Already, we are seeing an attempted shift in strategy, though it is unclear how well it will work. In case you haven’t heard, next week the White House is getting together with congressional leaders to try to resurrect the health care reform effort. Senator Bayh cited the partisanship and obstruction in Congress as his primary reasons for quitting; it is doubtful that there will be a change in that atmosphere at the summit, and some Republicans are suggesting that the summit is not even worth it in the first place. I tend to agree with them, for now, anyway; we do need health care reform, but it is time that we address the rest of the agenda.

Except, we’ve already started to. Congressional Democrats tried to take a shot at the jobs picture, and the effort was even bipartisan, yet Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada canned it and replaced it with a scaled-back version. More than one Republican senator has already stated something to the effect that Reid is the real problem in the Senate, not the GOP. Certainly, Reid’s leadership style is an interesting contrast to that of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. We have seen over this past year how much trouble Senator Reid has had holding the Democratic caucus together in the Senate, while Pelosi has just about turned the House into a well-oiled machine. Part of this is due to the more stringent rules in the House than in the Senate, but the personal characteristics of the leaders in each body also play a large role.

But enough abstract talk of leadership styles; it is clear that something needs to change in Washington. If the election of Sen. Scott Brown, R-Mass., was not enough of a wake-up call, consider this: The Republicans only have to defend one more seat than the Democrats because of a resignation. Given the advantage incumbents typically enjoy, this is huge; both parties have used circumstances like these to swing the balance of power in their favor. First, Senator Reid needs to reinstate the Grassley-Baucus jobs bill. Concerns over adding to the Federal deficit are certainly legitimate these days, but seriously, is missing a chance to restore some sense of bipartisanship really worth saving about $70 billion over 10 years, the difference between the estimated costs of the bills? Second, the GOP needs to meet the Democrats halfway on health care—stop talking about this nonsense of starting over as a prerequisite to negotiations. Oh, and of course, get rid of those elected officials who fail to live up to their duties of governing rather than campaigning in November. This may sound like idealism, and it certainly is more difficult than it sounds, but it could really work if it is done right. At the very least, the last item will definitely be effective.

Charles is a freshman in Arts & Sciences. He can be reached via e-mail at charles.herrera@wustl.edu.

Called “A Fresh Look at Government Jobs: Civil Service in the 21st Century,” the event featured George Selim, a Department of Homeland Security employee who spoke with students at the Danforth University Center and attended a luncheon with them. A number of other government employees attended the event, including representatives from the Environmental Protection Agency, the Central Intelligence Agency and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. Employees from the FDIC and the Department of Commerce held programs at the Olin Business School.

The event stemmed from a grant that created a partnership between the Gephardt Institute and the Career Center to promote government careers.

“With the economy being what it is now, students I think are more open to the idea of looking at different alternatives, including the public sector,” said Robin Hattori, program director for the Gephardt Institute.

Hattori also noted the need for young talent in government agencies to replace retiring government employees.

While the event was relevant to seniors who are considering pursuing government jobs after graduation, it also catered to graduate students, sophomores and juniors.

“People might not be ready to start looking for a job yet, but maybe a summer internship would be another option to look at,” Hattori said.

For Washington University law student Michael Wu, his internship created job opportunities on Capitol Hill. After working as an intern, Wu became a staff assistant and subsequently a scheduler for three different members of Congress. Wu is now enrolled in law school with the hopes of becoming a national security lawyer.

“Lawyers represent clients generally, and I feel like that’s not as exciting to me as the idea of trying to do good,” Wu said.

Senior Laura Lane-Steele is considering joining AmeriCorps during her gap years between graduating from the University and enrolling in graduate school for anthropology.

“I’m interested in working with people and trying to get on that community-based level,” Lane-Steele said. “I’m more of a public interest kind of person, and corporate America doesn’t really appeal to me in terms of social justice.”

Lane-Steele also finds the health insurance, benefits and non-discrimination policies that government jobs provide to be appealing.

In addition to providing opportunities to work for the public good, government jobs allow new employees to take on significant responsibilities.

“Most of the agencies have a lot of money for professional development and for training,” Hattori said. “The pay is not what you would find in the corporate sector, but to make up for it you really do get some great responsibility at the get-go.”

Hattori added that government jobs also provide mobility.

“Once you get in the government you can look at other agencies, and you can look at other departments within your agency,” Hattori said.

Undergraduates at the University are preparing for government jobs by selecting specific coursework.

Senior David Weisshaar, who has an interest in international policy and development, double majors in Latin American studies and political science with a concentration in international relations. He also minors in business.

“Having a little bit of quantitative skill I think is always useful in any government career,” Weisshaar said.

In addition to preparing for a government career through his majors, Weisshaar learns from the experiences of his fellow students.

“Just hearing their experiences, how they’ve gone about getting internships, the kind of perspectives they have on this field have certainly informed my own opinion and perspective on how I can best go about procuring a job in this field,” he said. Weisshaar also plans to pursue a master’s degree in public policy.

“I’m personally encountering a kind of skepticism among people in our general age range, 18-22, and a cynicism about government that I think is rather unhealthy,” Weisshaar said. “My personal viewpoint is that government is the quickest and most effective way to have an impact on public policy.”

“Government is a place where good can happen and inspiration can happen,” Wu said.

This legal discrimination did not end because of some benevolent act of Congress. Blacks fought for their civil rights with protests, marches and boycotts all over America, many of which resulted in imprisonment, injury and, in some cases, death. They did not struggle for their rights alone: Many whites fought in the civil rights movement. Prominent white leaders fought the injustice side by side with blacks. In the march on Selma in 1965, John Lewis, Martin Luther King Jr. and others joined arms with white leaders like Abraham Joshua Heschel and Maurice Davis to protest the injustices faced in the area at the time. White college students fueled the Freedom Summer of 1964, which aimed to register as many blacks as possible in Mississippi, a state that had only 6.7 percent of eligible blacks registered in 1964. This white dedication to civil rights went beyond marching and organizing.

During the Freedom Summer, the Klu Klux Klan murdered three people working to register blacks: James Chaney, a 21-year-old black civil rights worker; Michael Schwerner, a 24-year-old white social worker; and Andrew Goodman, a 20-year-old white college student.

Even with the threat of violence, whites continued to fight for civil rights. These whites would not directly benefit from the successes of the civil rights movement. They had the right to vote and access to public facilities, yet they chose to protest, boycott and suffer with blacks because they believed what was occurring was wrong. They believed people should not be discriminated against because of who they are. They believed, as King wrote, “Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.”

King’s declaration rings true today just as much as when he wrote it in a Birmingham jail cell in 1963. Many of the same injustices the black civil rights movement fought still are applied to members of the gay community. In 32 states, landlords can legally evict tenants because of their sexual orientation, just as landlords could deny housing to blacks based on their race. In 29 states, it is legal for a company to fire an employee based on sexual orientation. This legal right to fire based on sexual orientation is exercised constantly by many employers, including the U.S. military, which has discharged more than 13,000 service members because of their sexual orientation. These brave and loyal American men and women want to defend their country. They were deemed fit to serve and did so, many in occupations the military defined as “critical,” until their sexual preference became known.

This injustice towards gay Americans affects more than just housing and employment. By forbidding committed homosexual couples the same rights as committed heterosexual couples, the government refuses homosexual couples more than 1,100 statutory provisions it grants to heterosexual couples. This includes denying partners the right to visit their loved one in the hospital, refusing American citizens in binational relationships the right to petition for their same-sex partner’s immigration, and forcing estate taxes on property inherited from a deceased partner. It is just to amend the definition of marriage to include homosexual couples just as it was just to amend the definition of marriage in 16 states in 1967, when anti-miscegenation laws forbidding interracial marriage were ruled unconstitutional.

Heterosexuals must stand up with our homosexual peers to demand the righting of the wrongs the government allows, endorses and participates in. We must demand gay equality under the law by signing petitions like the one being circulated by the Right Side of History at therightsideofhistory.org. We must walk arm in arm with the gay community as we fight for the rights these individuals want, need and deserve. Heterosexuals must fight for homosexual rights because injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.

The gist of the bill deals with various requirements for tobacco companies regarding regulation of cigarettes, notification of the public about their ingredients and various other restrictions and requirements for them. However, about a quarter of the way through the bill, a “Special Rule” is thrown in, stating “a cigarette or any of its constituent parts…shall not contain…an artificial or natural flavor (other than tobacco or menthol) or an herb or spice.” Note two things: first, the elimination of flavorings; second, the special exception of menthol cigarettes. The rest of the bill is largely commendable, but this special rule is a cause for concern.

The ban on flavorings is ostensibly designed to discourage teens and younger adults from smoking. The widely-held belief is that cloves (also called kreteks), which are one of the most prevalent forms of flavored cigarettes, are most popular among young smokers. In addition, these cigarettes are supposedly unhealthier than normal ones. This is wrong on both counts. In 2002, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) found that kretek usage among teens had been declining since 1997, as are all other forms of tobacco except smokeless. And despite allegations that kreteks are more unhealthy than the average cigarette, a 1990 study in the journal “Archives of Toxicology” comparing American brand regular cigarettes and kreteks found that rats suffered no more ill effects from kreteks than from cigarettes. Presumably Congress knew about this before they wrote the bill—after all, if a freshman in college with a search engine and a large amount of free time on his hands could find numerous references to this, Congress definitely can. Therefore, one must question the motivations behind the special rule if it is not for the safety of young smokers.

Questioning the motivations behind this legislation brings me to my second point: the menthol cigarettes exception. The exception of menthol cigarettes is contingent to the banning of all other natural and artificial flavors and additives. Menthol cigarettes—the most popular of all flavored tobacco, with 25 percent of the overall cigarette market share—are predominantly produced by Phillip Morris USA, which supported the bill in its final form. By supporting a bill that both eliminates its competitors in the flavored cigarettes market and appears to look like an excellent piece of legislation, Phillip Morris comes across as a responsible, regulation-accepting member of the tobacco industry. In reality, Philip Morris has used Congress to establish a monopoly in the flavored cigarettes market, so much so that the bill is sometimes referred to as the “Marlboro Monopoly Act of 2009” alluding to the corporation’s “Marlboro” brand.

The speculative nature of the bill aside, not banning menthol cigarettes has serious health complications. They are widely believed to be by far the most addictive of all cigarettes, as consumers take in more nicotine—the active addictive ingredient in tobacco—when they smoke them.

Overall, H.R. 1256 has good intentions in endowing the FDA with the power to regulate cigarettes but falls short of this goal. Banning flavorings while excepting menthol has prevented this legislation from becoming complete and demonstrates the sway that industry giants like Philip Morris continue to hold over tobacco regulation. Because it does not prohibit menthol cigarettes, the law is weakened, and the most dangerous cigarettes will continue to lack much-needed policing.