Tristan Martin, assistant teaching professor

Beyond the material items, Feb. 14 can be a pleasant or painful reminder about the relationships in your life. From romantic partnerships to deep friendships, the hyper-focus around how we connect with others is on full display.

is an assistant teaching professor of marriage and family therapy in ���ϲ�����’s Falk College. Clinically, in private practice, Professor Martin provides support for the LGBTQ community, with specialization in supporting gender transition. He teaches classes in family therapy and has a research focus on transgender sexuality within the intersection of relational and erotic diversity.

Professor Martin answers five questions about relationships, approaching the topic of therapy with your partner and dealing with loneliness around Valentine’s Day.

Rob Buyea ’99, G’00

When Rob Buyea ’99, G’00 first began teaching, he remembers talking to his students about writing and challenging them in their skills—but he wasn’t doing that himself.

“Simply put, that didn’t sit well with me, so I got started. I said to myself, ‘You can talk the talk, but can you walk the walk?’” says Buyea, reflecting on his journey out of the classroom and toward publishing award-winning middle grades novels

These days, doesn’t so much walk as run. The former Orange wrestler, elementary and high school teacher, and wrestling coach is now the of two popular book series—”Mr. Terupt” and “The Perfect Score”—and the stand-alone novels, “” and “.” Much in demand, Buyea visits schools across the country and—virtually—throughout the world.

Despite his success—which includes for his books—Buyea, who studied biology and elementary education in the School of Education, remains humble about the origins of his vocation: “I began writing so that I could become a better teacher of writing, and that happened because of my students. They were my inspiration.”

With his inspirational students and inquisitive readers in mind, Buyea put aside his latest manuscript to discuss “creative concoctions,” why he prefers not to physically describe his characters and whether Mr. Terupt will ever star on the big screen.

Mary Grace A. Almandrez (Photo by Jeremy Brinn, senior photographer)

As she settles into her new office at Steele Hall, Mary Grace A. Almandrez will be putting up a painting her brother gave her that reminds her of the importance and purpose of her life’s work.

“I am Filipina, and I’m very proud of that identity. And in that painting, it depicts the value of ‘bayanihan,’” says Almandrez, vice president for diversity and inclusion, who begins in her role today. “Bayanihan refers to a community coming together for the greater good.”

The painting shows a group of individuals carrying a hut on bamboo poles, a practice typical in rural villages where the community helps move a neighbor’s home. All those who can assist help with the move, and then the family hosts a dinner for everyone, regardless if they assisted or not.

“I bring that painting everywhere I go because it reminds me of the values I hold of treating people with respect—seeing the dignity, coming together for the greater good, not expecting anything in return,” Almandrez says.

Those values are embodied throughout her family and community—and those are the values she brings to her work and the reason why she does the work.

Almandrez, who has spent the last 25 years working in higher education leadership roles, was drawn to ���ϲ����� because of the diversity, equity, inclusion and accessibility (DEIA) work being done by campus community members.

“The ability for me to come in and to work with an already strong established team, and to also report to a chancellor who has shown this commitment was very exciting for me. When the opportunity presented itself, I could not pass it up,” she says.

In the following podcast and accompanying Q&A of highlights, Almandrez talks about her experience in DEIA, her priorities as she starts in her new role and what she does for fun outside of work.

Here is the full conversation with Almandrez on the ’Cuse Conversations podcast. A transcript [PDF] is also available.

Ruscitto received the Undergraduate Student Employee of the Year Award for his work with the D’Aniello Institute for Veterans and Military Families.

Q: How was your experience getting to ���ϲ�����?

A: I’m a ���ϲ����� native, and enlisted in the Marine Corps in 2013, out of high school. After five years of military service, I saw a crossroads. At 23 I realized if I don’t pursue this opportunity to go to college here now, then I’m going to miss it.

As a kid, I never would have considered coming to ���ϲ�����. When I got out of the Marine Corps, I thought it was too big. I thought I wasn’t smart enough or capable enough. Fortunately, I had people who were encouraging, and helped me see coming here as a different kind of challenge. In a year, these people have convinced me that yes, I can. They’re making me believe I can do this. I can be part of this team.

Q: What made you want to join the Marine Corps?

A: My uncle retired from the Marine Corps, and he’s always been my hero. Also, I know it sounds like a cliché, but I wanted to do something for the greater good. I believe the only good reason to join the Marine Corps is the privilege of calling yourself a United States Marine. It doesn’t need to make itself more desirable.

Q: What was your military experience like?

A: It’s not fun, and it’s not super easy, but I got to do and see a lot. In just over five years, I went to more than 10 countries. I did humanitarian relief, deployed twice in the South Pacific, and worked as a helicopter crew chief, flight instructor, tactics instructor and lead flight instructor. Everything I got to do after earning the title Marine was a bonus.

Q: How was it transitioning from the military to student life here?

A: It was scary, and a bit of an identity crisis at first. You go from being a very important part of a machine where you have a specific role to something very different. People don’t always have the best experience when they leave the military. ���ϲ����� doesn’t force you to carry that with you. From the moment you step on campus, they’re trying to help you figure out how to leave the uniform behind and get in front of your next mission. As much as they respect what veterans have done, I also appreciate they don’t expect us to put on some kind of show. It’s helped me figure out who Sgt. Ruscitto is and who Anthony Ruscitto is going to be.

A common theme I see among those who struggle with this transition is not getting invested in campus. At first, I lived 30 minutes away. I barely had time to meet friends and missed that sense of community that’s so important for veterans. Every single time Dr. Haynie speaks at our new veteran orientation, his challenge is: Be a college student. It’s a really good point, and when I first heard him, I don’t think I understood it yet. I tried as much as I could. He poses that challenge to each of us, and that advice encouraged me to get out there and be as active as I can. ���ϲ����� offers so many things that allow veterans to still make a difference and be a part of something.

Q: What are some ways you stay engaged here?

A: I’m the vice president of the student veteran organization on campus. As an advocacy group, we’re always trying to look for opportunities to get a veteran out into the world besides getting up, going to school and going home. We host socials and engage speakers who deal with something veterans-related, and there are so many here. For example, we brought in a Veterans Affairs rep to talk about vocational rehab and G.I. Bill benefits. We had somebody from the law clinic talk about the rights of veterans specifically with the law, and a speaker from the health clinic talk about resources unique to the veteran experience here.

I’m also really involved in ���ϲ����� Ambulance (SUA), an all-student organization. I never had medical experience in the Marine Corps, but this was the perfect opportunity for me get back into uniform. It’s a little stressful, and it’s great to give people a little peace and comfort on what’s most likely the worst day of their life.

Another thing I really enjoy is being a student worker at the D’Aniello Institute for Veterans and Military Families (IVMF). As an intern, I support entrepreneurship programs including Boots to Business, Veteran EDGE and V-WISE. It’s given me insight into some of the challenges that most veterans face. You can see that people who work at IVMF understand the primary mission of “what we can do for veterans?” Everything is about, “How would this be good for veterans and their families?”

Q: What other resources have you found here for military-connected students?

A: Since I’ve been in ���ϲ�����, the resources that are available to us as student veterans, as far as I can tell, are unique compared to my peers. Other campuses have maybe an office for veterans. We have networking opportunities, service opportunities, career counseling, mental health support and more. I’m fortunate I’ve done ery well in my studies here, but there were resources in place that helped me get there, like the Office of Veteran Success. This is the place to start new.

Q: What do you want other students to know?

A: I would challenge all veterans and non-veterans to make one connection with somebody who has nothing to do with you. Student veterans don’t have to feel like those old people with tattoos and beards in the back of the classroom. Non-veteran students want to learn more about veterans and our experiences.

Also, I really want to encourage other student vets to find out what your next mission is. That’s one of the scariest things about the transition. It’s not that no one cares. It’s that there’s nothing big on the horizon unless you put it out there. It can be small things at first, then it can be bigger things. ���ϲ����� is a place where you can do all of that.

Tracey Reichert Schimpff

Sometimes we need extra support to manage the more difficult challenges in life, including challenges in our family relationships. A trained couple and family therapist can make an enormous difference in keeping these important connections healthy and strong for life.

���ϲ����� employees have access to licensed, credentialed counselors through . Myriad can be found through the Barnes Center at The Arch. But perhaps you have a loved one in need of therapy services who has limited options available. The Couple and Family Therapy Center might be a good place to start.

Located just off campus in Peck Hall, offers individual, couple, family and group therapy to the larger Central New York community and serves clients of all ages, identities and demographics. Services are free for all clients, which allows the center to serve those who may not otherwise be able to afford therapy.

The center is operated by the Falk College’s . At the center, marriage and family therapy students receive extensive clinical training while practicing under the close supervision of faculty and staff who are licensed marriage and family therapists and either American Association for Marriage and Family Therapy (AAMFT) approved supervisors or approved supervisor candidates.

We spoke with , to answer some of our questions about the benefits of couple and family therapy, and how to help your loved one get the help they need.

Dr. Nardella shared her answers to our questions on April 12—the day before federal health officials called for a pause in the use of the Johnson & Johnson vaccine.

So, Dr. Nardella did what she and the rest of the University’s Public Health Team have done all year: She remained nimble and waited for more information and guidance from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) before updating her answers. Following a thorough safety review, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and CDC determined that the recommended pause regarding the use of the Johnson & Johnson vaccine in the U.S. should be lifted and use of the vaccine should resume, according to a .

Dr. Nardella shares the most up-to-date information about the safety and efficacy of the vaccines:

Q: As of June 1, ���ϲ����� will require a COVID-19 vaccination for all students, faculty and staff who access campus over the summer months. All new and returning students as well as faculty and staff will be required to be vaccinated prior to the Fall 2021 semester. Why is it so important that all students as well as faculty and staff receive a COVID-19 vaccination?

A: The main reason is because in order to prevent death and hospitalizations and move back to a sense of normalcy in this country, we need to have herd immunity, which is not going to happen until at least 80 or 90 percent of the people have the vaccine or a recent COVID-19 infection. If you don’t have herd immunity, then the virus will continue to circulate and more variants will emerge and we will continue to have COVID and restrictions on our activities.

Q: Are the vaccines safe?

A: The vaccines are very safe, and no adverse events have been seen apart from the rare blood clots after the Johnson & Johnson vaccine (there were a reported six U.S. cases of a rare and severe type of blood clot among more than 7 million people who received the shot). The technology behind these vaccines is not new and all the correct protocols with vaccine trials were followed.

Q: With the pause being lifted, the Johnson & Johnson vaccine will continue to require only one shot. Does that make it less effective than the Pfizer and Moderna two-shot vaccines?

A: No, one shot versus two shots doesn’t impact the effectiveness at all. It’s just a different type of vaccine. There are some questions about the overall effectiveness of the Johnson & Johnson versus the other two vaccines, but it’s not because it’s one shot versus two shots.

The studies on the Johnson & Johnson vaccine were done worldwide when different variants were circulating, whereas the studies for Moderna and Pfizer were done in this country when there was just one variant. They have similar effectiveness for preventing severe disease and death, and that’s the most important part.

Q: How long after my shot(s) does it take before I am fully vaccinated, and how long will I stay vaccinated before I need a booster shot?

A: You’re considered fully vaccinated two weeks after your Johnson & Johnson shot, and two weeks after the second dose of Pfizer and Moderna. At this point, there aren’t any boosters, but all of these companies are researching and developing boosters because we know that the coronavirus is like the flu virus in that it mutates fairly frequently, and so in order to keep up with the variants it may be that every year we’ll need an annual shot because of that. At this point it is not clear when we will get a booster shot but we do know that the current Pfizer vaccine lasts for at least six months.

Q: Do I still need to follow safety measures such as masking and social distancing when I am fully vaccinated?

A: The current is that if you are fully vaccinated, you can gather with another household of people who are also fully vaccinated. You can also gather with another household who may not be vaccinated but who are at low risk for severe disease. The CDC still recommends that if you have someone who is at risk for severe disease, either elderly or with underlying health conditions, you still wear a mask if you are gathering indoors with them.

You can travel without quarantining upon return if you are fully vaccinated. However, it is still important to avoid medium and large gatherings, and it’s still important to wear a mask in public because not everyone is vaccinated. We do not have herd immunity and there are variants circulating and if you do not take these measures the variants can spread.

Q: The weather is getting warmer, and I would like to go out to eat. Can I do that?

A: Indoor dining remains one of the highest risk activities, unfortunately. If you have a lot of people in a community who are not vaccinated, there is a chance you may be exposed to COVID-19. The good thing is that it’s spring and summer will be here soon and most places have developed an option to eat outside, which is much safer.

For more information about ���ϲ�����’s vaccine requirements and response to the pandemic, please visit the webpage and the webpage. The Office of Human Resources is asking faculty and staff to complete a brief to confirm their vaccination status. Faculty and staff can also use the form to claim exemption from this requirement for medical or sincerely held religious reasons.

Shiu-Kai Chin

Shiu-Kai Chin, professor of electrical engineering and computer science in the , director of the Center for Information and Systems Assurance and Trust, provost faculty fellow for strategic planning and Meredith Professor for Teaching Excellence, is an expert on cybersecurity. He recently shared his thoughts on the spate of major cyberattacks around the world.

Q. Of the many basic rights that LGBT people have demanded—the right to employment and housing, the right to have children—equal rights in marriage is the one that seemed to grab the public’s imagination, causing a public outcry for and against when it was affirmed. Why do you think this is?

Aaron Hoy

A. Following the 1993 Baehr vs. Lewin decision, in which the Hawaii Supreme Court ruled that gays and lesbians should have equal access to marriage, socially conservative organizations, which were highly organized and well funded, made opposing marriage equality a priority. Social conservatives felt that marriage needed to be defended because from their perspective, the nuclear family is the bedrock of our society. They worried that gays and lesbians would untether marriage and procreation and might even bring an end to marriage as an institution.

To a significant extent, marriage equality became an issue much to the surprise, and chagrin, of LGBT rights activists who, in the early 1990s, calculated that marriage equality would be too difficult to achieve and would drain the LGBT rights movement of valuable resources. LGBT rights activists eventually took up the issue for several reasons. One is simply that LGBT people needed to be defended against the attack from social conservatives. But a more important reason is that for better or worse, marriage is an institution through which a broad range of legal rights can be accessed. Some of these are parental rights, which were especially needed at the time because same-sex couples were increasingly having and raising children. Other rights help couples to care for and protect one another, which many gay male couples needed following the HIV/AIDS epidemic. Beyond rights, though, marriage is also an institution through which couples gain legitimacy for their relationships, both from family and friends and from the broader society. In short, LGBT rights activists understood that marriage is a crucial part of citizenship.

Q. Gaining marriage equality was a huge symbolic victory for the LGBT community, but how has the reality measured up? With anti-LGBT activists like Kentucky county clerk Kim Davis and a handful of bakeries and such refusing to service gay couples, have most LGBT couples been able to proceed smoothly into matrimony?

A. Some same-sex couples have been denied services by bakeries, photographers, wedding venues and others, and their stories have been widely covered by the news media, which has led to high levels of anxiety among same-sex couples; many worry that while planning a wedding, they will be denied services. Fortunately, though, most have not encountered such prejudice. By and large, the wedding industry has been very welcoming of same-sex couples. In fact, in the year since the Supreme Court decision, same-sex couples and their guests have spent over $1.5 billion on weddings.

Families are also important here, and when same-sex couples marry, old conflicts with family members are sometimes reignited. Many same-sex couples face resistance from family members who oppose marriage equality or are intolerant of homosexuality. Just as often, though, family members are supportive, in part because marriage confers legitimacy in our society. Same-sex couples tend to report that upon marrying, they become more fully integrated into their families and that family members accept and value their relationships more than before. Sometimes this happens despite initial conflict, as marrying smooths over hostility or rejection by signaling that a couple is serious and committed to one another.

Overall, same-sex couples do face some obstacles to marrying, and most of them are obstacles that different-sex couples are unlikely to face. But the transition to marriage has been easier and less difficult than most anticipated.

Q. Some have theorized that hate crimes like the recent tragedy in Orlando may increase in the next few years in reaction to the relatively rapid success of the LGBT rights movement. What is your take on this?

A. Gathering accurate and reliable statistical information on hate crimes is challenging, in part because of whether and how a particular incident is defined as a hate crime and in part because of underreporting. Having said that, there is evidence to suggest that hate crimes against LGBT people are on the rise. At a minimum, the news media are more likely to cover hate crimes, and as a consequence, the public has become more aware of how prevalent, and brutal, they are. I think it is difficult to draw a direct line between any particular success on the part of the LGBT rights movement and hate crimes, but it does seem that the overall success of the LGBT rights movement has motivated some to commit acts of violence against LGBT people. We are living in a moment of rapid and dramatic social change, especially with respect to gender and sexuality, and this is offensive to some and difficult for others to accept. Many have a vague sense that LGBT people are unfairly demanding special rights or protections and that in the process, they are fundamentally altering our society for the worse. In other words, they feel that our society is under attack, and they sometimes lash out in response.

Q: While marriage equality was a big milestone, much remains to be done in the area of LGBT rights. What’s next?

A: The broader LGBT rights movement has been one of the most successful social movements since the 1960s, and today, it remains one of the most powerful movements in existence, ready to mobilize and lobby for any issue at any moment. Many feared that the LGBT rights movement would slow down or fade away following the Supreme Court’s Obergefell decision, but I see no evidence that this is happening. On the contrary, the LGBT rights movement remains active and vibrant, and I expect to see it take up a number of issues in the next several years. One is violence against LGBT people, which continues at very high rates. In fact, according to a recent New York Times article, LGBT people are more likely to be the targets of a hate crime than any other minority group. And in addition to education and outreach, I expect that activism on this front will take multiple forms. For instance, given the recent tragedy in Orlando, I would not be surprised to see some of the national organizations support stronger gun control laws.

I also expect to see the transgender rights movement continue to push for stronger legal protections for transgender people. We have reached what Time magazine famously called the “transgender tipping point,” meaning that with the visibility of transgender celebrities and activists like Caitlyn Jenner and Laverne Cox, our society has begun to acknowledge the lives of transgender people and is beginning to debate what rights they should have. Recent legislation in North Carolina has put the issue of whether transgender people should be allowed to use the bathroom that corresponds to their gender identity under a spotlight, and this is important, but the transgender rights movement is focused on other issues as well. For instance, the ability of transgender people to access safe and adequate health care and to change their identity documents are both important issues for transgender rights activists and will likely become more visible to the public in the next several years.

To some extent, this is already happening, but I also expect that protecting LGBT people from employment discrimination will become a priority. Many states and localities already guarantee such protections, but many do not; in far too many places, it is still legal to discriminate against LGBT people in hiring and firing, compensation and promotions. Some version of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) has been introduced to almost every U.S. Congress since 1994, but it has yet to pass. Given that public support for the bill is strong, I expect that the LGBT rights movement will make a push to finally see it passed at some point in the near future.

Indeed, much remains to be done.

Q. What is the importance of this moment for American women?

Robin Riley

A. This is a very important moment for American women. It is always good for historically underrepresented groups when a member of that group has increased visibility. Seeing people like themselves in positions of power inspires, in this case other women, to imagine possibilities for themselves, to aim higher. Hillary Clinton now is close to becoming the most visible woman in the world. It signals that women, or at least this woman, is seen as a legitimate political leader. Of course, the import of the moment is tempered by a number of things. First, many women do not support her for various reasons, so while some are delighted to have a woman candidate, others point to her rise to power that in many ways comes about as a result of her husband’s power and position and suggest that because of how it happened, the true victory of a woman running simply on her own record and with her own name recognition has yet to occur. Some worry that her past statements on race are indications that she doesn’t fully appreciate the difficulty of living a life as a person of color in the United States, signaling a retreat from the Obama administration’s engagement on these issues. Other women believe that her hawkishness on foreign policy as secretary of state might indicate an overfondness for military solutions to international problems, which might be in tension with the beliefs of many women. It is nonetheless an uplifting moment for women in the United States to have a woman be the nominated candidate of a major party, in spite of the fact that there are still far too few women elected to the House or Representatives and the Senate, and it is still remarkable when a state has a woman governor. Hopefully this breakthrough will encourage more women interested in public service to run for these positions until it becomes ordinary for women to seek elected office with the same frequency and chances at election that men have.

Q. It has been almost 100 years since women in the U.S. gained the right to vote. How did suffrage change life (or did it) for everyday women?

A. Suffrage didn’t really change everyday life for U.S. women. It took 72 years for women to get the right to vote in the U.S. That was a long struggle, and it was only the beginning. It is not as if women got the right to vote and then everything was great for them. There’s been a lot of feminist sweat and struggle that has occurred from that day to this. Life has changed for all Americans since then, but mostly as a result of ongoing struggle. Activist movements like the Civil Rights movement, the second wave of feminism and the gay rights movement continued the work begun with suffrage. Post women’s liberation in the 1960s and ’70s, the U.S. saw more and more women entering the workplace, but as has been discussed a lot of late, women are still not paid the same as men. More recent feminist activism has changed thinking around race, around marriage, around what constitutes a family, and all of that struggle has led us in a way to this moment where a woman candidate can be seriously considered for the presidency. And of course Hillary Clinton is standing on the shoulders of the folks from these movements as well as those of earlier women in politics, such as Shirley Chisholm, Barbara Jordan and Patricia Schroder. Change for women in politics in the U.S. has been hard fought and incremental and the struggle continues.�� Much of what we have seen this election cycle has been about resistance to having a woman candidate, though the rhetoric is couched in anti-Hillary language about Benghazi or emails. Some women have insisted that Bernie Sanders’ popularity was less about his positions and more about resistance to having a woman candidate.

Q. What does does having a female presidential nominee mean for the average woman?

A. I don’t know if we can know that yet. I can speculate that it’s going to help inspire women to keep their heads up in difficult situations as they can begin to imagine themselves as having power or access to power. Hillary Clinton has indicated that she intends to attend to issues that have historically been considered “women’s issues,” like a living wage, universal health care coverage and equal pay for equal work that will certainly impact women’s lives for the better.

Q. With a major crack having appeared in the glass ceiling, what do women’s rights advocates need to focus on next?

A. The struggle for opportunities for women is not over. As mentioned above, women continue to be paid 70-some cents to the male dollar. Women still do not have proportionate representation in local governments, much less either the federal House of Representatives or the Senate. Recent events have shown us that African American women suffer violence disproportionately at the hands of the police, and indigenous women experience levels of rape and sexual assault much higher than those of other women in the U.S. College campuses are unsafe for all young women as they risk rape and sexual assault as they seek to attain the degrees so necessary for workplace success, and transgender women are much too often the victims of violence in our communities. There is still so much work to be done.

Burak Kazaz

“As a person who is involved in moving things, I tell myself what good are we if we cannot help these people in the upcoming winter and the realities of this human tragedy,” Kazaz says.

Q. Define the size of the problem for us.

A. We have around 5 million displaced Syrian refugees at the moment; 2 million are in Turkey and the reports state that Lebanon has around 1.2 million. Jordan has another 600,000 and Egypt 150,000. This is already a big number. When they cross the northern border of Syria into Turkey, along the border there are many refugee camps. These are almost like mobile built cities because this is not a small chunk. Even the largest cities in this region, none are a million, so this is a significant population of people to add.

Q. How prepared have the surrounding countries been for this influx of refugees?

A. Turkey was good in terms of being prepared for earthquakes and some of the other natural disasters that happened in the region, so it was able to employ resources to create these mobile cities. That’s not sufficient because now you have to provide health care and nutritional needs particularly for women, children and the elderly. They are actually doing a good job. But that’s not the case everywhere.

Regardless of whether you are private, for profit, or not-for-profit, until you experience something very drastic you put it out of your mind. The point here is that nobody is prepared sufficiently for these types of tragedies and they are not prepared for first response, especially in Europe. You don’t see these kinds of natural issues in Europe. Austria, Hungary, as much as they might want to help, the governments are not prepared and don’t have things in place to provide shelter, heating, nutrition.

Q. How can we use the knowledge of supply chain management to improve the conditions for these refugees?

A. In tragedies of this kind, food delivery becomes an important issue, as does medical delivery. They are very highly correlated. If you fail on the food side, you are going to have problems on the health side. We have to work with private entities because they know how to deliver in those conditions. A government organization by itself will not have the know-how for this kind of operation.

Private companies are better equipped in the sense that they know who can deliver things. If you wanted to reach the most remote places in the world, you have to look at how Coca-Cola delivers its products to those regions.

A lot of private entities are helping in Turkey due to UN funding being cut. The founder of Chobani declared he will give 50 percent of his wealth to refugees. We need to look at generous people who will be willing to actually work and distribute necessary items for the refugees.

One entity can’t do it on its own. We need a collaboration. The UN would be able to provide leadership. They’ve done a very good job with malaria medicine in Africa, for example, and its distribution. They have an organization there specifically dedicated to Africa and malaria outbreaks. In the case of Syrian refugees, we don’t even have that. First would be to organize a specific group within the UN that will address the refugee challenges. They would probably have to partner with all these companies and private entities to make these deliveries.

Q. How will the upcoming winter affect the ability to keep the refugees alive and healthy?

A. In Austria and Hungary, we are going to have a very harsh winter. We might be looking at a huge human tragedy because we don’t have any kind of shelter for them. We don’t have anything in place. And beyond shelter you also have to provide heating. And there are other human aspects of this. For example, if there is a young girl who has not been to school for more than two years, that is considered to be a human rights violation. Now, we’re going to get into the issues of educating the refugees and providing sustainable life.

We might be experiencing one of the worst human tragedies in the world. When you look at the 2012 Charahi Qambar refugee camp crisis in Afghanistan, many people died, hundreds of children, because we couldn’t provide necessary goods to the region during the harsh winter conditions. I think we might be seeing a similar situation unless we really get serious about this.

Pope Francis in St. Peter’s Square in the Vatican City in 2014
Photo by Alfredo Borba (Own work) [CC BY-SA 4.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0)], via Wikimedia Commons

Margaret Susan Thompson, associate professor of history and political science in the and senior research associate at the school’s Campbell Public Affairs Institute, shares her thoughts on what might be expected during Pope Francis’ first visit to the United States.

Margaret Susan Thompson

Thompson, who also holds a courtesy appointment in the Department of Religion in the , focuses her current research on the Americanization of Catholic women’s religious life and also the impact of religion upon American politics and governance. Thompson, who has written extensively on the history of American Catholic women, lay and religious, is working on a book titled “The Yoke of Grace: American Nuns and Social Change, 1808-1917.”

Q: Why is Pope Francis’ visit to the United States so significant?

A: Pope Francis has really caught the imagination and the attention of a wide spectrum of people, not just Catholics; he’s been on the cover of everything from Rolling Stone to Time magazine. His presence is such a contrast to the popes of the last 30 years, without being critical of them.

He is saying things that resonate with a broad spectrum of the population—a concern for the poor, the neglected, the environment. With his famous “Who am I to judge” statement in answer to a reporter’s question about gay priests, which was actually much more nuanced, most people just take that sentence out of context, but I think the reason they do that because it seems so reflective of the persona that he represents.

Q: What messages do you think we’ll hear in his speeches to Congress and the United Nations?

A: I think he will remind people that Catholic social teaching encompasses a lot more than simply concern for issues of reproduction and sexuality. During the two previous papacies, of John Paul II and Benedict XVI, those issues received the overwhelming preponderance of attention.

Certainly Pope Francis wouldn’t disagree with the kind of right-to-life statements those popes were saying, but he will probably say this is not all that Catholics should be concerned about—they should be concerned about such issues as the environment, which he emphasized in his encyclical that came out earlier this year, and the economically deprived. He’s also obviously very concerned about immigrants and refugees, which I’m sure he will discuss before the United Nations.

Pope Francis will travel to Washington, D.C., New York City and Philadelphia during his first visit to the United States.
Photo Source: Flickr Creative Commons by Republic of Korea https://www.flickr.com/photos/koreanet/

Q: What makes this pope such a transformational leader?

A: He presents a persona of compassion, empathy and concern that goes beyond the strictly doctrinal and denominational. One of the things that was emblematic of this pope was on his first Holy Thursday, when he washed feet of both men and women, and both Christians and Muslims in the prison in Rome; he was making so many statements with that gesture. But if you had gone to him and you had said “Why did you do this,” he would not have said “I did this to make a statement,” he would have said “This is what I was called to do out of faith.” He is demonstrating how faith is relevant in the modern world, even to people who may not share his specific doctrinal positions or beliefs.

During his time in Philadelphia at the World Meeting of Families, we’re going to see both the expansiveness of his interests and the limits. For example, there has been some discussion of the fact that the grounds for marriage annulment have been made easier to comply with, but on the other hand in other areas of the world this has not changed.

Also, the only person who is going to be speaking on behalf on the LGBT community at this conference is a gay man who remains celibate. There’s nobody representing a community that might have a different understanding. While the mood of this papacy is very different, the teaching really hasn’t changed a whole lot.

Q: What will you be interested in hearing him speak about?

A: I’m interested to see whether he’ll meet with victims of sexual abuse. I’m also interested to see if he says anything that is more responsive to the concerns of women. He’s been very conservative when it comes to matters about gender and women in church leadership.

Everybody will find something that resonates in what he says, but not everything he says will resonate with everyone. More conservative Catholics will appreciate anything he says about the traditional family; more progressive ones might appreciate what he has to say about climate change or standing in solidarity with the poor. There’s nothing wrong with this. Part of his job is to challenge people to think about a range of things more rigorously and maybe in different ways.

It’s also exciting that he is Latin American and will be speaking in Spanish at many events. With a growing Hispanic population in the United States, this is significant. Another crucial element during his visit is the canonization of Father Junipero Serra, an early Franciscan friar, who is seen by some as having less than complete respect for the cultures of the Native Americans he was trying to convert.

For most people, much of this is totally irrelevant; they are just excited to be part of a papal event. It’s sort of wonderful in a lot of ways. They’ll worry about the things that are more substantive down the road.

It’s just as people can get excited about meeting a president of the United States—even if it’s a president they wouldn’t support. Overlay that with Pope Francis’ charisma and the fact that he represents a faith tradition that’s important to a lot of people, and you can understand the phenomenon.

Carl Schramm

Q. It was widely predicted that the ruling in King v. Burwell would swing the other way. Did you foresee this outcome? Why or why not?

A. I was betting that the ruling would come out this way. A recent case saw some hedging on statutory interpretation by several of the justices; I saw this as protecting themselves from being seen as inconsistent. Further, I never thought that the chief justice had made a “mistake,” as some have said, in finding a tax-related justification [for upholding the statute] the first time the ACA had been heard. I had a sense that the external push on the justices in the media about the alarming consequences of overturning Obamacare was effective before, and the push continued. The justices, as it was once said, do read the newspapers.

Q. Can you explain the state exchanges that were at the heart of the lawsuit?

A. It comes down to a few words in the statute. The states had the option of starting insurance pools, really public companies, to sell insurance. If they did, they would get subsidies from the federal budget. States have been baited for four decades into accepting federal guidance in Medicaid in this manner. Policy makers on the left presumed that offering incentives would do the trick. But, surprisingly, many governors and state legislatures balked. They did not institute exchanges because they saw that the federal regulations of health care provision would be a denial of fundamental liberties to patients and providers in their states. This quarrel is not resolved by the King case.

Q. What was the legal principle on which the majority made its ruling? Do you believe it is legally sound?

A. In my opinion, there is no principle involved. The Supreme Court apparently just wanted to make the Affordable Care Act statute work, and ignored the principal of reading plain meaning as the rule of interpreting statutes. One avenue of “reasoning” is not really legal at all. The majority opinion turns to several economic studies to say that if the court overturned the statute, severe economic hardship would descend on uncovered individuals. Ironically, there are now more uncovered individuals than when the ACA passed.

Q. The Affordable Care Act has been subject to many legal and legislative challenges since its inception. Will this latest ruling change all that, or will it spur more challenges?

A. We must remember the law was rammed through the Congress. Many of those who voted for it have left Congress, punished by voters. The law will continue to arouse anger among a wide range of citizens. The government continues to allow, unfairly, selected groups to opt out of coverage or avoid penalties for having, in the government’s view, too much coverage. Many big labor unions have enjoyed this exemption. The scheme has driven health care costs upwards. Look at the market surge of stocks in hospital and drug companies immediately after the decision was announced. Healthcare under the ACA sanctions enormous wealth shifting to health care providers with little assurance that more people will get better care. All of this will continue to feed a sense that the scheme, while now found constitutionally acceptable for a second time, is somehow not working and unfair. When more people find themselves without insurance, or being penalized for not buying it but still finding it too expensive to buy, there will ultimately be more political pressure. So, the game, for now has shifted back to Congress. In King v. Burwell, the court has said this is a political question. I suspect the court won’t take up another case on this, and given what it has declared, that the statute’s words do not mean what they say, lower courts will be reluctant to turn to the statute as guidance. The issue could not have been more clearly put before the court than in the King case. This is the end of the road for judicial review.

Chase Catalano

Q. There has been a huge amount of publicity surrounding the journey that Bruce Jenner has taken to become Caitlyn Jenner. Do you think this has made things easier or harder for transgender people in general?

A. I think there has been an increase of media attention about transgender identities since Laverne Cox appeared on the cover of Time (June 2014), or at least the visibility of trans* people. [“Trans* is a shorthand way of referring to people who may be transgender, transsexual, gender nonconforming or one of many other identities.] I can only hope that the media attention surrounding Caitlyn Jenner will go beyond how beautiful she looks (and good for her!) and think more complexly about the lives of trans* people. Trans women of color are disproportionately murdered, but that gets very little media attention. I hope that this increased visibility will bring people to consider that not everyone has access to or interest in transitioning.

Q. How is Jenner’s experience likely to have been different from the average, non-famous transgender person’s experience?

A. Jenner has certainly had to deal with some common themes that most, if not all, trans* people experience: fear of rejection, isolation, disrespect, doubt and other issues. However, she has the financial capability to access surgeries and services that are out of reach for most people. The public support and public ridicule are amplified for Jenner, and I would say the former is important because it means protection and investment in her life.

Q. Many people have expressed confusion over Jenner’s saying that she still intends to date women. Can you explain the difference between being transgender and being gay?

A. People often confuse gender identity and sexual orientation, mostly because of the LGBT acronym (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender). Everyone has a gender identity and a sexual orientation. Transgender identity is a gender identity, and other gender identities include man, woman, transgender man, transgender woman, and many more. Sexual orientation is about who someone is romantically and sexually attracted to and includes such identities as lesbian, gay, bisexual, heterosexual, asexual and many others. Jenner’s interest in dating women is about the gender she is attracted to (women). She also gets to decide her own labels for what that means for her and the person she dates.

Q. Most people know they should be careful to use the transgender person’s preferred pronouns. Are there other points of etiquette they should keep in mind?

A. Well, the first thing I would say is to caution about the use of the word preferred because preference implies there is a flexibility we have to honor how people identify. These are my pronouns and it’s not up to the person I am speaking with to consider them as authentic or not; the person just needs to use them. As for etiquette, I think the problem is that there is no one right way to ask, and also a pronoun doesn’t necessarily tell you a person’s gender. So, the best advice I have is to introduce yourself by the pronouns you use and then respectfully ask a person their pronouns so you can refer to them in the way they feel most comfortable. The important thing to remember is that it’s OK to make a mistake, try not to dwell on the mistake, and avoid making the mistake in the future.

I also think that people are curious, which is not a bad thing, but it does lead them to ask inappropriate questions. A person’s interest in, plans to, or experience with surgeries, hormones or identity should not be considered topics that are reasonable to ask (unless the person tells you it’s OK to ask). I think most people understand that it’s inappropriate to ask invasive questions to a stranger or a friend, but the curiosity about trans* people’s bodies makes them forget that fact. If you are curious, search the Internet because there are lots of really informative websites about transgender identities that will help build understanding without demanding someone share their story.

Bea González

Q. What excites you most about this new opportunity?

A. What excites me most about this new role is that it’s really an extension of the work I am doing at University College for nontraditional students. Here we really try to meet students where they are and help them navigate this institution in a way that helps them reach their goals. As I look more closely at our academic strategic planning process, I see that the value I bring is in my ability to connect the dots. I can take the thinking and conversations that are happening with diverse groups all across this campus and bring it all together to create a more cohesive environment for all of us.

Q. Looking back on your role working with THE General Body in the fall, what did you take away from that experience?

A. First of all, I learned the true value of listening. I think I am a good listener and I tried to bring that to every interaction I had with the students. What I learned through the process of working with THE General Body is that we as an institution may need to do more to provide our students with spaces where they feel safe to build community. Our students are looking for community. We are all looking for community. I want to help advance that conversation.

Q. How do you define community?

A. For students, I think a community is a place where their values are recognized and validated. Where their sense of who they are is respected. Our students come here to earn a degree. They come here to build on their beliefs—their common core. We admit leaders to this University and leaders want to be challenged and they want an opportunity to make their community—the world—a better place. We have to pay attention to people’s basic needs and we have to be there for all of our students.

Q. In your opinion, what role does physical space play in creating a sense of community?

A. To me, organizing is one of those things that happens organically. But physical space is important to people. One of the recommendations of the Chancellor’s Workgroup on Sexual Violence Prevention, Education and Advocacy is to provide such a space, and that’s being seriously considered. This is a really important piece of the Campus Framework Master Plan conversation. How do we build physical spaces that allow for community? That can be as simple as where we put benches for people sit to where we create collaborative study spaces. But we also have to think about community. The gathering does not always happen in a physical space; it’s how we interact with each other and how we learn to live together.

Q. Many on campus are wondering what’s been happening to address the concerns raised by student protestors and advance the needs of all students. What would you like them to know?

A. The Chancellor and his executive team, together with several departments across campus, have been continuing to work on the issues raised last semester. There has been substantial progress in a number of areas. Most of the updates can be found here. We are also in the process of building a comprehensive web page that will continually update the status of several ongoing initiatives and we’ll publicize that once it’s launched.

Roy Gutterman

Roy S. Gutterman, a graduate of the Newhouse School and the ���ϲ����� College of Law, is an expert on communications law and the First Amendment. He is director of Newhouse’s Tully Center for Free Speech. In the wake of the killing of 12 people at the offices of French satirical weekly Charlie Hebdo last week, presumably by individuals who objected to what they saw as the mocking of their religion, Gutterman spoke about the massacre and about freedom of expression in general. The remaining staff of Charlie Hebdo, meanwhile, announced plans to print an unprecedented 3 million copies of its next edition, to be issued Wednesday.

Q. In the wake of previous violence against the publication were the Charlie Hebdo staff, in your view, brave or foolish to keep on publishing this content?

A. The editors and cartoonists at the newspaper, Charlie Hebdo were tremendously brave in continuing to publish these potentially offensive and inflammatory cartoons despite a previous attack on the publication and threats against the publication. This is a satirical publication, which in many ways exists to mock and offend. Some might view their work as tantamount to kicking a hornets’ nest. The cartoons were offensive and insulting to many, but comedy is sometimes like that. Nevertheless, the violence against the newspaper is sad and inexcusable.

Q. Many publications, web sites and broadcast outlets have expressed support for Charlie Hebdo in the wake of this tragedy. Will this support translate into greater support for free speech, or will this violence have a chilling effect on what outlets will dare to post?

It is just as difficult to declare one publisher right and another wrong as it is to clearly define what is humorous or downright offensive. There is no doubt that publishing or republishing the cartoons or creating other offensive content like that may target other news outlets for violence. Newspapers, magazines, television networks and websites take lots of things into consideration before publishing or broadcasting, and fear of violent reprisals, unfortunately, is yet another consideration. It is sad the editors now have to weigh threats of violence in their decision-making process and this will surely have a chilling effect on the media. The violence against Charlie Hebdo comes in the wake of the killings of journalists James Foley and Stephen Sotloff. These brazen attacks on the press are bringing these issues to the public’s attention. I do not think the public has much understanding of the hazards journalists face in bringing news and information to them. I hope the public will be more supportive of the press and continue to condemn these attacks. Hopefully some of this public pressure may lead to stronger press laws and protections while discouraging extremists from attacking the press.

Q. Where should cultural sensitivity come into play in satire?

A. One thing Charlie Hebdo is famous for is the notion of being an “equal opportunity offender.” Over the years, it looks like no institution or religion was spared ridicule in its pages. But this is a humor magazine, in the vein of the Onion or “The Daily Show with Jon Stewart.” A joke can certainly go too far, but that is sort of the reason why humor should be protected. In a U.S. Supreme Court case in 1971, Justice Harlan famously said one man’s vulgarity is another’s lyric. Perhaps we could paraphrase that to say, one person’s joke may be another’s insult.

Q. The American film industry very quickly reacted to threats from hackers before the film “The Interview” was scheduled to premiere, in contrast to the Charlie Hebdo staff, which kept putting out the same product for years under the threat of violence. Do you see this as a cultural difference or the difference between the film and print industries, or personal courage or something else?

A. There are certainly parallels between the Charlie Hebdo massacre and the recent controversy involving Sony’s movie “The Interview” with regards to threats of violence against satire and content that many, at least in the West, would consider humorous. But Sony’s decision to pull the movie from theaters and make it available online seems more vested in business interests and preventing the release of further embarrassing information that the hackers threatened to leak. Certainly, Sony did not want to risk any violence at the screenings. After much public criticism about its self-censorship, Sony made use of the infinite capabilities of the internet by releasing the film online for purchase or rental. Sony then set a record for online movie distribution and got the content out to the public after all. Films have never been immune from censorship battles, but we are now seeing how the power of the internet can be used to bypass censorship or threats of censorship around the world.

Q. Why is free expression so important?

A. As human beings, we have thoughts and beliefs. We communicate and identify ourselves by the ways we express ourselves. Free expression inspires art, creativity, invention and fuels dialogues. In many ways, free expression and free speech are human rights.

Guy Golan

Q. How have cell phones and caller ID affected pollsters’ ability to get a clear picture of voters’ preferences?

A. Cellphones have completely undermined the telephone polling industry. Today pollsters are struggling to produce representative samples using traditional random-digital-dialing to land��lines. Most people under the age of 35 exclusively use cellphones. Caller ID technology generates very low response rates. In addition, federal regulation requires pollsters to hand dial all calls made to cellphones. The result is that��telephone polling is less representative, more time consuming and expensive than ever before.��Pollsters are quickly figuring out that their industry is in deep trouble.

Q.�� In what other ways have technological advances affected political polling?

A. The future of political audience research is found in social media��analytics. Advances in network, issue,��sentiment and��influencer��analysis provide political research teams with more information than was ever available to them via polling. Currently, only highly funded campaigns hold such research capabilities. I predict that within a decade most political campaigns will replace their pollster with social media��analysts.

Q.�� Does polling actually affect the outcome of elections? If so, how?

A. The marriage of polling and television provides voters with��salience��cues regarding​ potential��election��outcomes. Most undecided voters prefer to side with the winning candidate. This trend sometimes leads campaigns to release polls that favor their candidates.

Q. Recently, a poll came out about the local congressional race that showed a large swing from previously. How dependable are those numbers, especially when the candidate who is behind is claiming that his polling numbers show the opposite?

A. Survey research results are often influenced by sampling procedure. Campaigns at times��influence the results of their polls via the selection of their participants.��One-time surveys, known as cross-sectional surveys, provide a mere snapshot of the day in which the poll was conducted. Yet, the modern campaign is��continuously��shaped by events on the ground, advertising and media coverage.��As such, cross-sectional polls��do not represent much.

Q. Are people honest when they respond to political polls?

A. Discrepancies��often exist between what people think and what people say. Self-reported measures, such as��likelihood��to vote, are often influenced by a sense of social expectation. This is a key limitation of all political polls. This problem will be solved by social media��analytics��that provide actual��measures of online discussion and behavior.

David Van Slyke

David Van Slyke is the Louis A. Bantle Chair in Business and Government Policy in the Department of Public Administration and International Affairs in the Maxwell School. His latest book, “Complex Contracting: Government Purchasing in the Wake of the U.S. Coast Guard’s Deepwater Program” (with Trevor L. Brown and Matthew Potoski) was published in September by Cambridge University Press. Van Slyke answered some questions about the problems people have had signing up for the Affordable Care Act on the government’s website.

Q.���� What are the major issues that are slowing down/preventing people trying to sign up on the Affordable Care Act website?

A.���� The website access issues are largely being caused by poor integration of each of its component pieces. In part, this is a result of having 50+ contractors, each working on his or her own piece of this puzzle. The individual pieces largely work as intended. However, when those multiple pieces have to be put together to function as a whole, that’s where the problems begin. With the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) acting as the integrator, this problem is exacerbated because there was too little time for “system” testing and resolution of issues, and also because the integration of multiple pieces often requires the integrator to develop the “glue,” or framework, to make all the pieces work in concert. In many ways, CMS is like the conductor of an orchestra, but one not well versed in the particular composition being performed.

Q.���� What caused the unreadiness of the website, given the long lead time the people involved had to prepare the site?

A.���� There are really several things. First, CMS acted in the capacity of systems integrator, a role that it had neither the capacity, experience nor expertise to play. Second, the complexity of the system made this website/exchange development very challenging. Being unclear about some of the regulations, requirements and number of states to participate in a federal exchange was a “secret” that kept key decision makers and contractors in the dark about the systems design. Third, requirements of the system continued to change, causing significant ripples throughout the system that were not easily incorporated into the administrative operation of the website exchange. Fourth, there were no contractual governance mechanisms to coordinate the work of the multiple contractors, who were all playing a role in the creation of the technological infrastructure. Not only was there a lack of information exchange, collaboration and coordination with contractors, but with other agencies, states and the larger insurance and health markets. Those are just a few of the problems that CMS and the developers had to deal with.

Q.���� Are the problems with the site causing ordinary people to lose faith in the Affordable Care Act, and in government initiatives overall?

A.������ Budget cuts, sequestration, continuing resolutions, a government shutdown, continuous debt ceiling debates and extensions, a lack of grand bargains and other policy debacles in the public press, such as the NSA spying, have all contributed to a continued decline in trust, confidence and satisfaction by American citizens with government. The failed implementation of the ACA’s health care exchange website is only the latest. There are some good reasons why success was not initially achieved in this domain, but the technicalities are not likely to build trust and confidence.

Contracting in the federal government, especially for complex products and services, is not easy. And yet, the government depends extensively on contractors for the production and delivery of goods and services. At the federal level, this is about $550 billion a year. What has not been discussed much are the cost increases and schedule delays that have resulted from the website debacle. From the very beginning, there was an expertise and experience deficit at CMS and Health and Human Services in being able to operationalize the president’s vision for ACA and how to make that a reality.

Q.������ Will the website problems be fixed in time for everyone who wants/needs to sign up to be able to?

A.���� Yes, I believe the urgency, high profile and significant stakes mean that access remediation through the website will be resolved in the short-term implementation to satisfy those who want to sign up. But lots of fixes in the short term will not provide long-term satisfaction unless there is a significant reflection on how to go in and improve, upgrade and continually monitor the system in the medium term.

Jared Lyon

U.S. Navy veteran Jared Lyon G’13 heeded the call of “Join the Navy and See the World” as a high school graduate in 2001. “That promise did not disappoint,” Lyon says.

A submariner and Navy diver, Lyon was stationed in Groton, Conn., but his deployments took him all over the world—Japan, Guam, India, the Suez Canal, Greece, and the Middle East, among many other areas. A veteran of the Global War on Terrorism, Lyon now works with fellow veterans as the national program manager for the (EBV) and (EBV-F). EBV was founded by the Whitman School of Management in 2007 and has been administered by the Institute for Veterans and Military Families (IVMF) at SU since that organization’s inception in 2011.

Q: What do you reflect on during the Veterans Day observance?

A: It’s an annual reminder to take a look at, not only the way I live my life, but how other veterans do. It’s a reflection on something that I think of as “a servant’s heart.” I recognize it in myself but I see it constantly in other veterans. Service doesn’t end when you take off the uniform; it continues in our communities.

Additionally Veterans Day is also a chance for me—since I separated from active duty in 2005—to reach out to all my buddies who maybe I haven’t talked to in a little while and let them know I’m thinking about them. With social media, my friends and I will change our profile pictures on Veterans Day to a photo of us from when we were in uniform.

It’s a day of pride, it’s a day of remembrance and it’s a day of reflection.

Q: What makes you most proud about your service with the U.S. Navy?

A: A lot of the humanitarian work that we do particularly stands out as a highlight of my service. There was one particular humanitarian effort in Goa, India, at a free school run by a Christian minister.

The roof had caved in and the rain had destroyed the library books, so we brought a whole bunch of books. Guys with construction experience refinished the roof and the rest of us helped put up fresh coats of paint. Then we brought bolts of cloth and a couple of foot-powered sewing machines so they could use it to make extra clothing, and we built them a playground.

Just shy of 100 sailors and marines showed up and did this in one day, sharing the day with the kids and bringing the good will of the United States.

Q: What is the work that you do with EBV?

A: My day-to-day responsibilities are for recruitment and admissions to the EBV programs and EBV national consortium of universities, of which SU serves as the national host. EBV is offered at eight universities across the country. It’s the first initiative of its kind for veterans among major universities since World War II.

It’s incredible work that I get to do every day because I work with my brothers and sisters in arms as they achieve their next mission, their next dream of business ownership and entrepreneurship.

Q: What do you hope to bring to veterans through your work with IVMF and EBV?

Jared Lyon on the USS Alexandria (SSN 757), a Los Angeles-Class fast attack submarine, during his days as a diver for the U.S. Navy

I’m a former entrepreneur, having failed at business once and then been pretty successful at a second endeavor. Once you’ve been bitten by the entrepreneurial spirit, it really stays with you. The work that I do in helping others achieve their dreams of entrepreneurship is something I hope to bring to as many veterans as possible through our program and also through the stories of our amazing graduates.

We have a little over 700 graduates of our EBV program and just about 100 graduates of our EBV families program. I want to continue to bring that most American of dreams to a group of men and women who I think have earned it more than any others in owning their business.

Q: What do you enjoy about being a volunteer advisor with the SU Student Veterans Club?

A: I am a non-traditional student, having gotten out of the military in 2005, gone to work for two years and attending community college at night. After starting two businesses and then having a career in Major League Baseball as manager of Florida operations for the Washington Nationals, I decided to go back to college at Florida State University.

As a 28-year-old student among peers who were 19 and 20 years old, I felt a sense of isolation. I came across the Collegiate Veterans Association; it was the first thing on campus that spoke to me as a non-traditional student.

We created an incredible initiative to make Florida State the most veteran-friendly university in the nation, and I worked directly with the university president in writing the business plan for the initiative. I wound up being named the 2011 National Student Veteran of the Year by the Student Veterans of America.

When I came to SU in January 2012, I had just finished my bachelor’s degree, so I felt an innate connection to the awesome student veterans at ���ϲ�����. If there was anything I could do to help them as they continue to be successful on this campus, that was something I couldn’t stay away from.

Also, the Student Veteran Club offers a sense of camaraderie that a lot of veterans miss when they leave the service. I love just being with veterans—if there’s anything I can do to help in their success that’s what I’ve dedicated my life to at this point.

Micere Githae Mugo

Anti-apartheid icon Nelson Mandela turns 95 on July 18. Mandela, who became the first black president of South Africa after serving 27 years in prison under the repressive apartheid regime, has been hospitalized since June 8 with a serious lung infection, but is said to be getting better. Since 2009, the United Nations has recognized his birthday as Nelson Mandela International Day and has urged people to pay tribute to him by volunteering 67 minutes toward a worthy cause to mark Mandela’s 67 years of public service.

Micere Githae Mugo, poet, playwright and Meredith Professor of Teaching Excellence Professor in the Department of African American Studies, answers questions about the importance of Nelson Mandela to South Africa and to the world.

Q: How did Nelson Mandela become such a symbol of the anti-apartheid movement and other things for so many people?

A: In my view, the watershed that defined Nelson Mandela as a symbol of the anti-apartheid and other struggles against domination, colonialism and imperialism was his “I am prepared to die” opening statement at the defense case in the Rivonia Trial in 1964. Under trial for treason with others (having been arrested in 1962), he had the extraordinary courage to stand up in the Pretoria Supreme Court—the proverbial “belly of the beast,” so to speak—and declare that democracy, freedom and equality were not only goals he was hoping to live for and achieve; but if need be, ideals for which he was prepared to die.

All through his imprisonment on Robben Island for 27 years sentenced under hard labor, 18 of which he spent in confinement, Mandela stuck to his convictions. In sum, his courage; endurance; advocacy for human rights and dignity; clarity of vision and commitment to the project of liberation made him a global symbol of resistance and struggle against all forms of injustice.

Q. What will Mandela’s lasting legacy be?

A: He will be remembered as the freedom fighter who was at the forefront of the struggle that brought down the walls of apartheid, perhaps the most oppressive political system since slavery. More importantly, he will be celebrated as the president-elect who responded to the inhumanity of apartheid by raising the bar of humanism even higher, choosing forgiveness and peace over retaliation and revenge. It is unfortunate that the Truth and Reconciliation Commission never succeeded in either addressing or resolving apartheid economic injustice, thus leaving the majority of South Africans still under impoverishment.

Lastly, Nelson Mandela will forever remain the ultimate example of an African president who had the grace to relinquish power as soon as his term of office was up, smoothly handing over power and sitting back in dignity like the proverbial elder of African orature, who sits on the golden stool of authority. Mandela remains the beloved leader referred to by his people as “Baba Madiba”—a term of endearment.

Q: Does Mandela’s legacy go beyond South Africa to other parts of the continent or other parts of the world?

A: Definitely. One only has to watch, or read the news or listen to discourse on leadership with reference to the African continent and the rest of the world. Without a doubt, Nelson Mandela is an icon in his own class. He will remain a constant point of reference as an example of the finest in humanity and visionary leadership.

Amos Kiewe, professor and department chair of Communication and Rhetorical Studies and an expert in political rhetoric, answers a few questions on speeches at the just-concluded political conventions.

Q:How do you think the two nominees did in their convention speeches?

A:Both gave adequate, but not great, speeches. While Romney is not a natural orator, he gave a speech that was good enough. He said little about specifics and stuck primarily to a general theme of “are you better off now than you were four years ago.” He set his speech as a claim or a major argument, to which Obama replied with a tenuous yes. Obama’s record clearly constrained his speech, as the answer or the counterargument in which he asked the nation to give him another chance to finish what he started and continue to have faith in him despite economic vows.

Q:People often say that the level of political rhetoric has gone down over the years. Do you agree with this?

A:I don’t buy into the argument that the level of political rhetoric has gone down over the years. It has always been quite low and negative. Presidential campaigns during the early years of the nation were more negative, even viciously so. We tend to forget every four years the role and function of negative ads, and it is this particular phenomenon that has contributed to our distaste for political campaigns, precisely because they are constructed as sharp attacks, that skew issues, and often skirt the truth. Yet, they have proven to be effective and that is why they are used. Negative ads tend to succeed with the undecided, who need to cling to a simple truism about a particular candidate.

Q:Who is the main audience for convention speeches? Is it the party faithful, or those who may not have decided for whom to vote?

A:Conventions are ceremonial events and they have functioned as such since 1968, when the selection of the party presidential nominee was moved to the primary phase of the campaign. As such, their objective is not to elect the presidential candidate, but to bring the party back together, to heal the party wounds after the rough and tumble of the primary campaigns and soothe the pain candidates inflicted on each other (relevant this year only with the Republicans, as Obama had no fellow candidates to contend with). The speeches at the convention are by-and-large ceremonial (as distinct from policy speeches); they celebrate the party’s values, they dwell on national myths and they recite known narratives of patriotism, courage, equality and fairness. They also highlight the contrast with the opposing party, and this year both parties dwelled on the contrast rather extensively.

The main audiences for the convention speeches are not only those attending the conventions, but the general viewing public and the media as a conduit to reaching the entire voting populations. This year, the focus of the convention speeches was specifically on the few undecided voters, and more importantly, voters in key states that could determine the election, namely Florida, Pennsylvania, Ohio and Virginia. It is not surprising that we heard a lot about the middle class and its fears and hopes, the very sentiments that can decide an election that currently is very tight.

Q:Do you believe that great speeches have a large effect on the outcome of elections?

A:Great speeches can affect how people vote, but more likely such effects are limited to those not sure of their vote. Great speeches usually reinforce those already on the side of the speaker, and have negligible effect on those on the opposing side. Great convention speeches, such as Obama’s in 2004, have inspired many who were going to vote the Democratic ticket and brought many young voters to vote, but in the end George Bush was re-elected.

It is even more interesting to point to great convention speakers who did not sway the election, but positioned themselves as future potential presidents, such as Franklin D. Roosevelt nominating Al Smith in 1924, Ronald Reagan nominating Barry Goldwater in 1964, or Barack Obama’s 2004 convention speech. All became presidents later on, while all the candidates of these years lost.