Search Results
Below are your search results. You can also try a Basic Search.
(10/24/00 9:00am)
Philadelphia's 21,000 public school teachers will go on strike this Friday if a new contract is not successfully negotiated between the School District and the teachers' union by then, Philadelphia Federation of Teachers President Ted Kirsch announced last night.
Before a crowd of about 1,200 frenzied PFT members in an auditorium at North Philadelphia's Central High School, Kirsch addressed the Board of Education with the union's grievances and then presented the legally mandated notice that a strike would be called.
"By imposing unacceptable working conditions upon the membership... I am hereby notifying you that unless a contract is negotiated with both parties agreeing, we will be forced, by your actions, to stop working effective at the close of the work day on Friday, October 27," Kirsch told the board as thunderous cheering erupted from the pro-union crowd.
In the past, officials from the Board of Education have said that any teachers' strike would result in the closing of all 260 of the city's public schools. The PFT's strike deadline of Friday afternoon means that most students will not be affected until Monday.
"We have given more than the [state law] required 48-hours notice to give parents and students time to make arrangements for their children," Kirsch said. "We hope that in the time that remains we will be able to reach a negotiated settlement."
The possibility of a teachers' strike has been particularly real ever since September 27, when the Board of Education voted unanimously to follow the recommendation of Mayor John Street and impose a forced contract upon the PFT after nine months of failed negotiations.
At that time, Kirsch said that the union -- which had been working without a contract since the previous agreement expired on September 1 -- would hold off on calling a strike until it was most beneficial for the union.
That time, it appears, will come this Friday.
"When the [negotiating] process began, you told us you wanted a new beginning, a new partnership -- and we believed you," Kirsch angrily told the board as he shook his finger at the nine-member panel. "Shame on you."
Following his message, Kirsch led the PFT members out of the room and to the front lawn of the high school, where they met up with about 1,000 other union members for a candlelight rally in support of the strike and the union's cause.
Among other demands, the PFT is calling for higher salaries and benefits for all employees, smaller class sizes and stronger provisions for dealing with unruly students.
In the imposed contract, the Board of Education extended the teachers' daily working time to 7 1/2 hours -- putting the Philadelphia workday on par with the national average -- without raising salaries proportionately.
The Board also instituted a new system of seniority assignments, as well as a four-year, 14 percent pay increase.
PFT members from across the city reacted with anger to the Board's initial contract move, and exhibited the same disgust last night for both the Board and Street.
"The PFT is willing to take action, but the school board is deaf," Arts and Technology School teacher Zachary Rubin said. "If they cared about kids they'd be lowering class size and putting a full-time librarian and counselor in each school."
Prior to the Board's meeting, union members -- almost all of whom sported the PFT's trademark red T-shirt -- joined in a variety of derisive songs and chants, many aimed at Street, including "Hit the Road, John" and "One-Term Mayor."
Union members continued to display animosity toward the Democratic mayor following the announcement of intent to strike.
"I was at [Vice President Al] Gore's rally on Saturday night," Cook-Wissahickon Elementary School teacher Estelle Moffa said. "And I watched as Gore stood on stage with Street and praised the labor history of Philadelphia while Street smiled next to him. Shame on John Street for being a pretend Democrat."
Earlier in the week, some warned that the political ramifications of a strike may be serious, as unionized workers may hesitate to cross picket lines to deliver voting booths to schools for Election Day. Such a move could only hurt Gore, who will count on Philadelphia's overwhelming Democratic majority to carry Pennsylvania come November 7.
But as the PFT moved forward with strike plans last night, Kirsch said that the union would do nothing to impede the electoral process. Union members agreed that such suggestions were false.
"That's a red herring," Rubin said. "Everybody believes in democracy and that the franchise is one of the most important rights we have. Nobody wants to interfere with anyone exercising their suffrage."
(10/23/00 9:00am)
It's a two-sided scene that has played out more than 140 times since Texas Gov. George W. Bush took office in 1995.
At one end, a convicted murderer lies motionless, strapped to a gurney in a Huntsville, Texas prison while awaiting the flow of a lethal solution of drugs into his body.
On the other end, final authorization papers hit the desk of the Texas chief executive. Bush, acting in concert with the Bureau of Pardons and Paroles, must make the final decision on whether to put a hold on the execution proceedings or allow them to go forward according to the law and the mandate of the courts.
The scenario is not unfamiliar to the Republican presidential candidate. On all but one occasion over the past five years, he has chosen the latter option, invoking the state's highest criminal penalty and ending the lives of 145 convicted killers.
As the 2000 presidential campaign season enters its final days, Bush's record as governor of Texas -- where more executions are carried out per year than in any other state -- is drawing fire as observers on both sides of the death penalty debate the issue and its relevance in the upcoming election.
And as comparisons are made between Bush and Vice President Al Gore, the death penalty remains an issue on which the two have the same fundamental stance.
"Neither one of them have gone to any of the core issues in this debate," National Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty spokeswoman Tonya McClary said. "They're still giving the standard line without really paying attention to the factors that really influence death penalty opinions."
In an agreement that is decidedly uncharacteristic for the two White House contenders, both Bush and Gore say that they support the death penalty as a means of deterrence and punishment.
But while Gore has said little on the death penalty in public, Bush has used several forums -- including the presidential debates -- to publicly discuss the issue and his controversial track record, which he says has more to do with fighting crime than ending lives.
"Governor Bush believes that ultimately the death penalty saves lives," Bush campaign spokesman Ken Lisaius said. "If it didn't, he'd have to rethink his support. But when administered swiftly, justly and fairly it indeed does save lives."
"His record speaks volumes on his commitment to reducing crime and to his [crime-reducing] accomplishments in Texas," Lisaius added.
Several experts disagree, saying that the popular assessment of the death penalty as an effective deterrent is flat-out wrong.
"There's no evidence that the death penalty does anything to reduce homicides," Fels Center of Government Director and Sociology Professor Lawrence Sherman said.
Sherman, who serves as president of the International Society of Criminology, added that Gore's support of the issue -- an uncharacteristic stand for a traditional liberal Democrat -- may be based more on politics than on policy.
"Certainly many liberals, who support Gore for lots of reasons, feel he's saying that because he would get too much negative response if he didn't," Sherman said. "The reason Gore did not go after Bush on issues of racial disparity and sheer volume of executions may be that it would make it appear that he's against the death penalty -- and that would be political suicide."
Officials from the Gore campaign did not return repeated calls for comment.
Despite the two candidates' similar stances, anti-death penalty activists contend that the enormous execution trend in Texas -- where 70 criminals have already been put to death this year alone -- is going to eventually negatively affect the Bush campaign.
McClary said that Bush's approach to the topic during the final presidential debate -- in which he discussed the punishment handed out to three men convicted in the 1998 racially-motivated dragging death of a black man -- is a perfect example of the Texas governor's misguided approach.
"I think that it's not only [Bush's] record, but also how people perceive him," McClary said. "During the presidential debates, he's come off as being very cocky and indifferent toward the death penalty. His record combined with what people see in him is really going to make the difference."
(10/12/00 9:00am)
The debates are in full swing, the airwaves teem with campaign ads and all around campus people are buzzing about who will take the oath of office come January 20.
It's official: Election season is finally upon us.
And as the days wind down to November 7, several groups at Penn are gearing up for one of the University's most active get-out-the-vote efforts in recent history.
Starting next Monday, the University will play host to "Get Wise about the Upcoming Elections!", a week-long political information series designed to prepare the Penn community for the forthcoming elections. A "Rock the Vote" concert featuring area bands will be held on Friday.
The Daily Pennsylvanian is a co-sponsor of the events.
Each day, students, faculty and community members alike will be invited to participate in a variety of issue forums, discussions and special events intended to raise awareness of election issues and the candidates' views.
The highlight of the week, organizers say, will be Wednesday's town hall-style forum entitled "America's Democratic Promise: A Public Seminar and Town Meeting."
Sponsored by the Philadelphia Higher Education Network for Neighborhood Development -- a regional consortium of colleges and universities -- the event is designed to expose students to a multi-faceted discussion on an important social issue, according to organizer Hillary Aisenstein.
"The topic of our discussion is going to be, OWhat can government and higher education do together to abolish poverty in America?'" said Aisenstein, a 1999 College graduate. "We're going to have representatives from the four major campaigns -- Bush, Gore, Nader and Buchanan -- as well as faculty, student and community respondents."
For nearly two hours, the campaign representatives and other participants -- who will represent colleges and universities all over the area -- will discuss the issues surrounding poverty before an audience in Houston Hall's Bodek Lounge.
"There's a lot of talk right now about the Oengaged campus,' and getting students to make those connections between their volunteer and community experience and what's going on in the larger political scene," Aisenstein said. "Our audience is students who do volunteer work, and we're trying to have this event to say to them OHey, you should look at these political issues, too.'"
In addition to the Wednesday forum, other University and Philadelphia-area groups will be sponsoring a number of events.
Throughout the week, students will be invited to attend discussions on religion and politics, Latinos and the election and issues surrounding blacks and democracy.
And on October 21, Perelman Quadrangle's Wynn Commons will turn into a concert venue as "Rock the Vote" comes to campus to host a special voter-registration concert.
Sponsored by the Social Planning and Events Committee, the concert will feature appearances by Philadelphia-area bands Angry Salad, Waterface, Smooth Approach and Weston, according to the "Rock the Vote" Web site.
(10/09/00 9:00am)
To Leah Sheaffer, the words "gun control" used to mean about as much as the word "Columbine."
That was, of course, before the April 1999 day when two gun-toting teenagers grabbed worldwide headlines with their brutal massacre of classmates and teachers at Columbine High School in Littleton, Colo.
Since then, gun control has become a primary concern for the College junior, leading her to organize anti-violence workshops on Penn's campus and to take a decidedly strong stand on the topic during the presidential election.
"I see gun violence today as a health epidemic," Sheaffer said. "It's something that's harming not just the people who are dying and wounded, but also their families and friends. It's a more serious issue than people are giving it credit for being."
As the weeks wind down to Election Day, Sheaffer isn't alone in her concern for the issues surrounding guns and their availability. All across the nation, advocates for both gun control and the Second Amendment are vigorously pushing their cause to an electorate that has yet to decidedly swing to one particular presidential candidate.
But much to the dismay of many on both sides of the spectrum, neither Texas Gov. George W. Bush nor Vice President Al Gore has yet to prominently discuss the issue.
"I think guns are an issue that's of central importance to precisely the key demographic in this race," said Eric Gorovitz, Policy Director for the Million Mom March Foundation, a California-based organization that promotes gun control laws. "And I think the candidates need to be spending a lot more time explaining their positions."
While both Bush and Gore have offered official positions on the issue, some criticize the contenders for not making gun control a bigger part of their election strategies. Neither candidate, for example, mentioned the issue during the first presidential debate.
According to Penn Political Science Department Chairman Jack Nagel, the candidates' reasoning behind that strategy may be based on their own protection.
"It's interesting how low a profile the issue has had," Nagel said. "And I think the reason is that there are enough people on both sides that are so passionate about it that it can potentially cause damage to both candidates."
In the wake of Columbine and similar school shootings across the country, gun control immediately topped the nation's political agenda. But since a gun control bill was defeated in Congress soon after the tragedy, the issue has largely fallen off the radar screen.
Democrats and gun control activists have focused their efforts on toughening licensing procedures, mandating child-proof trigger locks and closing legal loopholes that allow same-day gun purchases at gun shows.
Republicans, by comparison, have tied the gun-control issue with the fight on crime, centering their crusade not on the guns themselves but on their criminal users. The GOP advocates tough sentences for gun-related crimes and more vigorous prosecution of gun offenders.
So far in this election cycle, it appears that neither of the two main candidates has wandered far from their party's official platform.
"The governor believes strongly that the best control measure is to vigorously prosecute those who are involved in violent crime and gun offenses," Bush campaign spokesman Ken Lisaius said. "He's already cracked down on gun violence in the state of Texas, and the proof is that violent crime has decreased 20 percent and overall crime is down 13 percent."
Lisaius added that Bush would support legislation mandating voluntary-use trigger locks, as well a ban on the importation of high capacity ammunition clips.
To Democrats and gun control advocates, though, Bush's policy -- which they say stems directly from the GOP's close association with the pro-gun National Rifle Association -- does little to address the real problem: the wide availability of dangerous weapons on the market.
The NRA refused to comment on either of the candidates' stances.
"If Bush gets elected, it will turn back the clock on gun control in this country," Texans Against Gun Violence lobbyist Nina Butts said. "I'd like to see the vice president take Bush to task for his terrible record on gun control in our state."
But for the most part, debate has focused on what's not being said, rather than what is.
"I certainly thought that it had the potential to become a major issue after tragedies like Columbine," Nagel said. "I think there are potentially a lot more people on the pro-control side than the other side, and it will be interesting to see if the Democrats use that potential, which I think is still out there."
(10/06/00 9:00am)
Long known as one of the basement-dwellers of the National Football League, the Philadelphia Eagles have been flying high so far in this young season.
But Birds fans looking to watch their team make future Super Bowl drives may have to look a whole lot further than the intersection of Broad and Pattison streets, team officials said yesterday.
At an afternoon press conference in Center City, Eagles Executive Vice President Joe Banner hinted that the team may have to consider moving to another city should they be forced to keep playing in the dilapidated Veteran's Stadium.
"We're going to continue to exhaust every option available to us to build a new stadium, and until we've exhausted every one of them, we're not going to look into [moving]," he added.
In recent months, the pressure to finalize plans for two new stadiums -- one for the Eagles and one for baseball's Phillies -- has grown tremendously as the calendar approaches November 30.
If no deal is reached by that date, the city will be contractually obligated to purchase the Eagles' new South Philadelphia practice facility -- at a cost of $23 million -- and put an additional $80 million into infrastructural repairs to the Vet.
All of that can be avoided, Banner said, if Mayor John Street and City Council agree on a site location and financing plan within the established timeframe.
Banner even went so far as to publicize the plan his organization is proposing to the city.
"We think we have a special vision here," Banner said. "It's the most aggressive proposal any team has ever made to any city in the country to get a stadium deal done."
According to the proposal, the city would provide the land at the existing T-Warehouse site adjacent to Veteran's Stadium, and the construction costs would be footed jointly by the state and by the team.
Banner said that the Eagles' estimated $320 million contribution is an unprecedented sum for a franchise to offer.
"We'll have the largest public contribution and the most public-friendly deal in NFL history," he said.
But despite the team's insistence on meeting the November 30 deadline -- a date he says is necessary so that the new facility may be ready for play in 2003 -- it appears that other factors may push back a final vote well past that date.
Street has said that no stadium deal would go through unless separate agreements are reached with the Eagles and the Phillies simultaneously.
And while the Eagles appear convinced on the viability of the South Philadelphia site, the mayor's proposed Phillies site in Chinatown at 12th and Vine streets has met with tremendous opposition from community leaders.
A downtown baseball stadium had been a goal of former Mayor Ed Rendell, who said it would help revitalize Center City. But downtown sites have faced passionate opposition in neighborhoods such as Chinatown -- stalling the planning and building processes.
Such opposition -- as well as the mayor's insistence that the stadium issue not be discussed until the Philadelphia teachers' contract is settled -- could force a major compromise on the plan.
"We support new stadiums in the city of Philadelphia," Street said as he took the microphone from Banner toward the end of the press conference. "But I believe it is our responsibility to act within the political environment that is offered us."
Street said that he still hasn't been in office long enough to have the time to properly deal with the stadium issue. Street was inaugurated 10 months ago.
"What I ask is that the people give us an opportunity to get this done," the mayor said. "I would like for you to give this mayor [a few] months -- to November 30 or thereabouts -- for a chance to get this done."
But when asked what issues were holding up completion of a deal between the city and the two teams, Street said he couldn't provide concrete answers.
"I can't tell you that," Street said. "It really is true that on some of this you are going to have to trust us."
Officials from the Phillies said that while they have been frustrated that no official negotiations have taken place in several months, they were enthused that the mayor feels that a plan by November 30 is still feasible.
"We're encouraged that the mayor thinks [November 30] is still an opportunity," Phillies President David Montgomery said.
Montgomery added that the Phillies continue to prefer that their new stadium be built in the South Philadelphia area that currently houses the Vet.
(10/06/00 9:00am)
If Tuesday's debate between the two leading presidential contenders was a battle of fiery campaign rhetoric, then last night's clash between the Democratic and Republican vice-presidential candidates was a lesson in politeness.
In a packed auditorium at Centre College in Danville, Ky., Democratic nominee Joe Lieberman and Republican Dick Cheney engaged in a 1 1/2-hour-long debate on issues ranging from military readiness to tax relief to the fate of Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic.
And while neither candidate hesitated to point out differences in opinion, the exchange never took on even a mildly hostile tone.
Sitting just feet apart at a small table -- separated only by moderator and CNN anchorman Bernard Shaw -- Cheney and Lieberman began the discussion by addressing education and tax cuts.
"Under the Bush plan, anyone who pays taxes will get some form of tax relief," Cheney said.
Lieberman responded with a detailed description of the Gore fiscal plan, adding, "We're focusing our tax credits on the middle class where they say we really need it."
With Lieberman launching into a confusing rundown of percentages and tax allocations, Cheney jumped on the Connecticut senator for his misleading, numbers-based delivery.
"Bernie, you have to be a CPA to understand what he just said," Cheney said. "It's a classic example of a tax program that tries to drive people to live a certain way."
But that's as mean as it got all night.
Even through clear disagreements over the state of the military and the legacy of the Clinton administration, both of the candidates maintained an unusual level of decorum -- even taking time to joke casually.
In discussing the strong economy, Lieberman brought up the lucrative separation package his opponent received when he left his oil service company to join the GOP ticket.
"I am pleased to see from the newspapers that you're better off than you were eight years ago too," Lieberman said.
"And I can tell you, Joe," Cheney responded, "that the government had nothing to do with it."
As the audience launched into uncharacteristic laughter, Lieberman said that his wife had wanted him to join the private sector.
"Well, I'm going to try to help you do that, Joe," Cheney quickly replied.
Following those brief moments of levity, the candidates continued to discuss a multitude of issues with Shaw, frequently requesting that he invoke his moderator's privilege to allow them to continue discussion past the two-minute limit.
Among other themes, the pair touched on the hot-button topic of abortion, specifically focusing on the recent U.S. Food and Drug Administration approval of the abortion drug RU-486.
Cheney remarked that while both he and running mate George W. Bush were solidly pro-life, they were focusing on "reaching across the [political] divide to reduce abortions."
Lieberman's response reflected a very direct Democratic party stance.
"Al Gore and I will respect a woman's right to choose," he said. "And our opponents will not."
(10/05/00 9:00am)
Philadelphia Mayor John Street lost yet another high-ranking member of his administration yesterday,when Communications Director Barbara Grant announced that she will leave to pursue a career in television news.
Grant, 50, said she was leaving City Hall effective October 16 to take a newly established executive position with KYW-TV, the city's local CBS affiliate.
"It's like the line in The Godfather," Grant said. "They made me an offer I couldn't refuse.
"I don't mean that just in terms of money," she added, "because they just offered me a really wonderful opportunity in a field that I love. It's a really good fit for me."
At KYW, Grant -- a former radio and television reporter -- will assume a new position devoted to special features and programming.
"In that position, [Grant] will coordinate the reports of our special features," KYW spokeswoman Joanne Calabria said.
Grant now becomes the fourth high-ranking administration official to leave since Street took office in January.
Earlier this year, the mayor fired his first communications director, Ken Snyder, in a move that opened up the position for Grant, who had been serving as press secretary.
Street also relieved airport director Alfred Testa and saw controversial Chief of Staff Stephanie Franklin-Suber resign under what many said was heavy pressure from the mayor himself.
"There's definitely been some degree of turnover," said Snyder, who is now working in the office of State Sen. Vincent Fumo. "Some of it has been unfortunate and some of it has been distracting."
Grant said that her departure had nothing to do with the other recent high-level personnel moves.
"I think in the first year of any administration, you're going to have some ups and downs in terms of where people are," she said.
"In the first year of both the Rendell and Goode administrations, they both lost press secretaries," Grant added. "So I don't think we're setting a precedent here."
In the interim, Street has named Deputy Communications Director Luz Cardenas to assume Grant's responsibilities until a permanent replacement can be found.
But relying solely on internal candidates may be dangerous, said Snyder, who added that the mayor would benefit by conducting a broader search to fill the job on a permanent basis.
"I hope [Street] does a national search because it's an incredibly important job and the mayor has an awful lot between now and the end of his term to sell to Philadelphians," Snyder said.
"Communications director is a really taxing job," he added. "There are a lot of really top-notch, experienced reporters out there who will keep your feet to the fire and it's easy to get lost in the shuffle."
Grant agreed, saying that the job was one of the most challenging of her career.
"It was a difficult decision because I've enjoyed my job here," she said. "This was the most challenging and enjoyable thing I've ever done."
(10/04/00 9:00am)
Justin Schmaltz just doesn't want to vote.<P>
He tuned in to watch the presidential candidates deliver their nomination speeches, he keeps up on national news and he even considers himself affiliated with one of the major parties.<P>
But despite all this, the Wharton sophomore and Fargo, N.D., native says he still doesn't have all the facts he needs to make an informed choice come Election Day.<P>
"I see voting as something you should do if you're educated about all the issues," the self-described conservative Republican said minutes after watching last night's debate between George W. Bush and Al Gore.<P>
"And as of now," he said, "I still don't consider myself really informed."<P>
Along with four other randomly selected Penn students, Schmaltz participated last night in a Daily Pennsylvanian panel designed to gauge student reaction to the first of three debates between the major party contenders for the White House.<P>
And like students and voters across the country, the five participants responded to the 90-minute debate with an equally varied mix of optimism, criticism and doubt.<P>
To College sophomore Alia Gonsalves -- a self-described political novice who will be voting this November for the first time -- the vice president's fact-based approach to questioning sealed up her decision to vote Democratic.<P>
"Gore definitely has my vote," said Gonsalves, who was born in the United States but was raised in Kingston, Jamaica. "He knows his policies inside and out. He knows Bush's policies inside and out."<P>
To others, though, the difference between Gore and Bush wasn't nearly as clear-cut. Both candidates, they said, appeared well-versed on the issues and dedicated to their convictions.<P>
But while the students said Gore maintained an obvious strength in providing evidence to back up his policy claims, they also pointed out that Bush's charisma may have gained him the upper hand.<P>
"Gore was much better with policy and providing statistical evidence," Wharton freshman Greg Eisner said. "But Bush showed more personality, so maybe to those who weren't listening as close, he came off better."<P>
Eisner -- a native of Huntington, N.Y., and a Republican who has crossed party lines to support Gore -- added that the vice president clearly outshined his opponent on issues of substance, but Bush's one-liners may have made the difference considering the media's appetite for quick, biting commentary.<P>
The Texas governor showed an affinity for such soundbites on numerous occasions throughout the debate, referring to Gore's Social Security plan as "fuzzy numbers" and his Medicare proposal as "Mediscare."<P>
But such convoluted rhetoric may have obscured the key issues, College freshman Dina Ackermann said.<P>
"I enjoyed watching the debate, but I wonder how much the average American got out of it," the Greensboro, N.C., native and Gore backer said. "Often the answers were long-winded and both of the candidates used the opportunity to speak on only the topics they wanted to."<P>
From nearly the first moments of the debate, both Gore and Bush attempted to draw attention to those issues in which they viewed themselves as stronger.<P>
Bush spent considerable time -- no matter what question was posed by moderator Jim Lehrer -- discussing his experiences as governor of Texas and lashing out at Gore's various policy proposals.<P>
To the panelists, such mean-spirited barbs were indicative of Bush's general demeanor.<P>
"It's getting ugly," Eisner noted as the two candidates engaged in a particularly abrasive exchange on the issue of oil production. "He takes one step forward and one step back and then sidesteps the issue."<P>
Gore, by comparison, entered into several lengthy discussions on his plans for funding Social Security and Medicare -- exchanges which, said the panelists, became overly repetitive and predictable.<P>
"My plan is Social Security plus," Gore said. "The governor's plan is Social Security..."<P>
"Minus," Ackermann quipped as she correctly predicted the vice president's train of thought. "This is getting old."<P>
While all five panelists admitted that the debate opened their eyes to the relevant issues in the campaign, they likewise said that the often-rambling commentary and misleading claims might have turned off some potential voters.<P>
"Nothing they said changed my opinions in general," said College sophomore Erica Young, who hails from Allentown, Pa. "I disagreed with a lot of the things they both said, and I think a lot of it was over my head and over the heads of most Americans."<P>
And while Schmaltz says his support sways more toward the Bush side, the debate did little to convince him to cast an unenthusiastic ballot on Election Day.<P>
"I think I'm actually less likely to vote now," Schmaltz said. "I came into this liking Bush more, but I don't think either of these two men is ready to be president."<P>
(10/03/00 9:00am)
Jeremy Siegel seems right at home.<P>
Tucked away inside his small Steinberg-Dietrich Hall office, the veteran Wharton Finance professor leans over a laptop next to his desk and glares at a seemingly incomprehensible array of zig-zagging lines and carefully columned numbers.<P>
"I've got to check what the market has been up to," Siegel mutters as he gleans some meaning from the statistical mess on his computer screen.<P>
"Looks like we're in for some volatility up ahead," he says.<P>
Behind the cluttered desk -- nestled between a pair of matching bull-and-bear bookends -- rest a dozen copies of his best-selling Stocks for the Long Run, the 1994 book which turned the academic economist into a Wall Street wizard.<P>
And perched at the edge of his table sits a brightly colored globe, on which, perhaps, the world-famous analyst plots the nearly 150,000 miles he travels each year for consulting and speaking engagements.<P>
For a man who has made a career out of deciphering those obscure lines and columns -- and who's done virtually all of it within the tightly guarded confines of an Ivy League business school -- Siegel is a shining star in an academic universe known more for its sobering darkness.<P>
His words -- and those of his other high-profile colleagues -- can be found almost daily on the pages of major newspapers and magazines around the world. Their faces dot the television landscape, on such shows as Moneyline, Nightline and The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer.<P>
With every appearance or quotation, these superstars of Penn bring an acclaim to the University that many say could not be generated by any other means.<P>
"Certainly having persons whose reputations are recognized publicly is a major distinction for any university," said Bruce Alton, a higher education executive recruiter with the Academic Search Consultation Service. "It's one of many marks that bring credit to a school."<P>
"Those of us who are in the public eye, I think, raise the visibility of the institution as a whole," Annenberg School for Communication Dean Kathleen Hall Jamieson added. "That's an important role to play."<P>
Jamieson should know. Widely regarded as the nation's foremost authority on issues of political communication, the media's demand for her insights on presidential debates, campaign advertisements and political rhetoric is extraordinarily high during the months leading up to Election Day.<P>
"I don't consider myself a celebrity," said Jamieson, who in the past few weeks alone has been featured on CNN, National Public Radio and in countless newspaper articles. "I consider myself one of the academic voices that get into the news a lot."<P>
For all their exposure and name recognition, neither Siegel nor Jamieson view their public role as separate from their other work. Instead, they both say, their outside collaborations are merely a facet of their basic teaching responsibilities.<P>
"I [speak with the media] because I regard it as an extension of my teaching," Siegel said. "People tell me I'm a celebrity. Some people even tell me I'm a guru. But that's impossible -- no one has or can have a real specific knowledge of the future."<P>
Siegel may not be able to predict the ups and downs of the stock market with 100 percent accuracy, but University officials say that by attracting top faculty and students to Penn, he and his celebrity colleagues provide intangibles to the University that set them apart from their equally-knowledgeable peers.<P>
"They're obviously very valuable to the school both in the attention they bring to Penn and in their abilities in bringing the outside in," School of Arts and Sciences Dean Samuel Preston said. "They can bring issues in public discourse back to the classroom to make learning especially exciting."<P>
David Backus, the vice dean of faculty at New York University's Stern School of Business and a follower of Siegel's work, agreed. "It's a different experience having them in the classroom than someone else."<P>
Backus added that fame from the media spotlight also brings a potential danger: It makes famous professors more attractive to other schools.<P>
"The academic world is a pretty small one," Backus said. "And if you get the idea that somebody big might move or isn't happy, you start talking to them."<P>
Siegel and Jamieson admit that they have often been the targets of outside recruiting.<P>
"I have been the subject of offers ever since I got my Ph.D., and the number and nature of offers really hasn't changed since 1972," Jamieson said. "But why would I want to leave a university doing so well?"<P>
Siegel, who commands significant sums for his outside consulting engagements, echoed those sentiments. "I've been invited to work on Wall Street many times, but I could never have the freedom I have here.<P>
"The thought of making $10 million or $20 million is nice, but what gives me satisfaction is doing everything I'm doing now," he said.<P>
Besides the ever-present lure of bigger salaries on the outside, the success that notoriety brings can sometimes demand an even more significant price, as Center for Bioethics Director Arthur Caplan learned recently.<P>
Caplan -- whose expertise in the field of medical ethics draws, by his estimate, at least 200 media inquiries each week -- was named as a defendant in a civil suit filed against Penn and several others by the family of Jesse Gelsinger, who died last year while participating in a gene therapy research trial conducted at Penn.<P>
The suit claims that the advice Caplan gave to researchers running the study led them to target older, healthier subjects like Gelsinger, rather than terminally ill infants whose parents, Caplan advised, cannot give informed consent.<P>
According to Caplan, suits like this are a side effect of the growing spotlight on himself and on bioethical issues in general.<P>
"I think one of the costs of being out in public... is that you're going to attract all different kinds of reactions," Caplan said. "The media involvement has its ups and downs."<P>
Caplan's colleagues say that part of his value as a bioethicist rests in his ability to reach out and communicate to the public in ways that typical scientists cannot.<P>
"I think he's perhaps the best-known person in our field, and that brings with it a certain luster to the University," said University of Minnesota Center for Bioethics Director Jeffrey Kahn, who replaced Caplan at Minnesota when Caplan came to Penn in 1994.<P>
"Art is extremely productive, and his name is mentioned in all the relevant literature," Kahn added. "He's a huge recipient of grants, and his exposure helps that."<P>
Caplan has built much of his reputation through his affinity for engaging public discussion, but exposure can also be found far from Nightline.<P>
For Lawrence Sherman, a professor of Sociology and director of the Fels Center of Government, success has come by leading his field in a new direction.<P>
Sherman -- who came to Penn just 15 months ago from the University of Maryland -- has already gained the plaudits of University figures for his ambitious rebuilding of the Fels Center. For years it had sat in limbo as enrollment dropped and was shifted among various schools at the University.<P>
Sherman is president of both the International Society of Criminology and the American Criminological Society, and was recently ranked by The Journal of Criminal Justice as the most-often cited among 27,536 criminologists around the world.<P>
"I think that there is some reason to characterize my work [as groundbreaking]," said Sherman, whose work has brought the scientific method to a traditionally theoretical field.<P>
Sherman serves as an advisor to both Philadelphia Mayor John Street and Police Commissioner John Timoney and provides expert testimony in trials around the country on cases that involve crime reporting.<P>
"Larry Sherman is a public intellectual and certainly a leader within his profession," Preston said. "He has helped revitalize the programs of the Fels Center, in part because of his vision and in part because of his reputation."<P>
Still, many in academia say that the reputations of Penn's superstars continue to feed not solely on their television exposure, but also on their sheer intellectual talent.<P>
"Kathleen [Jamieson] plays a large part in extending Annenberg into the public eye," Communications Professor Barbie Zelizer said. "She is brilliant at welding scholarship and the everyday political world, and she has been able to transpose her message in a way that people can understand."<P>
And to the professors, the mass exposure can at times seem entirely routine.<P>
"If you're still making appearances long after your mother cares, you have to be doing it because you really care about the issues," Caplan said.<P>
---------<P>
<h2>Sidebar: ...and waiting in the wings</h2><P>
They're regular contributors to CNN, they advise heads of corporations and they even manage to make it to class once in a while.<P>
But are Penn's high-profile faculty members fundamentally different from the hundreds of other scholars who make their way around the West Philadelphia campus everyday?<P>
According to a number of academic leaders, the answer is no.<P>
"There are a large number of faculty members here who I consider to have a huge impact and are making major contributions to their own field," Provost Robert Barchi said. "Some of those are more visible than others."<P>
Barchi particularly mentioned Lasker Award winners in the Medical School and Penn researchers who have, in the course of their careers, been on the short list for the Nobel Prize as examples of eminent scholars whose work often goes unnoticed by the general public.<P>
At a major university like Penn -- one which offers study and research opportunities in a seemingly limitless number of disciplines -- the focus of media attention often centers around those individuals who concentrate on more timely issues or are just more willing to speak to the media.<P>
"In general, we have differences between people who are very well-known in their own disciplines and others -- in the category of public intellectuals -- who are prominently cited in the press," School of Arts and Sciences Dean Samuel Preston said. "Some of our best teachers have terrific reputations on campus but their reputations may not extend so far abroad as some others."<P>
Even among celebrity professors themselves, there seems to be a general consensus that the only thing that separates them from the rest of the pack is a natural tendency to speak their mind.<P>
"I think that my input is valued by both my colleagues and my students," Wharton Professor Jeremy Siegel said. "Still, a lot of my colleagues are doing tremendous research and they just tend to shy away from the press more than I."<P>
"A long time ago, I decided that bioethics should be a public issue," Center for Bioethics Director Arthur Caplan said. "On the whole, most academics aren't good about dealing with the media. It's something that you're not ever trained or paid to do, and there's a tendency to say that there's no skill set involved with doing it."<P>
Whether the attention earned by Penn's high-profile professors is entirely warranted, there seems to be little doubt about the enormous impact that such individuals have in developing the reputation of the University.<P>
"In projecting their own reputation, they are projecting an image of Penn," University President Judith Rodin said. "They all do tremendous work and they're willing and often eager to communicate it publicly."<P>
-- J.M.<P>
(09/29/00 9:00am)
The leaders of the group representing Philadelphia's public school teachers said last night that they would not call an immediate strike, even though the city had just minutes before imposed a forced contract upon the 21,000-member union.
Before a crowd of about 1,000 local teachers, Philadelphia Federation of Teachers President Ted Kirsch announced that while the union was upset with the actions of the mayor and the School Board of Philadelphia, a strike would only be called when it was deemed most beneficial to the teachers.
"We have been in the classrooms and in the work areas, serving our children," Kirsch told the crowd of chanting educators and school employees in front of the Board of Education building in Center City. "And tomorrow, we will be back at our schools doing it again."
"[The strike] is an option that we're not going to relinquish," he added. "We're going to utilize it when it's at our benefit. And we know that when we do it, it's going to be effective."
The immediate possibility of a teacher's strike became likely Wednesday night when Mayor John Street announced he would recommend forcing a contract on the PFT if union and city officials were still unable to reach an agreement by 7 p.m. last night.
City and union officials have been holding contentious contract negotiations for nine months. Benefits and the length of the work day are key issues of debate.
Teachers continued to work over this month even though their original contract expired September 1.
But with no success in the discussions yesterday, the Philadelphia Board of Education met at 7:30 p.m. and voted to immediately impose the mayor's terms. The move met with immediate disapproval from the PFT members both inside and outside of the board's meeting chamber.
"I have sat with members of this board for many months," PFT chief negotiator Linda Harris said. "I think that you see through the resolve here that this is not the way to go."
"Hitler and Stalin made hard choices, too -- and we've reaped the effects of their choices," PFT member Eugene Fitzgerald angrily told the board members. "How are you going to benefit from these hard choices?"
While both union and board officials acknowledge that they differ on relatively few provisions of the proposed contract, those differences, they said, are tremendous.
Among the terms that will be part of the new city-imposed contract are the extension of the teachers' work day to 7 1/2 hours -- a level that puts Philadelphia on average with other Pennsylvania school districts -- as well as a new system of seniority assignments and a 14 percent pay raise over four years.
Union members loudly voiced opposition to the longer work day, and reiterated that their most crucial need was a new set of stricter guidelines for dealing with unruly students.
"I think the school board's decision hurt us," Kensington High School teacher Alan Ozer said. "The only effect was to try to punish the teachers by making us stay an hour after school, taking away our benefits and cutting our pay for the time we're teaching."
School board officials said that the forced contract was a necessary move and marked the first time in recent history that city officials were courageous enough to make a difficult decision in a time of great opposition.
"In the past, we had failed to make the hard choices at the hard times," Board of Education President Pedro Ramos said. "This is the responsible thing to do."
Protesting union members just outside the board's meeting room had a very different view.
"I think Mayor Street stuck his foot in his mouth this time," Shaw Elementary School food service manager Carol Green said. "He put us against a wall and we're not going to take it."
"I've been educating for 31 years -- I've done a good job for 31 years -- and I think it's a shame that [Street] doesn't show us the respect to at least come out and speak to us," Elementary School teacher Susan Phillips added.
While the union can still call a strike at any time, state law requires at least 48 hours notice before it could take effect.
(09/29/00 9:00am)
Rebecca Lieberman was just like every other student in her Penn Law School class of 1997.
She stressed over the rigorous Ivy League Law school curriculum, made her way between classes and a comfortable Center City apartment and even had a couple of favorites among Penn's many neighborhood food trucks.
But today, three years after her Penn Law days came to a close, Lieberman's priorities are far from those of most of her former classmates. Instead of winning her cases or moving up in the ranks of her firm, her present goal is very simple: to help her father become the next vice president of the United States.
Lieberman, the daughter of Connecticut senator and Democratic vice-presidential nominee Joseph Lieberman, visited Philadelphia yesterday for a series of events designed to foster political discussion and drum up support for the Gore-Lieberman presidential ticket.
Her first stop was a roundtable discussion on general politics with a group of students at the Community College of Philadelphia. Afterwards, she made her way back to her old campus and spoke at a Democratic women's group function at the Annenberg Center's Zellerbach Theatre.
"We're doing these discussions because there really has been something of a mutual neglect between politicians and young people and we want to break through that," said Lieberman, who has been visiting several states in recent weeks on behalf of the Democratic ticket.
For about 30 minutes, Lieberman held court with a group of 15 Community College students, discussing such topics as voter registration, police brutality and higher education financing.
And while the tone of the discussion was rather sedate and welcoming by political standards, there was no mistaking the very partisan approach Lieberman brought to the table.
"Things are sometimes difficult when one party controls the White House and another controls the Congress," Lieberman told the group when the discussion shifted to government gridlock. "It makes it difficult for the Democrats to get anything done."
For the students selected by the Community College administration to participate in the discussion, the chance to discuss relevant issues with a young person so close to the presidential campaign was a significant opportunity.
"I truly believe that there's a barrier between young people and politics," 26-year-old Kareem Strong said. "Young people can't relate to a lot of the issues, and politics is filled with a lot of jargon that an 18-year-old just can't understand."
Following the discussion, the 26-year-old Lieberman paused to look back at the three years she spent wearing the Red and Blue.
"I made wonderful friends at Penn and I had some great professors," she said. "Law school is a notoriously difficult experience, but Penn is a non-competitive place and that was terrific."
Lieberman was also careful to note the little things that made her Penn Law experience so terrific.
"I have a special place in my heart for the vegetarian meatballs from the Magic Carpet food truck," she said. "And I used to hang out all the time at the Ritz Theater downtown, going to two shows a day sometimes."
For the one Penn student in attendance at Lieberman's afternoon discussion, the opportunity to discuss major issues with a candidate's daughter was very helpful.
"It was a good free-flowing discussion," Democratic volunteer and College freshman Abraham Dyk said. "It became a lot more than them just asking her questions, and that was great because it allowed her to know a lot about how they feel."
After her appearance at the Community College, Lieberman addressed a crowd of Democratic supporters at Penn at "Every Woman Counts!" The event was organized by the Five County Democratic Women's Coalition to support the cause of women in government and at the ballot box.
(09/27/00 9:00am)
The continuing saga of Penn's Institute for Human Gene Therapy took yet another interesting twist this week when its embattled director, James M. Wilson, resigned from his side position as chief of medical genetics in the Department of Medicine.
The move -- which was announced to department faculty in an e-mail from Interim Chairman of Medicine Stanley Goldfarb on Monday -- concerns only his role as head of a small clinical program within the department.
"Jim has decided to resign from the role of division chief in order to focus on his other two major administrative responsibilities," Goldfarb wrote in his e-mail announcement.
Wilson will retain his position as director of the IHGT, a role that has brought him under national scrutiny for the past year after the death of a patient participating in a trial there that Wilson was leading.
Wilson also serves as chairman of the Department of Molecular and Cellular Engineering. The resignation does not affect either of those two positions.
And according to Goldfarb, Wilson resigned so that he may be able to concentrate fully on the growing issues of his other two departments, while allowing the few Medical Genetics faculty members to benefit from the direction of a full-time chief.
Barbara Weber, a Hematology professor and the director of Penn's breast cancer research program, was named to fill the Medical Genetics post until a permanent replacement can be found.
"[Weber] is an internationally known researcher in cancer genetics -- a true leader in the field," Goldfarb said. "She will help guide the division and the young faculty members."
Medical School professors familiar with Wilson and the IHGT situation said his resignation was not directly linked to the controversy surrounding the beleaguered IHGT.
According to Hematology Professor Stephen Eck, Wilson had discussed the possibility of leaving the Medical Genetics post some time ago, and likely did so now so that he could focus more intensively on his major research initiatives.
"Jim has three administrative positions, and that's a lot," Goldfarb said. "I think he thought [resigning] was in the best interests of developing this Medical Genetics position, and it would be better off if someone else was focusing on it."
Wilson's name jumped to the forefront of the debate over human gene therapy just over a year ago, when 18-year old Jesse Gelsinger died while taking part in an IHGT experiment that Wilson was leading.
After a two-month investigation, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration suspended all human gene therapy research at Penn in January, citing program deficiencies that "could expose patients to a significant and unreasonable risk."
Since then, Wilson and the IHGT have continued their gene therapy research not concerning humans, while mounting an as-yet unsuccessful campaign to have their research permits reinstated by the FDA.
And just last week, Gelsinger's father filed suit against Wilson and the University alleging negligence which led to the death of the Arizona teenager.
(09/25/00 9:00am)
It's an issue with which most Penn students probably think they're well acquainted.
After all, those $30,000-plus tuition bills could make an expert out of just about anyone going through four years of college education.
But to the two candidates vying for the White House -- as well as a slew of experts and educational leaders around the country -- the issue of higher education funding is a lot more complex than just writing a check.
And with just six weeks left until Election Day, the candidates and pundits alike continue to debate about not just what plan best meets the needs of America's college-bound students, but also whether the higher education discussion has truly taken the proper course during this political season.
"This may be the first presidential campaign in American history when both candidates have placed a high priority on higher education funding," said Rhodes College President William Troutt, a former chairman of the National Commission on the Cost of Higher Education.
"Both Mr. Bush and Mr. Gore have, in different ways, expressed how important they see access to higher education," he added.
In recent weeks, both George W. Bush and Al Gore have released detailed plans for making college more accessible to a greater number of American students.
The plans, which focus almost exclusively on easing the heavy financial burden associated with a college education, offer different prescriptions for funneling federal money out to defray educational costs.
Democratic nominee Gore, for example, has proposed offering a $2,800 tax credit to families with a college-bound child, while increasing the maximum level of Pell Grants offered to individual students under federal law.
The Pell Grant program currently provides federal funds for financially needy students to attend college.
"In an economy where what you earn more and more depends on what you learn, college and continuing education has become more important than ever," Gore campaign spokeswoman Devona Dolliole said.
Bush's proposal, by comparison, gives more power to the states to decide how to make college more affordable. It would focus on state-based merit programs, as well as an increase in Pell Grant funding.
"The governor's proposals -- including College Challenge grants, Pell Grants and special grants for promoting math and science study -- reach out and offer assistance to the low- and moderate-income families who need the help with college the most," Bush campaign spokesman Ken Lisaius said.
Lisaius added that the proposed $1.5 billion College Challenge grant program is modeled on a system enacted in Bush's home state of Texas, and they would provide states with funds to disperse to financially needy students who follow a mandated course of rigorous study in high school.
But according to the Gore camp, the Texas governor's proposal for a sweeping, across-the-board tax cut would drive too heavily into the federal budget surplus to make his college funding plan economically feasible.
"George Bush's tax cut pretty much squanders the surplus and leaves no room for education funding," Dolliole said. "There's nothing left in his plan for credits."
But the Bush camp, not surprisingly, disagrees.
"That's a ridiculous charge," Lisaius said. "When you look at the surplus, the governor's proposal fits very clearly into his detailed budget. These are charges from people trying to run away from the fact that their program provides no real relief for people who need the assistance."
He added that the Gore plan offers relief only for those families paying federal income taxes, a population that, Lisaius said, does not include about 5.5 million students from America's poorest families.
As Bush and Gore continue to exchange their fiery campaign rhetoric, though, a number of experts across the country remain undecided on what direction the education debate should follow.
Some, like Penn Public Policy and History Professor Ted Hershberg, see the entire focus on education as something that has changed fundamentally during this election cycle.
"While there have been lots of educational reforms before, those in the past have been driven largely by educators," Hershberg said. "While this one is driven by governors and legislators and corporate leaders who say we need a school system that will educate well and educate everybody."
Hershberg continued to say that while candidates focus primarily on the issue of college funding, they miss the more pressing need to support simple post-secondary training.
"The Bureau of Labor Statistics reported... that 55 percent of the new jobs will require more than high school but less than college," he said. "It's too complicated to explain that people shouldn't be investing in college -- they should be investing in post-secondary education."
Other experts offer even more fundamental disagreements on whether Bush and Gore are really paying enough attention to the detailed policy demands of higher education.
"Education has been a major issue, but I don't think [the candidates] are talking much about higher ed," Graduate School of Education Dean Susan Fuhrman said. "Access remains important -- and that's mainly an economic issue -- but the debate on the substance of education policy remains on K-12."
(09/21/00 9:00am)
MEDIA, Pa. -- Good things seem to happen to George W. Bush when he comes to Philadelphia.
In August, the City of Brotherly Love hosted the Texas governor's official nomination as a presidential candidate, when 20,000 delegates swarmed the city for the 2000 Republican National Convention.
And yesterday, the lagging Bush campaign got a much-needed shot in the arm by winning the endorsement of the National Fraternal Order of Police during a rally in the sleepy Philadelphia suburb of Media, Pa.
Flanked by a group of local police officers on one side -- and Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Ridge and local elected officials on the other -- Bush spoke for 20 minutes before a crowd of about 1,000 Delaware County supporters, extolling the virtues of his campaign and the value of the FOP nod.
"It wasn't all that long ago that we were down the road in Philadelphia, having a pretty good national convention," Bush told the invitation-only crowd of party faithful.
"And now I am honored to have earned the support of rank-and-file police officers throughout the nation," he continued.
The FOP is the nation's oldest and largest police union, comprised of 290,000 members nationwide.
While the FOP nomination has not necessarily been a predictor of success in past general elections, this year's selection has drawn attention, especially since the FOP endorsed the Clinton-Gore ticket in 1996.
"George W. Bush is a leader that the rank-and-file officers on the street can say they're proud to have as their president," FOP President Gilbert Gallegos said.
Gallegos went on to excite the passions of the crowd by relating Bush's support of the death penalty to the case of an infamous local death row inmate.
"Gov. Bush supports the death penalty," he said. "And he would streamline the appeals process so we don't have any more Mumia Abu-Jamal situations."
Abu-Jamal has drawn worldwide attention after he was sentenced to death for the 1982 murder of a Philadelphia policeman. Bush has presided over more executions than any other governor in modern history.
As a high school marching band performed and confetti rained from the skies, the crowd greeted Bush's speech with near-universal applause.
"I thought he was great," 2000 College alum and former Penn College Republicans Chairman Patrick Ruffini said. "George Bush is the only guy in this race who can bring people together, while the other guy manages to just piss people off."
But not everyone in attendance was there to support Bush. The rally was disrupted by heckling from a group of protesters speaking out against Bush's AIDS policies and from a small group of Al Gore supporters who gathered to speak out on behalf of their candidate.
While the Gore supporters were allowed to stay for the entire event, the AIDS demonstrators proved to be an interference and were removed by U.S. Secret Service agents.
"I'm here to just make sure that the Gore campaign is visible at all events and that the people at this rally don't forget what Al Gore stands for," College junior and Gore supporter Tom Hickey said. "He's the candidate who's going to work to make our country more prosperous in the future."
(09/20/00 9:00am)
With election day just seven weeks away, the campus political machine is revving up its engine and preparing to charge into battle.
Penn students working on behalf of both George W. Bush and Al Gore have made activism their top priority for the fall.
For now, College senior Michael Bassik, best known on campus as the chairman of the Undergraduate Assembly, isn't just thinking about the latest UA dining survey or student-administrator task force.
As statewide coordinator of Students for Gore and head of Penn for Gore, Bassik has immersed himself in the workings of a presidential campaign that is focused heavily on winning the battleground state of Pennsylvania.
"The main challenge we face is getting all these students who support Al Gore... to actually register to vote and exercise their civic duty this November," Bassik said.
And while Gore may have Bassik on his side, Bush has his fair share of Penn support.
"This is one of the closest presidential elections we've seen in some time and we really have to fight for this," College senior and Penn College Republicans President Philip Bartlett said.
Already, the Penn College Democrats and College Republicans have held introductory meetings, and the first sessions of Penn for Bush and Penn for Gore are slated to assemble in the next week.
"The early reaction has been great," said College junior and College Democrats Chairwoman Christy Gressman. "We basically just put up some posters and ended up getting a huge response."
Although each of the campaign-oriented groups operates independently of their party and has separate leadership, the ties between the respective Democratic and Republican-oriented clubs is undeniable.
Both the Penn for Gore and Penn for Bush groups materialized last spring, as their respective candidates battled for their party nominations.
The groups representing primary challengers Bill Bradley and John McCain never officially merged with the groups representing their respective party's nominee, though some individual members have crossed over to support the eventual candidates.
Those leading the election efforts say their toughest battles are still ahead of them.
"Things are still in the works," said College sophomore and Penn for Bush Chairwoman Meredith Voliva. "Right now we're doing a lot of things centered around voter registration."
Voliva added that members will be organizing awareness campaigns and attending campaign rallies in support of Republican presidential candidate George W. Bush.
On the Democratic side, students are likewise concentrating on registration campaigns while spreading the word about Gore.
"We want an open dialogue between the [Democratic and Republican] groups," Bassik said. "Our main focus is educating the student body so our campus can truly become an informed electorate."
(09/18/00 9:00am)
Fraud
€ September 15 -- A female University staff member reported that two black women approached her on the 3500 block of Market Street at about 5 p.m. and offered her half of a sum of "found" money in exchange for $500 in advance cash. After the two women obtained the woman's money, they fled without further contact.
(09/15/00 9:00am)
With this month's reopening of Houston Hall, Penn officials promised that the rejuvenated facility would be worthy of truly international prestige.
What they never mentioned was that one of its first visitors would be a major foreign dignitary.
Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong of Singapore and a delegation of other Singaporean leaders visited the University yesterday to observe technological research initiatives and discuss means of a possible partnership between Penn and Singapore.
Goh's visit, which was organized by the Singaporean embassy in Washington, included visits to the University City Science Center, the Port of Technology building, Biomedical Research Buildings I and II and Houston Hall for a special lunch with University leaders.
According to University spokeswoman Phyllis Holtzman, the relationship between Penn and the government of Singapore has been fostered over the years by repeated interactions between Singaporean leaders and University alumni, Trustees and administrators.
"Dr. Rodin had been in Singapore last summer and she had connections with the deputy prime minister about Singapore's interest in developing scientific programs," Holtzman said.
"The deputy prime minister visited Penn in March 1998 and [Board of Trustees member] Jon Huntsman, Jr. is the former U.S. ambassador to Singapore," she added.
While his appearance was comparatively short -- Goh spent only about five hours on campus before departing the city -- the prime minister took the opportunity to learn much about the University's various scientific and research-oriented programs.
"The visit mainly consisted of presentations on technical research and facilities," Holtzman said.
Goh's visit was particularly noteworthy given Penn's budding desire to extend its brand name and expand its presence on the international stage.
Goh's visit also necessitated a flurry of special security arrangements.
"The Secret Service was here along with the Philadelphia Police Department's dignitary protection division and a sizeable force from the Penn Police," University Police Chief Maureen Rush said. "It was a large contingent, fairly standard for all heads of state."
Penn's relations with the tiny city-state in Asia have grown progressively stronger in recent years. In 1998, the Wharton School assisted in the development of Singapore Management University -- the nation's third university and the first to be founded since the end of British colonial rule.
The next year, Wharton Deputy Dean Janice Bellace left the school to become president of the newly formed institution.
Members of Penn's Singaporean student community reacted to Goh's visit with delight.
"In general, Singapore has many ties with Penn," said Wharton senior Dawn Teo, president of Penn's Club Singapore.
"I think his visit to Penn is quite a milestone in the partnership between Singapore and Penn," she added.
(09/14/00 9:00am)
In the end, all that was missing was a guy named Noah, 40 or so pairs of animals and one very well-known ark.
A team of explorers from the National Geographic Society and the University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology announced yesterday they have uncovered 7,000-year-old evidence of an ancient human civilization beneath what is now the Black Sea.
And despite initial theories that the team had stumbled upon the flooded terrain immortalized in the biblical tale of Noah's Ark, the project's lead scientists say their find has a very non-religious significance.
"There's no way that we're finding Noah's Ark," said Robert Ballard, National Geographic's explorer-in-residence and lead researcher on the expedition, in a press conference yesterday. "That would have floated away in the flood. What we're really excited about is that we've found evidence of human habitation that was left underwater and is very old."
Ballard is best known as the deep-diving explorer who discovered such famous undersea wrecks as the Titanic and the Bismarck.
He was joined on board his Black Sea research vessel by Fredrik Hiebert, a Penn Anthropology professor and the project's chief archaeologist.
According to Hiebert, the discovery has the potential to reveal much about human history, but very little about any biblical tales.
"This new data suggests that we're looking at an incredibly important event in human history," Hiebert said.
"One of the surprising things for me is to see how different this Black Sea world is from the world of our biblical myths," he added.
Both Ballard and Hiebert, who spoke with the press on the phone from their vessel Northern Horizon, are still exploring off the coast of Turkey.
The original connection between a flooded Black Sea basin and the Noah's Ark tale was raised by Columbia University professors William Ryan and Walter Pittman in their 1997 book Noah's Flood.
In the book, Ryan and Pittman claimed that melting glaciers flooded what was then a freshwater lake to create the enormous saltwater Black Sea of today.
Ballard and Hiebert's underwater exploration -- which began last year with the discovery of an ancient underwater coastline -- uncovered the existence of a number of items suggesting the area was once home to human society.
"We saw crafted wood. We saw implements that were drilled," Ballard said. "We saw stone slabs that had been arranged. In other words, we saw evidence of human activity."
The project was jointly funded by a number of different organizations, including the University Museum.
According to University Museum Director Jeremy Sabloff, Hiebert's participation in the project is a very significant accomplishment for both him and Penn.
"For us, it's very exciting," Sabloff said. "We like to think of ourselves as the leading research institution of our kind in the world."
Sabloff added that while the discovery is certainly exciting, it is still too early to begin defining its true significance.
"The potential is just tremendously exciting but we need to be cautious about its ultimate significance," he said.
(09/14/00 9:00am)
After months of debate, Philadelphia's Wistar Institute was effectively cleared this week of responsibility for the spread of the AIDS virus. A prestigious group of scientists reported that the disease was not traceable to a polio vaccine administered by the Institute four decades ago.
The findings -- released during a special meeting of the Royal Society of London -- refute the claims of British journalist Edward Hooper, who wrote last year that the virus was originally transmitted via a tainted oral polio vaccine administered to African children by Wistar doctors in the 1950s.
"There is nothing in the results from these tests to support the theory that HIV [the AIDS virus] entered the human population during the late 1950s polio virus clinical trials in Africa," said Claudio Basilico, chairman of microbiology at New York University and head of the Wistar committee that oversaw testing of the samples.
The meeting of the Royal Society -- recognized by many as the world's leading authority on issues of scientific validity -- was called to discuss whether or not the disease jumped from chimpanzees to humans when the oral polio vaccine was administered to nearly 250,000 children in the former Belgian Congo between 1957 and 1960.
In Hooper's 1999 book The River: A Journey to the Source of HIV and AIDS, the former BBC stringer offers circumstantial evidence pointing toward the possibility that the disease originated in the Wistar labs.
But the vast majority of evidence provided by the scientists in London this week seemed to debunk most of Hooper's claims.
Citing tests conducted by a trio of independent laboratories in the United States, Germany and France, the assembly in London directed the focus of research toward the theory that HIV originated when a hunter contracted the disease while butchering a chimp and cutting himself.
Hooper responded strongly to the very vocal opposition to his claims.
"There is substantial and growing evidence for the polio vaccine hypothesis," Hooper said. "Most significant is the fact that there are two smoking guns that have emerged in the last two months."
"Chimp kidneys were being routinely extracted, and in large numbers, by the Wistar researchers and their collaborators in at least two different places in central Africa in the late 1950s, according to... three different witnesses," he added.
Wistar officials were quick to dismiss Hooper's defense as scientifically unsound.
"Mr. Hooper made significant mistakes in reporting where vaccination was done," said Stanley Plotkin, one of the vaccine's developers and now a Penn emeritus professor of microbiology.
"In general, the epidemiology of AIDS is consistent with sexual transmission but does not agree with the polio hypothesis," Plotkin added.
Other medical experts voiced fundamentally different concerns about the Hooper claims, saying that his message could have the effect of scaring people away from crucial immunizations.
"It really is enormously important to get this thing out and over with, basically because it casts a shadow on the whole idea that its safe to be immunized," said Penn Microbiology Professor Helen Davies, who also heads the undergraduate residential program on infectious diseases.
"Having anything go through the Royal Society is tops in the world as far as science," Davies added. "It basically ends the issue."
The Associated Press contributed to this article.
(09/12/00 9:00am)
Chanting "two-four-six-eight, Dr. Laura teaches hate!" and bearing signs with such slogans as "Doctors help, not hurt," nearly 70 Philadelphia-area gay rights activists convened upon Independence Mall last night to protest this week's arrival of Laura Schlesinger's syndicated talk show to the program lineup at CBS affiliate KYW.
Schlesinger -- whose new show is dedicated to dispensing "morals, values, principles and ethics," according to her Web site -- has been the target of extensive criticism for her ultra-conservative social views.
In the past, she has been quoted referring to homosexuals as "biological errors," and "deviants," according to another Web site, http://www.stopdrlaura.com.
Yesterday's protest was organized by the Center for Lesbian and Gay Civil Rights as part of a national movement with the purpose of reminding Philadelphians, KYW management and show sponsors just how hateful Schlesinger's rhetoric is, according to Tiffany Palmer of the CLGCR.
"We're here today because it's just not fair that Dr. Laura is portraying gays and lesbians as biological errors, as pedophiles or as some other kind of disorder," said Lauren Hurdecki of the CLGCR, who acted as a master of ceremonies for the protest outside KYW's offices at Fifth and Market streets.
"We all have the right not to be degraded, and we're here to fight for that right," she added.
Protesters first assembled at Welcome Park at Second and Walnut streets and then marched over to the Independence Mall site, all the while chanting and drawing the attentions of rush-hour city commuters.
A handful of speakers then addressed the crowd of activists for nearly a half an hour with speeches on the danger of social bigotry and prejudice, as well as the need to drive Schlesinger off the airways of KYW.
"Our lives and our contributions are too great to be considered a biological error," said Michael Hinson, executive director of The Colours Organization, one of the event's co-sponsors.
While the protest remained peaceful, a pair of KYW security personnel were on hand throughout the demonstration.
Both KYW and the show's distributor, Paramount Television, offered statements in response to the criticisms raised by the protesters both here in Philadelphia and 26 other cities across the nation.
"Paramount Television recognizes every individual's right to have and express his or her point of view," said the statement issued by Paramount. "With the production of Dr. Laura's television show... we are committed to presenting society's moral and ethical issues without creating or contributing to an environment of hurt, hate or intolerance."
KYW's statement echoed very similar sentiments.
"While we understand [the protesters'] position, we are contractually obligated to air the show," it read. "Paramount has assured us that the program's content will not be discriminatory to any group. KYW will also monitor the program to make sure that it does not promote discrimination against any group in our community."
Following the demonstration, the protesters universally responded with an attitude of success.
"People have the right to protest and it's good to see people using their rights to do that," said College sophomore Josh Kaplan, a passerby who stopped to observe the demonstration. "Dr. Laura has the right to be a bigot and say what she wants to say, but people also have the right to protest and cry out against that."
"I think this event was very successful and very well-attended," Palmer added. "It's a really strong statement to the advertisers that Dr. Laura's show isn't going to be a profitable one and isn't going to be one that people want to tune in to."
"If Dr. Laura had been speaking out against blacks, Asians or obese people, it would be called discrimination and she wouldn't be on the air," said Philadelphia resident and activist Mark Cady. "Regardless of how people discriminate, it still has an ugly face and I think it's important that we stand up for our rights."
One of the demonstrators in particular took a very unorthodox approach to the Schlesinger criticism.
"She just looks like an old Joan Rivers with all the steam and none of the fun," Rev. Jim Littrell of the St. Mary's Episcopal Church said. "[While watching her on TV] it struck me that Laura could take fashion lessons from Larry King."
