A new exhibit on the West Bank features photographs, set models, costume sketches and other items from the Guthrie collections that have been part of the Guthrie history since 1965. These items have been on display in the Elmer L. Andersen Library since August 7. The display allows for guests to get an idea of the early history of the theater and its creators as well as a feeling for all that goes into a show and how this has changed over the years.

Sir Tyrone Guthrie announced his plan for a theater outside of New York City in 1959 and chose Minneapolis over several other cities because of the strong arts community. Early documents and sketches of Guthrie’s original Hennepin Avenue location, where it sat for about four decades, are also featured and show the history of the theater. Many original sketches of different building ideas are on display and allow for a viewer to see all of the various ideas that were explored for the building. These sketches were done by Ralph Rapson, the Guthrie’s architect and head of the School of Architecture at the U of M at the time the theater was built.

Most notably are the two grandiose costumes displayed under stage lighting. A gown from Amadeus, which played in 2001, and a fairy costume from 1996’s A Midsummer Night’s Dream are beautiful examples of the work on display. Costume “bibles” show original costume sketches and are displayed with cloth piece samples that give an idea of the consistency of the costume. Sketches come to life with notes by the original designers that say things such as “NOT quick change,” describing the use of the costume in production.

Antique photographs show Sir Guthrie on the building site with floor plans as well as at different stages of putting the shows together throughout the production. Show programs from the early plays also add to the mystique feel of the exhibit. Also in the “Beginnings” display there are early telegraphs announcing the theater as well as the announcement of the theater being named after Guthrie.

The exhibit is on display until Oct. 27 and is free and open to the public on the first floor gallery of the library, Monday through Friday 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Visit andersen.lib.umn.edu for more information.

If you were beyond devastated upon hearing that Pluto was recently demoted to dwarf-planet status, you are not alone. On Sept. 14, in the first of a weekly series of events hosted by the University’s Institute for Advanced Study, Pluto admirers came from far and wide to mourn the loss of their beloved planet.

The series of events, titled “Thursdays at 4:00,” selected Terry Jones as their first speaker. Jones has been working in the University’s astronomy department since 1982 and sought to provide information about Pluto’s discovery, its brief stint as a planet and why it got the boot.

In 1929, Kansas farmer Clyde Tombaugh was hired by the Lowell Observatory to search for the ninth planet. After less than a year of searching, Tombaugh discovered Pluto. Differing from the other eight planets, Pluto was much smaller in size and had an irregular orbit.

In the years that followed, many similar objects were discovered in the solar system. As Jones stated, it’s “not a recent notion that Pluto isn’t a planet.” However, all was going well for Pluto until early 2001, when the Hayden Planetarium removed Pluto from its display of the major planets, re-labeling Pluto a Kuiper Belt object.

Since Hayden Planetarium’s evil deed, scientists and astronomers alike have debated whether Pluto should remain as one of the nine planets. Earlier this summer, the International Astronomical Union was called on to decide once and for all the status of Pluto.

In August, the IAU met in Prague and defined a planet as having sufficient mass for its self-gravity to overcome rigid body forces so that it assumes a hydrostatic equilibrium. This is basically an overly scientific way of saying that a planet must be round (or nearly round) to be in this much sought-after category.

Pluto’s status was the IAU’s main concern when redefining what constitutes a planet. But based on their definition, anything in the solar system that is nearly round can be classified as a planet. So responding to fury and outrage by other scientists, the IAU added another criteria to their definition saying a planet must dynamically control its local orbit and sweep it clean of smaller objects. There goes Pluto.

And not only did Pluto get booted from the solar system, the IAU didn’t even allow Pluto the dignity of giving it a new title. As for now, Pluto resides with many other bodies in a group temporarily referred to as “trans-Neptunian-objects.”

But here is the real kicker. In January 2006, NASA launched its New Horizons spacecraft in a first-ever mission to Pluto. In honor of the 100th anniversary of its discoverer’s birth, the spacecraft is carrying some of Tombaugh’s ashes. New Horizons is predicted to land on Pluto sometime during the year 2015. I bet Tombaugh didn’t plan on spending an eternity on a “trans-Neptunian-object.”

Jones expressed his remorse by saying, “Science has to change, it has to progress.” Many others are surely grieving with him. On the other hand, University senior Jose Rivera sums up his feelings by stating, “I don’t care that much about Pluto.” I think he speaks for us all.

Some say that the race to become the next U.S. Congress representative from the 5th District was decided in the Sept. 12 DFL primary. But Republicans are mounting an attack on the winner of the primary, Rep. Keith Ellison, that could shift the district from the liberal stronghold it has historically been to more conservative ground. DFL politicians have represented the 5th District, which encompasses all of Minneapolis and some of the surrounding suburbs, since 1963 when Republican Walter Judd was in office. Because of this, many doubt that the other candidates in the race (Republican Alan Fine, Independent Tammy Lee and Green Party candidate Jay Pond) have much of a chance.

“This district is way too liberal to elect a Republican and not liberal enough to elect a Green Party candidate,” says Nick Lambert, a University of Kansas political science graduate and a former staffer of Ember Reichgott Junge’s campaign for Congress. Reichgott Junge was one of Ellison’s DFL opponents and was defeated in the primary. “This is the 10th most democratic district in the country,” Lambert says.

But Lee, the Independence Party’s nominee, says that “the complexion of the district changed in 2000” when it was redistricted following the census. “Congress is desperate for a new direction,” Lee said in an interview, and she thinks she can provide some balance between the extremes. “People are fed up with partisan politics,” she says.

Fine’s recent attacks on Ellison prove that partisan politics are alive and well in this campaign. In recent candidate debates, Fine, a Carlson School of Management professor, has repeatedly brought up Ellison’s ties to the Nation of Islam and its leader, Louis Farrakhan. Fine has called the Nation of Islam a “hate group” whose agenda includes the “destruction of our country” and has called on Ellison to explain his association with the group. Fine says that “these are questions that need to be asked.” He says he feels that Ellison is trying to avoid the subject to dodge bad press.

Ellison has responded by saying that he was never a member of the group and has never met Farrakhan. “Never in my life have I held racist or bigoted views,” Ellison says. His supporters, he says, are a diverse group of people including Jews, Christians, Hindus, Muslims and “all of God’s people.”

But Lee may not be right when she says voters aren’t willing to put up with it anymore, as the DFL primary race showed. Though Ellison never went negative personally in the race to the primary, some groups supporting him did. Education Minnesota sent out fliers on his behalf criticizing the other candidates in the race. Ellison won the race with 41 percent of the 5th District’s support. Mike Erlandson, retiring Rep. Martin Sabo’s chief of staff and Ellison’s former opponent in the primary, also mailed literature attacking his opponents. Erlandson came in second place with 31 percent of the primary vote. Reichgott Junge, who took third place with only 21 percent, never mailed any negative campaign literature.

Ellison does say that he wants to maintain a positive campaign as “a reason of principle.” His basic strategy in responding to attacks has been to request a return to the issues. Ellison told the Star Tribune that Republicans “haven’t done much for homeland security, we still have a healthcare crisis. The Earth is warming up, and they’re not doing anything about it. What are they going to do? They have to try to engage in smear politics.”

Ellison has also called for an immediate withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq, calling it a “terrible mistake” on his Web site. Fine, though he doesn’t mention the War in Iraq on his Web site, says that he “believe[s] in a strong defense and will support policies that will enable us to maintain the security of our country.” He also says he “will support legislation protecting U.S. interests throughout the world,” but doesn’t explain if this applies to the current situation in Iraq. In an interview, Fine said that he is updating his position paper on Iraq as the situation there evolves and that it will be posted online soon.

Fine does include “protecting the environment, the welfare of our children, making our neighborhoods safer and more cohesive, and producing jobs and keeping our economy strong” in his priorities, according to his Web site. Ellison is for a single-payer universal healthcare system and says he “will not support any effort that will provide Wall Street investors with a short-term financial gain at the cost of long-term ecological degradation.”

Lee wants to balance the budget, invest in public schools, including early childhood education, convert to alternative energy fuel usage, and reform healthcare. She says her plan will “bring healthcare costs down and provides more affordable insurance for more people.” Lee also says she wants to get college tuition prices under control. “Higher education has increasingly become out-of-reach” for many families. She’s interested in creating a civil service program which would be the “21st century’s version of the GI bill where college students could give back to the community and possibly earn some loan forgiveness.” Lee supports a “graceful, pragmatic exit strategy” from Iraq.

Pond, the Green nominee, says on his Web site that the “major-party representatives do not work for the residents of their districts, but for the party elite and the corporate lobbyists. To break the cycle we need congresspeople who are independent of this system.” He supports a single-payer universal healthcare system, a reduction of U.S. forces stationed in Iraq and reparations to be paid to the Iraqi people, and a major overhaul of the nation’s energy system to convert to wind power.

Lambert may be right that this is a DFL stronghold and is likely Ellison territory. But, as was proven in the DFL primary, voters might be listening to negative attacks, and Fine has a good start. But, Lee points out, “It was college students who stood up and said ‘we want a change’ when Jesse Ventura was elected. Students have the power to make a difference.”

“Katrina-style incompetence,” “priority, pessimism, politics” and “appalling,” were among the labels experts slapped on the United States’ policy regarding current nuclear and humanitarian crises on the Korean Peninsula at a recent Hubert H. Humphrey Institute of Public Affairs panel discussion. Former political leaders and government officials gave their take on the U.S.’s diplomacy – or accused a lack thereof – at the presentation, “Beyond the Nuclear Issue: Crisis on the Korean Peninsula” in mid-September.

“The development by Korea of intercontinental ballistic missiles and nuclear weapons is one of the gravest threats that we have had in our lives, and in our history,” argues L. Desaix Anderson, whose credentials include 35 years as Foreign Service Officer in the U.S. State Department. The four-person panel, moderated by former Vice President Walter Mondale, agreed with Anderson that the threat was serious, but differed on how it should be handled.

As part of Bush’s proclaimed “axis of evil” (Iran and Iraq also make that club), North Korea has thus far evaded diplomatic efforts to curb their nuclear ambitions – which are believed to currently contain more than 800 ballistic missiles, according to a BBC News country profile. The Bush administration has sought six-party talks with North Korean leader Kim Jong-iI, in hopes of using international coercion to urge North Korea into abandoning its nuclear program. The six parties are the U.S., North Korea, Russia, Japan, China and South Korea. North Korea’s requests for bilateral negotiations with the U.S. have been consistently denied by the administration. North Korea walked away from planned multilateral talks last fall due to financial sanctions imposed by the United States, after the United States accused North Korea of state-sponsored drug running and counterfeiting, explains Burton Levin, who is former Foreign Serviceman at posts in Asia, former U.S. Ambassador to Burma, member of the board of directors for the Mansfield Foundation and SIT investment visiting professor of Asian Policy at Carleton University.

Levin calls these public sanctions ridiculous, saying the issue of counterfeiting should have been “so secondary” to the diplomacy at hand. Whether the accusations were true or not, Levin says, a diplomat does not “create an atmosphere that’s going to create problems when you’re really working on diplomacy.” It was “appalling,” he says.

Defending the Bush administration’s policy, L. Gordon Flake, former director for research and academic affairs at the Korea Economic Institute of America, says the administration is acting with “priority, pessimism, and politics.” North Korea is hardly a top ten priority for the United States, he says. “In terms of foreign policy, our first priority is Iraq, our second priority is Iraq, and our third priority is Iraq,” Flake contends.

Flake argued that the United States’ policy is based on the fact that it is not capable of dealing with North Korea bilaterally – as it is tied up in the Middle East, and has little invested in the country to bargain with due to sanctions. “The fundamental outlook,” Flake says, “is that [negotiations] probably won’t work out right now.” Two-party negotiations would “provoke a crisis,” Flake says, “you don’t ask a question you’re not ready to answer.”

Anderson rejects Flake’s position, and continues to shame the administration’s approach. “The President of the United States has an obligation… to defend America and its national interests and just because you happen to be involved in Iraq, you need to be able to chew gum at the same time as you walk,” he says. “[North Korea] is a much more critical crisis than Iraq ever was. They didn’t have nuclear weapons – even Iran is three, four or five years away from them and North Korea is churning them out,” he says.

Seung-Ho Joo, a specialist in East Asian issues and associate professor at University of Minnesota-Morris helped explain in a later interview why the U.S. insists emphasis on Iran’s potential nuclear capabilities while sidelining North Korea. North Korea has a running nuclear program, he explains, which is different for the Bush administration, which leans toward preemptive policy. “North Korea’s nuclear issue is much more difficult to handle [than Iran’s],” he says, “plus the front line is in Iraq, and Iran is its neighboring country.”

“World leaders are more or less postponing,” Joo says. “The focus is more on the Middle East… ignoring Korea is not a smart policy.” He maintained that the United States needs to approach North Korea in two-party diplomacy, and “focus and reach actual results.”

At the discussion, Flake maintained that the “U.S. does not have the characteristics [needed] to solve the North Korea problem bilaterally.”

Bush, in his accused lax policy, enabled North Korea to develop nuclear weapons, Andersen argues. He agrees with Flake that the outlook is grim even if the United States does refocus its diplomacy with North Korea, but says “we still, I think, have to try because the only alternative is a nuclear-armed North Korea or war – and neither one of those is acceptable.”

To contextualize the nuclear crisis, it is important to understand the country – to the extent available at least, explained Dean of the Humphrey Institute for Public Affairs, J. Brian Atwood, also former administrator of the U.S. Agency for International Development for the Clinton administration. “The route to peace is international cultural understanding,” Atwood says.

North Korea, which test-launched seven missiles capable of carrying nuclear warheads in July, has remained a secretive government since becoming an independent state in 1953. The communist country emerged at the end of World War II, opted to remain isolated and is still technically at war with South Korea. The two never signed a peace treaty.

North Korean citizens have little access to the world outside of their country. Radios and televisions are pre-tuned to government stations. They do not have access to the World Wide Web either, only pages on a minimal intranet dominated by the government. The regime has been judged the world’s worst violator of press freedom, by Reporters Without Frontiers. The government is also accused of various human rights violations, including torture, slave labor and prison camps, according to a BBC News country profile.

Aid agencies estimate that over two million North Koreans have died due to famine, flood and economic mismanagement since the 1990s but the country does not release these facts, according to BBC. North Korea receives aid from the United Nation’s World Food Program. Dean Atwood argues humanitarian aid must not be compromised for politics, though he understands the temptation, he says.

In 2002, North Korea allegedly admitted to the United States the development of a secret nuclear arms program. This was in violation of a 1994 agreement to abandon nuclear endeavors in exchange for construction of two safer light and water nuclear power reactors and oil shipments from the United States In response to the admission, North Korea first claimed a right to the weapons, and later proposed negotiating for aid and a “non-aggression pact” with the United States. Bush responded by stopping oil shipments, after which North Korea said it never admitted having weapons – blaming a deliberate mistranslation of their statement of having the “right” to weapons. North Korea blamed the United States for the disintegration of 1994’s pact because of this and for being years behind schedule on the light power reactors. Nonetheless, North Korean Scud missiles and evidence of plutonium production were discovered by the end of 2002.

Throughout 2003 North Korea continued to demand bilateral “non-aggression pact” talks with the United States. The United States insisted on six-party talks, and four rounds of talks had occurred by 2006. After the last talk in September 2005, North Korea agreed to give up its weapons in return for aid and security promises. Later, North Korea demanded the right to a civilian nuclear reactor. In July, North Korea test-fired seven missiles.

Levin argued at the panel discussion that North Korea is scared of U.S. power, thus its nuclear program and insistence on the non-aggression pact. He says the problem is indeed between the United States and North Korea.

Bush insisted on an international front, and wants North Korea to resume six-party talks.

Though panel members voiced their reactions to Bush’s diplomacy from different poles, none tried to argue with Flake’s most basic premise. “Make no mistake about it; we are not prepared for a crisis in North Korea right now.”

Say goodbye to the University of Minnesota’s Science Classroom Building.

The Mississippi River Design Initiative, hosted by the University’s College of Design, plans to render the East Bank river site anew. Jamie Helding, a 21-year-old landscape architecture student, plans to use this project as a springboard into her post-collegiate career.

“The Mississippi River Design Initiative is comprised of staff at the University of Minnesota, which reaches out to faculty and administration advisors, as well as off-campus partners, in achieving the Initiative’s goals,” states MRDI’s Web site, riverdesign.umn.edu.

One such goal is to redesign the site around the Science Classroom Building in an effort to reconnect the campus to the mighty river on which it dwells.

“It’s probably the ugliest building on campus,” Helding says. “It blocks a great view of the West Bank, and it’s like the U isn’t even connected to the campus anymore.”

As the Metropolitan Design Center prepares a grant to carry out this project, Helding and other students and faculty have created the Making River Connections workshop. The purpose of the workshop is to assemble groups of students, community members, faculty and professionals and create prospective designs for the site.

The workshop seeks public artists, students in history, architecture, graphic design, urban studies, horticulture, geography and members of the surrounding communities to participate.

People who attend the workshop will be assembled into teams, given informational packets about the site and sent off to create designs. This will take place on the first day of the workshop, Oct. 14. Start times and registration forms can be found online at the MRDI’s Web site under “News and Events.” Click on the link for Making River Connections.

On the second day, the groups will present their designs to a panel made up of river experts, architecture and design professionals, as well as College of Design faculty. The panel will vote on the designs, which will then be displayed in Rapson Hall and on the MRDI’s Web site. These designs will be used in the final process when construction begins.

“Design firms will be at the workshop, and we’ll be able to meet with professionals, who get involved in projects like these to keep their…teeth sharp, their skills honed. It’s all really good for setting up your life after you get out of the U. Just going to the workshops, writing that on your résumé will help, just to say you worked with the pros,” says Helding.

The goal of the workshop is to “highlight connections between the river, the site and the campus through strategies such as public art, interpretive installations, plantings, water features, etc.” according to the Web site.

Helding’s involvement started when she was hired as a research assistant by Pat Nunnally, a College of Design professor and coordinator with the MRDI. It was Nunnally who conceived the Making River Connections idea, and the common enthusiasm for riverfront planning between the two helped Helding gain an important role in the workshop’s evolution.

Helding is the only undergraduate working on the project, and is amazed by how much she learned and how much being a part of this project will benefit her academically and professionally.

She says that her involvement with the project has shaped what road she’ll take with her career, and plans on going into riverfront planning. “There’s so much that goes into it – people are naturally attracted to water, and it’s important that sites near water be planned so people can enjoy it.”

“Design firms will be at the workshop, and we’ll be able to meet with professionals who get involved in projects like these to keep their…teeth sharp, their skills honed. It’s all really good for setting up your life after you get out of the U. Just going to the workshops, writing that on your résumé will help, just to say you worked with the pros.”

Helding has tasted the real world, and she wants more. Working on a real project that will have real results (construction is hoped to begin in 2008) is preparing her to leave student life and make a career out of something she’s deeply interested in. Other students looking for a stepping-stone out of college and into the real world would do well to register for this workshop, which will be held in the Rapson Hall courtyard Oct. 14.

The Varsity Theater in Dinkytown was set up more like a coffee shop than a theater. Twinkling lights filled the ceiling, while The Day After Tomorrow, starring hunk of the moment Jake Gyllenhaal plays in the background to set the mood. On Monday, Sept. 11, about 30 people gathered to discuss the change in weather and climate happenings as pollution and the environment become a growing concern to the general public.

The first in a three-part series of Café Scientifique at the Varsity Theater in Dinkytown, “Global Climate Change: It’s Getting Hot in Here!” showcased the global “warming” happening to the earth, caused in large part by pollution, deforestation and the burning of fossil fuels.

“It’s great to talk about this in a [relaxing] environment,” says panelist J. Drake Hamilton, science policy director for Fresh Energy adding that the “science” part of discussions on global climate change can get in the way of people actually learning the problem.

“We’ve been investigating global climate change since the end of the 19th century. In the 1970s very serious national efforts began,” panelist and environmental historian Daniel Philippon says. “This year though we’ve seen a shift in the cultural attitude toward global change.”

Philippon spoke of the media efforts that have happened recently to alert and instill fear in the general public. “But there’s a disconnect between what scientists know and what the public knows.”

Real life events such as “Hurricane Katrina can help put the global warming impact in context and help shape our understanding,” Philippon says. But overall, the public sees the problem in a frame the media creates, which can cause problems because it’s not the frame scientists want the public to see,” he says. “The media is more focused on the drama,” Philippon says, and this escalates fear.

This is all boiling up to a “perfect ethical storm,” says Peter Ciborowski from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. “There are theoretical concerns, generational concerns and scientific concerns,” he says. “If we can transfer these global concerns to community and personal concerns, change could occur,” Ciborowski says.

Another problem with the framing of the global warming problem is that “warming” is used when talking about the dilemma, when in fact the entire globe is not warming up, just certain spots. “‘Global warming’ is threatening and apocalyptic,” Ciborowski says.

On the positive side, “things are moving and being helped by grassroots actions,” Hamilton says. “But many more people need to weigh in on this. We don’t have [the] luxury of not doing anything for 10 years,” she says. “We have to be pushing for the best possible [solutions].”

Hamilton says that “within the next 10 years we need to stabilize emissions and make cuts. These gas emissions are rising everything—temperatures and costs.” If these changes are made, and quickly, we can prevent the worst damage. Most of what needs to be changed is decisions regarding the environmental choices made by large companies with carbon-burning factories, she says.

All three panelists mentioned the work of James Hansen, lead climate scientist and director of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Science. In 1988, as the director, he was the first person to testify to the House of Representatives that there was a strong “cause and effect relationship” between observed temperatures and human emissions into the atmosphere. Hansen now claims that if we proceed with business as usual the planet will become unrecognizable, Hamilton says. “I’m not talking doomsday, but this means that species and lifeforms will change drastically,” she clarifies.

Ciborowski showed slides that documented the expected outcomes of global climate change efforts. “Most of our greenhouse gases come from energy use and the rest is from agricultural use, which goes hand in hand with increased diminishing forests,” he says. He added that the high percentage of gases from agricultural sources come from Minnesota’s strong farming economy.

“In the next 30 to 40 years, whatever we do will not really matter, but the 50 years after that is when the problem will grow exponentially [if nothing is done],” Ciborowski says. “Not a scientist in the world disagrees with that.”

This election season, there are two “third-party” candidates running in the race to be Minnesota’s next governor, along with the Republican and Democrat nominees.

Independence Party candidate Peter Hutchinson and the Green Party’s Ken Pentel join Republican incumbent Gov. Tim Pawlenty and Attorney General Mike Hatch from the DFL. The Libertarian Party of Minnesota is not running a candidate since Sue Jeffers announced she’d run against Pawlenty for the Republican nomination in the Sept. 12 primary, in which she lost by a large margin. Voters will decide on Nov. 7.

Many think that a two-party political system limits voters. Maureen Reed, Hutchinson’s running mate for lieutenant governor and former member of the U’s Board of Regents, says, “we’re listening to what the electorate is saying and there’s no substitution for listening to their concerns.” She explained that in Minnesota, the Independence Party is considered a major party because of the percentage of votes it garners. According to a poll last winter, about 46 percent of Minnesotans define themselves as something other than Democrats or Republicans, Reed says.

Two days after the primary, Pawlenty, Hatch and Hutchinson gathered at a debate sponsored by the Minnesota Chamber of Commerce to weigh in on the issues. Pentel was not invited to participate.

At the debate, Hutchinson showed his strength of character by challenging Pawlenty. “You don’t get the right to tell me what I said,” Hutchinson interrupted the current governor. Hutchinson continued, “I said $32 billion is enough,” in reference to total yearly state and local government spending after Pawlenty misinterpreted Hutchinson’s original comment.

Hutchinson, a Faribault, Minn. native, also described Pawlenty and Hatch as typical politicians. He called the two candidates an example of “politics as usual” and slammed Pawlenty’s budget management abilities and says that Hatch should be reprimanded for not standing up to Pawlenty in that respect.

Hutchinson is the leader of Team Minnesota, the Independence Party’s group of candidates this year and will serve as their “manager.” The team, which will includes the state’s next attorney general, lieutenant governor, state auditor and secretary of state, claims on their Web site that “politics is broken by close-minded partisanship” and that they plan to work together to overcome the broken system.

“Going Independent is the only way to get out of the gridlock” that Reed says Minnesota will be in if a DFL or GOP governor is elected this November. She says the Democrats and Republicans use wedge issues to divide and distract Minnesotans and that the Independent candidates have a good chance because “Minnesotans are so sick of the hand grenades and the gridlock.”

Team Minnesota is focusing on four issues: healthcare, education, transportation and the environment. Reed says that healthcare is the most important issue we face in Minnesota because “healthcare should be considerably cheaper than what it is now.” Reed also says that the best way to tackle the other three issues is to reduce healthcare costs, because then the state can devote what it’s currently spending on health issues to other concerns. “The best thing you can do is get health care costs under control.”

Reed spent Sept. 14 talking with students on the Washington Avenue pedestrian bridge. She said she enjoys hearing from students because they’re usually very direct and she says she’s concerned about rising tuition. “Our goal is to double the number of college graduates in Minnesota,” Reed says. She and Hutchinson are worried because only about 25 percent of today’s ninth graders will get a college degree. “We need to assure there’s financial aid for students of lower economic means.”

Reed, originally from Redwood Falls, Minn., is concerned by how many debates Pawlenty has cancelled this year. He has backed out of 11 of 19 scheduled debates, she says. She also doesn’t appreciate his refusal to accept state campaign funds so he could forgo spending limits. “The governor had so little faith in the voters of Minnesota that he chose to turn his back on voter money and turn to private interests and their money.”

Pentel, the Green’s gubernatorial candidate, is also concerned about how strong our democracy is. He wants to reform the election process through instant runoff voting and proportional representation. He also supports campaign finance reform because, as he says on his Web site, “the people should have more of a voice in our government than lobbyists.”

“We need to clean up our democracy,” Pentel says. There’s a massive amount of lobby money interfering with the democratic process of electing representatives, he explained. “There are commercial interests orbiting around policy-making that turn our government into a commercial vehicle.”

The process compromises our legislation, he says, and this is “no longer a government by and for the people.” The major party candidates “are not representing the best interests of the common good.”

Having the Green Party’s endorsement, Pentel obviously prioritizes environmental issues. He says that Minnesota needs energy independence and efficiency and that the state could become a leader in reducing dependence on foreign fossil fuels. Pentel’s green energy policy “fights global warming at home, not wars for oil overseas,” according to his Web site.

“We need to make the transition to sustainable practices,” Pentel says. He wants to do that through legislation and education by enhancing outreach programs, such as apprenticeships, to reward students who will contribute to a “reciprocal society.” His plan would stabilize economies and would recognize the importance of communities, he says. For example, sustainable farms would not have to pay property taxes, the candidate explained. “It’s a holistic plan.”

Pentel, in his third run for governor, is also prioritizing healthcare. He wants to go to a single-payer universal healthcare system and “get out of this craziness.”

When asked why a voter should choose a third-party candidate, Pentel says, “If you vote out of fear, you’ve lost and you lose democracy.” He thinks that voters shouldn’t consider a vote for a third-party candidate a wasted vote, because these candidates do represent voter’s values and don’t allow the major parties to control and intimidate their stances. “There’s a huge percentage of the public that’s disenchanted with the current system and parties,” Pentel says, so people should get away from the ”corporate, militaristic and anti-earth” candidates.

Instant runoff voting is a perfect example of what Greens have to offer, Pentel explained. Voters rank candidates and one must get more than 50 percent of the vote in order to be elected. If no candidate wins that much initially, then second choices are taken into consideration. Minneapolis voters will be able to choose if they want to go to an instant runoff system this November. Pentel says that Greens have been talking about the idea for at least ten years and that it’s now seriously being considered.

Third-party candidates frequently bring up “ideas voters would normally not hear,” Pentel says. Also, “third parties provide a pathway for people who would not normally vote.”

Most third parties do not accept endorsements or lobby money, Reed says. “When candidates seek endorsements, they have to make promises,” she says. Pentel agrees that too much of state policy is made up by corporate interests. “There’s only one endorsement we want,” Reed says. “The endorsement of the voters of Minnesota.”

Over Labor Day weekend, while most were settling into dorm rooms, getting to know new roommates or dealing with moving trucks, Hillel, the Jewish student center, was holding an event to help others in need. Blanket the World with Kindness was held Sept. 3 and Sept. 4 at both the Superblock and Middlebrook, respectively, and allowed students to take a break from packing to get involved with the community and a campus student group.

At the event, tie fleece blankets were made for a local homeless shelter and went to children in need, says Ariella DePrenger-Gottfried, Hillel community service representative and co-organizer of the event.

Hillel has held similar events to this one on Northrop Mall in previous years as part of Jewish Culture Week and this event was a continuation of that, says Eve Shapiro, community service representative and co-organizer. “The board collectively thought it would be a good thing to bring back,” DePrenger-Gottfried says.

The event did have some difficulty in getting people to attend and participate. “Not as many [people attended] as we had hoped, but of the 10 or so people that did come, most of them stayed a significant amount of time and were able to make quite a few blankets,” DePrenger-Gottfried says. “It may have been sort of a bad time,” she says, adding that most of the people who approached the event were too busy moving or finding classes for the first day of school.

Despite the struggle, the event was still for a good cause and allowed students to meet members of the Hillel. “The blankets were a lot of fun to make, especially when there were a couple new people to chat with,” Shapiro says.

“It was really cool to hear reactions to the project,” DePrenger-Gottfried says. “I think it was a good opportunity for freshmen to be able to help the community on their first few days on campus and realize how many activities go on during the year,” she says.

Hillel is the Foundation for Jewish Campus Life and has been at the University of Minnesota since 1940. The group is a member of the largest Jewish campus organization in the world. While their focus is to enrich the lives of Jewish undergraduate and graduate students, they welcome all students at their events throughout the year.

If you’re interested in getting involved with the Hillel or attending their events in the future, visit www.ujews.com or stop by for a visit at 1521 University Ave. SE.

Each September during the first week of school, a few thousand freshmen pack Northrop Auditorium for Convocation. The event gives first-year students a warm welcome and a grand introduction to the University. University President Bob Bruininks speaks, students learn the Minnesota Rouser and the marching band brings the show to a climactic close. “It was empowering,” says first year attendee Bobby Halperin about this year’s ceremony.

But let’s get serious. The real reason for going to Convocation has nothing to do with the ceremony itself and everything to do with what comes after the march to Coffman Memorial Union: hot dogs, cheeseburgers and cold beverages. Yes, it’s all free.

“I mostly came for the food,” says freshman Laura Petersen. “I don’t really even remember what [Bob Bruininks] said in his speech.”

These sentiments were echoed by almost everyone in the backyard of Coffman, where hundreds sat to enjoy their meals while being entertained by various student music groups. “[The ceremony] was really dumb, but I don’t mind because now I get to have a delicious meal at no expense,” said undergraduate Paige Calhoun.

OK, so this food isn’t exactly top of the line. In fact, it may not even be up to the standards of UDS. But there is something about the concept of “free food” that rings so well with college students that, to most, a handed-out bag of peanuts is a thousand times more satisfying to devour than a paid-for filet mignon at Manny’s Steakhouse.

Not surprisingly, many shady upperclassmen took advantage of the University’s kind gesture to freshmen. “I’m not supposed to be here,” said junior Caitlin McNamara. “But I came for the food.”

Some of the volunteers greeting students apparently knew overage eaters would be a problem, as they used clever tactics to trick them into admitting their ages. One volunteer engaged in small talk with a few older-looking girls in an attempt to warm them up and then chose just the right moment to slyly pose the question, “So what are you guys, juniors?” “Ye – I mean no,” they replied, realizing they’d been caught off guard. A close call.

Aside from the illegal upperclassmen and the speeches and ceremony, Convocation was once again a success this year. When asked about the event, President Bruininks said, “We must have had close to 4,000 students come out. That number has increased every year since we started Convocation six years ago. The marching band really ended tonight’s ceremony on a ‘high note.’”

I hate to say it, but that increase in attendees surely has more to do with the free food than your awful puns, Bob.

Governor Tim Pawlenty’s recent shift to the center may cost him some votes from hard-line Republicans Nov. 7, but he’ll likely earn those back by convincing swing voters that his new middle-ground proposals are truly what Minnesota has been waiting for.

Just this summer, Pawlenty has proposed major reforms to higher education to provide free tuition to students who meet certain requirements, suggested regulation of contracts between oil companies and gas stations to boost the use of ethanol while supporting a plan to make cars ethanol-friendly and called for a ban on prescription drug advertising.

Many think that Pawlenty’s recent proposals have been merely a campaign ploy to lure moderate voters. “This is intensely practical, vote-driven behavior,” Peter Hutchinson, the Independence Party’s gubernatorial candidate, told the Star Tribune. In other words, Pawlenty may be just trying to reach voters by proposing popular programs that may never go into practice and might have little effect on Minnesota. The South St. Paul native has also taken flak from the blogosphere and conservatives regarding his deviation to moderation lately.

His proposals could benefit a lot of people if they’re well executed. For example, ACHIEVE, his higher education reform plan, will allow many students to attend the public institution of their choice for free for two years. Students would have to graduate in the top 25 percent of their class or have comparable ACT or SAT scores. If they chose to study a math or science-related major or to teach a math or science subject, they could attend college for free for two years.

Not only will the plan encourage students to study hard throughout their senior year and resist “senioritis,” the mock disease many high school seniors use to explain their lack of motivation after being accepted to college, but it will “keep the best and brightest here in Minnesota,” says Brian McClung, Pawlenty’s campaign spokesman.

Pawlenty’s education reform plans also include expanding post-secondary enrollment options and “redesigning high schools to better prepare students for the 21st century,” McClung says.

But at what cost can these major overhauls take place? It’s not likely that Pawlenty will propose repealing his tax cuts to the very wealthy to finance his programs, as defeated DFL gubernatorial candidate Becky Lourey did. McClung says the education reform will only cost about $112 million over two years and in a state budget that will likely be somewhere in the neighborhood of $33 billion to $35 billion, the education plans shouldn’t be hard to cover. “Minnesota is currently running a surplus,” McClung says, so the state should be able to easily finance such a “small percent” of the overall budget.

Attorney General Mike Hatch, the governor’s DFL opponent in the race, seems more concerned that Pawlenty has declined a state subsidy of $473,000 in order to surpass the cap in the state’s campaign financing laws. Under the law, candidates must limit spending to $2.4 million this year if the candidate accepts the state subsidy. No other incumbent governor has declined the state subsidies since the campaign finance laws were enacted 30 years ago.

Pawlenty’s campaign, however, holds that the decision to decline state financing isn’t really the issue. Michael Krueger, Pawlenty’s campaign manager, told the Star Tribune that the opposition’s smear campaigns are too well-financed to accept state funding, a claim which has been refuted by Hatch and his allies repeatedly.

Regardless, Hatch has a lot to be worried about. Pawlenty will probably outspend Hatch, and Pawlenty’s camp thinks their new policies will beckon to moderate voters that might go either way. McClung says that Pawlenty “has not been afraid to take on” issues typically left to the Democrats. “We think people understand and appreciate him [Pawlenty] for his frankness.”