and ocular melanoma in unusual populations and rates have raised questions about potential links to environmental factors. In a 2018 report, Iredell County displayed higher five-year thyroid cancer rates than other areas in the state, with the majority in the 28115 and 28117 zip codes These zip codes are just north of Duke Energy’s Marshall Steam Station respectively, and 16 miles from the McGuire nuclear plant. Radiation, the only confirmed environmental exposure linked to thyroid cancer, can enter the atmosphere through ash produced from burning coal for electricity. Susan Wind, the mother of a thyroid cancer patient, shared her teenage daughter Taylor’s story. Over a couple of years, Taylor suffered symptoms including headaches, wait gain, and fatigue. She developed a small lump under her ear, yet doctors continued to claim her symptoms were normal for a teenage girl and that she had nothing to worry about. After hearing about multiple young individuals in the area with Non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, Wind asked her doctor to order an ultrasound and test. They found her daughter had papillary thyroid cancer that had metastasized, spreading throughout her neck and lymph nodes. Wind shared, “obviously it was a shock, because supposedly young girls don’t get thyroid can-
cer.” After hearing similar stories from friends and neighbors, Wind decided to take action. She brought Iredell County’s abnormal cancer rates to her doctor’s attention and contacted Duke University researcher Dr. Heather Stapleton to arrange a study. To secure funding, Wind organized a 5K race in April 2018 and raised $109,000. Last summer, Stapleton began testing potential environmental factors. Wind emphasized, “We can’t say the coal ash is causing the thyroid cancer because that would be irresponsible, because they’re not done with all their research. But the thing that’s very nerve-racking is that Marshall Steam Station is in my backyard.” Health and Human Values professor Dr. Patrick Baron reflected on necessary criteria for causality over e-mail, contemplating, “Is coal ash residue the only carcinogen driving up cancer rates in this population? Are the agents contributing to cancer rates just in the surface/recreational water? Are they also to be found in the drinking water? The ambient air?” Baron suggests examining sick individuals’ lifestyles and environmental exposures to search for factors associated with thyroid cancer. In contrast, Duke Energy representative Bill Norton claims coal ash pits do not presently raise health concerns. He stated that the company’s work complies with strict air emissions controls, water discharge permits, and public safety regulations. Norton continued, “we’ve got extensive testing, not just by us, but independently by the state, by universities, by public water suppliers, that prove[s] that water supplies are safe from
coal ash impacts now.” However, Environmental Studies major Emma Brentjens ’21 cautioned against company bias in testing and added, “Duke has great [personal relations] I’m sure. They can spin anything…Definitely don’t believe everything you hear from a company like Duke Energy.” A 2018 report found that individuals living proximate to coal-fired plants suffered higher disease, lung cancer, and mortality rates. Factors include exposure to air pollutants as well as heavy metals and radioactive isotopes in coal ash. The Catawba Riverkeeper Foundation’s Brandon Jones confirmed via email that coal ash contains many carcinogens with known health impacts. Despite the current lack of conclusive findings tying coal ash to specific health conditions, Frank Holleman, Senior Attorney for the Southern Environmental Law Center, argued, “Although we don’t know what caused any particular individual’s illness, we do know that this kind of pollution increases the risks for the community as a whole. There is no point of incurring that risk.” At the same time, Baron recognized, “The problem is: how do you protect people, and exercise precaution, before you have complete evidence to establish who may be at risk and why?” He noted that officials have informed the public of new cases of thyroid cancer, interpreted data, and conducted interviews. Yet Baron also acknowledged the challenge of systematic protection, highlighting the need for increased data collection and
CONTINUED ON PAGE 2