“Ignorance, or apathy?” I asked myself just weeks after transferring to Lehigh University, with regard to environmental awareness.  Looking back at the past semester, during which I contrasted Lehigh to my former institution in Vermont, I decided that it was a bit of both, and I thought about who might be to blame: the students, who did not know any better, or the establishment, who failed to take action?

Lehigh: a private, affluent university.  This was made clear to me during orientation, when a tour of the campus brought me past a few of the University police officers. They were riding brand new, ten thousand-dollar Segways. Segways? Of course, I had to ask about these presumably useless vehicles. It is no secret that Lehigh is a campus with steps, and Segways do not climb steps. “To make Lehigh green,” was the response from my orientation leader.  Coming from a school that took great pride in its high environmental rating, I knew what it meant to make a campus “green”, and knew that Segways were not the answer.

So I did what I could. I joined the Green Action Club and attended a few meetings, but it was a disappointment.  There was not one meeting during which I saw more than fifteen faces, and that high number was at the meeting to elect club officers. Even those in the club admitted that they were there for a resume booster. “It’s a small club, so I can probably get a officer position. And it doesn’t really matter if you’re just in a club,” said the kid next to me. That was all he was there for. I asked him what he was going to bring to the club, what he thought we should be doing to green-up the school. He had no ideas. “We recycle,” he said, as if that was even close to enough.

I suggested composting, which I had already looked into. Rathbone and Lower UC separate the food waste before cleaning the dishes, so it would just be a matter of collecting and storing the food. I was told by the current Green Action president that it would be too expensive. Fundraising? “No,” she said. A demonstration, to make environmental problems visible? “No,” she said. Every idea I had was shot down. I suggested making the club bigger—holding the meetings in a more public place would surely attract more people. “No,” she said, “ Maginnes at seven in the evening is fine.” Fine is not enough. But to those in Green Action who were there for their resume, fine was fine.

After that meeting, I saw the members hop into their SUVs to climb the Lehigh mountain. I walked. I always walk. Because when I chose Lehigh, I knew that I was choosing a campus on a mountain. I wonder if my fellow classmates were not aware of this, as many of them see driving as the only way to get around. With all the weaving roads, and one ways, I have proven that it is faster to walk than it is to drive, so I know it is not a matter of time that convinces students to choose gas over calves.

The only other answer I can think of is apathy. At a top ranked business school, I am sure that the oil crisis, and its effect on the economy do not go unnoticed. And yet, our campus continues to be littered with cars: carrying people back and forth to class, carrying people to the dining halls, carrying people to the gym. (Ironic?) Why drive? It is not faster. It is not more efficient. It is not better for the environment.  And wherever you park, you are sure to get a ticket. There is just no reason to drive around the Lehigh campus.

Another major difference that I saw between Lehigh and The University of Vermont was the use of water bottles. I, personally, do not leave my dorm without a reusable water bottle in tow. It is hard to tell what disgusts me more, the trash left behind by the one-time use bottles, or the fact that in the twenty first century, we are still using them. The number of Poland Springs, and Deer Parks, and Fijis I see littered around campus each day is appalling. Not to mention the use of disposable coffee cups. Looking around my environmental studies class, I see students sipping out of paper cups while simultaneously learning about the clear-cutting methods used to produce them. In Vermont, I literally would have been asked to leave class for such ignorant behavior.

“Why,” I ask myself on a daily basis, “do people here not care?” Is it the lack of outdoor activities available, which in turn does not allow people to fully appreciate the environment in which they live? No. Sure, one might argue that there is not skiing from November to April like in Vermont, but that has not yet stopped me from getting outside. I still manage to find places to hike, and enjoy the basic elements of nature. I can still appreciate and revere. Why not the rest of Lehigh?

My blame is directed at Lehigh University, the institution of higher learning, which fails to acknowledge the importance of sustainability. We have English requirements, and math requirements, and social science requirements. What about environmental sufficiency requirements? At a school which takes pride in its near Ivy League standing, all of its students should be well aware of the issues that limit our growth as a people. We should all be taught that whichever direction we decide to take our lives, our paths are all fenced in by our resources – our environment. So, ignorance or apathy? At Lehigh, we certainly have both.

Yesterday’s vote was, indeed, as President Barack Obama put it, answering ‘the Call of History.’ Unfortunately for him, it was, in the eyes of every House Republican and a significant portion of House Democrats, the wrong answer.

The run up to the vote, complete with suspense and drama, was well covered by the New York Times, culminating in an article today¹ which provides a wealth of pundit-fodder on both sides. Democrats, basking in their victory, sling hyperbole left and right: the bill heralds “a new day in America”² (yes, today is called Monday); the program will “improve the quality of life for millions of American families”³ (ok, maybe that’s not hyperbole; we’ll ask these families again in ten years); “the Civil Rights Act of the 21st Century”⁴ (I have yet to see people in the same numbers marching around Washington claiming “I have a dream” about Health Care); the bill is “liberating legislation”⁵ (liberation from what? Responsibility?).

Of course, several Republicans got in their unhelpful jabs at the bill, calling it “a fiscal Frankenstein,”⁶ “a decisive step in the weakening of the United States,”⁷ and “one of the most offensive pieces of social engineering legislation in the history of the United States.”⁸ While these descriptions may be accurate, they aren’t going to help clean up the mess created by President Obama and the Democratic majorities in Congress.

But, what of the bill? What is so utterly revolting that not a single Republican voted in favor of the bill? For one, it promises to increase spending, such that the Congressional Budget Office projects it will cost the government $938 billion dollars over 10 years. It will also place the burden of health care coverage on employers and the government, as opposed to on the individual.

Many hail this as a good thing, becoming distracted from the fact that everybody can receive Health Care, but not everybody can pay for it. They fail to remember that Health Care is, like most things in the United States of America, a capitalist enterprise. Doctors are in practice to help people get better, but they also have to make a living off of what they do. Insurance companies with their (sometimes necessarily, sometimes unnecessarily) complicated procedures and tactics for delaying payment provide enough inconvenience to the average doctor; the government’s involvement in matters can only make things worse.

In fact, the biggest criticism of the Health Care bill from people who would like to see Health Care reform is that it doesn’t do enough in the right places, for example in regulating the activity of insurance companies so that they don’t ultimately fall into the same traps as the financial industry of a year and a half ago.

However, Republicans are less infuriated with the content of the bill and the measures it would introduce than they are with the politics employed to get it passed. From a completely objective standpoint, it looks suspicious that Democratic legislators have had a burning desire to reform the Health Care system for several years through a primarily Republican Congress and, when they finally gain a majority, force the reform through without a single Republican vote, meanwhile alienating several conservative Democrats (34, to be exact). The result of the vote yesterday was 219 in favor, with 212 against, a mere 3 more than the requisite “greater than 50 percent” to claim a majority.

The fact that no Republicans voted for the bill is a rather telling indication (that Democrats are busy ignoring in their victory celebrations) that bipartisan and nonpartisan politics are out the window, thanks in no small part to President Obama and the Democrat-controlled Congress. The failure to and apparent lack of interest in involving Republicans in the legislation process is an action that has the potential to bring an abrupt end to Democrats’ majorities come November.

When all is said and done, this bill looks more and more like a small victory that Democrats can pat themselves on the back for, while ignoring the real problems and alienating almost half of the House of Representatives (and possibly their constituents). John A. Boehner, R-Ohio and the House Republican leader, noted, “The American people are angry. This body moves forward against their will. Shame on us.” Honorable Senators and Representatives of Congress Assembled, shame on you. You have, once again, failed the American people.

1 – “Obama Hails Vote on Health Care as Answering ‘the Call of History.’ http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/23/health/policy/23health.html?hp

2 – Marcy Kaptur, D-Ohio

3 – Doris Matsui, D-California

4 – James E. Clyburn, D-South Carolina

5 – Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the House

6 – Paul D. Ryan, R-Wisconsin

7 – Lincoln Diaz-Balart, R-Florida

8 – Virginia Foxx, R-North Carolina

Is Greek Week really cancelled? For the spring of 2010 Greek Week was initially cancelled by the administration, but recent news from The Office of Fraternity and Sorority Affairs, the Panhellenic Council and the Interfraternity Council, as well as, from Tim Wilkinson, director of fraternity and sorority affairs, points to a leniency and concession on the part of the administration as plans have been made for a smaller, reevaluated replacement event for the spring.

Freshman pledges are buzzing over the idea of a weekend devoted to Greek Week-esqu activities. Seniors are eager to have a celebration of their last year at Lehigh on par with years of the past. While plans seem to be in the works for a shorter, smaller, pseudo-Greek Week celebration, what does the administration’s acquiescence reveal of the Greek system and the administration’s approach toward reprimanding it?

On one hand, many believe Greek events such as Greek Week need to change, be less unruly, without bias-related incidents, nudity, etc. Tim Wilkinson has been quoted saying there is “There is a clear need to re-evaluate and assess the goals, purpose and outcomes of Greek Week for the fraternity and sorority community, as well as the Lehigh Community as a whole.” After the behavior and events last year, administrators, but also students both outside and within the Greek community see the need for change.

The event this spring is supposed to transition to and precede a Fall 2010 Greek Week. Both events are hoped by the administration to bring more unity rather than the competition between houses of the past. Hopefully, this focus on unity and community building will foster more upstanding behavior.

With the cancellation of the Week, the administration seemed to be taking a firm stance against the rowdy and at times unacceptable behavior stirred by Greek events. With the plans to create a replacement activity, leniency and hope for progress, rather than punishment seems to be the administration’s new agenda. Greek, student, and administrative leaders strive to revamp the Week’s activities and purpose to curb unruly behavior and incidents, but also to instill a greater sense of community and solidarity at Lehigh. This will give new pledges and seniors an experience similar to Greek Week they would be otherwise missing if the administration did not allow for a replacement activity. Also, the charity and community service aspects of the event will continue to be incorporated, benefiting not only Lehigh, but the community surrounding it.

Overall, the approach of allowing an event similar to Greek Week to take place after the administration cancelled it, is lenient and not very demanding of the students to take responsibility for their individual or collective actions as a house. However, it allows for celebration, as well as, stimulates change and progress in the Greek system – bringing it to more respectable behavior – without punishing the entire Greek community.