The Virginia softball team split its doubleheader with Florida State this weekend. Virginia (20-17, 3-8 ACC) claimed the first game in a 1-0 shutout, but Florida State (30-19, 6-5 ACC) rallied to win the second game, 8-5.

The two teams were originally slated to play three games over the weekend, but rain Saturday forced the series to be cut to two, which were both played on Sunday.

In the opener, junior leadoff hitter Elea Crockett singled in the first inning for the Cavaliers. After a sacrifice bunt moved her to second and a stolen base moved her to third, Crockett scored on a throwing error by Florida State catcher Melissa Wood. The first at-bat of the day was the only hit the Cavaliers managed, but it was enough for victory as the Cavaliers won on one unearned run and one hit.

Meanwhile, senior Erin Horn and junior Coty Tolar held the Seminoles to no runs on four hits.

“I thought Erin threw very well the first game,” coach Karen Johns said. “Coty [Tolar] came in and did a great job, but we’re not getting that consistently game to game.”

In the second game of the day, the offense stepped up as the pitching staff faltered.

Senior Sara Larquier and Crockett both had two hits, sophomore Lindsey Preuss went three for four with two runs scored, and Whitney Holstun hit her third home run of the season. Altogether, the Cavaliers managed five runs on 11 hits.

The defense committed two errors but shined at times, stopping an FSU squeeze attempt in the fourth, tagging out FSU right fielder LaShaun Davis in a run down, and turning a 4-6-3 double play in the seventh.

With the score tied 3-3 going into the sixth inning, FSU pounded three home runs against three different Cavalier pitchers, putting FSU up 8-3.

Despite two comeback attempts scoring one run in the sixth and the seventh, Virginia ended the game with the bases loaded and was not able to even the score.

After being swept last weekend against North Carolina and only winning one game against Liberty this past week, the Cavaliers were satisfied with their efforts against a tough FSU team.

“I would’ve liked to have won both games, obviously, but I think we did good things in both games,” Holstun said. “There were a lot of good hits and a lot of people are making big strides with their swings. We could have done better, but we did all right for today.”

In their last game before FSU, the Cavaliers posted 13 runs, their highest of the season. With another 11 hits today, the offense seems to be stepping it up. However, with only one hit in the opener, the offense still lacks consistency.

“I think we’re doing some really good things,” Johns said. “We’ve got to work on two-out hits and hits with runners in scoring position. I think we’re doing a great job with setups, but someone has to come through for us when we’ve got someone on base.”

Despite the lack of consistency from around the field, there is no doubt in the improvement of the Cavaliers.

Before the series, Johns said that FSU might be the best team Virginia would face all season, and the Cavaliers played to their level the entire series.

Philippines ambassador to the U.S.Albert F. del Rosario spoke about Filipino domestic affairs and relations with the United States during the Organization of Young Filipino-American’s Spring Symposium Friday evening.

Del Rosario discussed the recent dramatic political situation within the Philippines that resulted in the declaration of a nationwide state of emergency several weeks ago.

“There was an [imminent] and real threat of the extreme left and the extreme right,” del Rosario said. “There was a conspiracy to get together to bring down the government.”

Del Rosario said the problem has been addressed and things are now back to normal.

Del Rosario noted, however, that the government may face change in the future.

“The people of the Philippines are looking to the possibility of changing the form of government from a presidential system to a parliamentary system that is unicameral [and will eventually] go into federalism,” he said.

Del Rosario said reasons behind the potential change include the wish to eliminate gridlock between the executive and legislative branches of the Philippines’ government and a desire to combine the House and Senate into one legislative body.

Del Rosario noted that the economic and military capabilities of the Philippines have developed a great deal over the past few years because of an alliance with the United States.

Since 2001, del Rosario said, the United States has provided a great deal of military support and training for the Philippines.

“I think we’ve pushed this defense [and] security cooperation far,” del Rosario said. “We’ve done very well with it.”

The United States has also provided support to the Filipino economy by remaining the largest foreign investor in the Philippines, del Rosario said.

“In terms of trade, what we’re trying to do is maintain the United States as our leading trade partner,” he said. “The exercise for us is to be able to create additional markets for our products.”

Del Rosario’s assistant, commercial attaché Veronica Bartolome, told students they can personally help the Filipino economy once they enter the American job market by importing products from the Philippines and by exporting jobs to the Philippines.

“Increasingly, a lot of back office [work is] going to India,” Bartolome said. “Why does it need to go to India? We have the same skill; we have the same capability.”

OYFA Corresponding Secretary Marty San Jose said her organization wanted del Rosario to speak because most students, including Filipino-Americans, have little knowledge about domestic affairs in the Philippines.

The members of the Board of Visitors broke ground for the new Nursing School building Saturday.

The Claude Moore Nursing Education building is projected to open for general use in 2008, according to Theresa Carroll, assistant dean for undergraduate student services.

The building will hold four new classrooms, faculty and administration offices, the Nursing School office of student life and a dining facility.

The new building is necessary because the Nursing School has expanded beyond its current capacity, Nursing School Dean Jeanette Lancaster said.

“We have completely outgrown McLeod Hall and our solitary off-Grounds research facility,” she added.

In the last five years applicants to the Nursing School have doubled, but the classes have only grown by approximately 10 percent because of the space issue, Carroll said.

Lancaster said the Nursing School intends to increase the total enrollment by 25 percent in response to the national nursing shortage.

“This new building will increase our space by 40 percent and allow us to increase all of our enrollments,” Lancaster said.

The dining area will be a café which will provide healthy food–part of a larger effort to keep the building in line with the virtues of the school, Lancaster said.

Other healthful initiatives in the building’s design include expanded bike racks, a large central staircase, large open able windows and an outdoor porch area.

“We are absolutely considering health in the design of the building,” Lancaster said.

The new facility will provide nursing students with the most cutting edge educational technology as well as areas where they can congregate, she said.

Currently there is limited space available where nursing students can socialize or for organizations to meet.

“The main entry will have a large student center with computer kiosks, small seating areas and conference rooms,” Lancaster said.

The groundbreaking of the Claude Moore Nursing Education building is part of a larger project to revamp the Nursing School, which includes renovating McLeod Hall and renewing the landscape architecture in the area, Lancaster said.

Lancaster estimated the cost of the new building at $12 million and the total cost of the project at $20 million.

The newly elected Honor Committee held its first official meeting yesterday, during which several support officers addressed the Committee about reforms they would like to see made to the Honor system.

Support officers Josh Hess, president of Students for the Preservation of Honor, and Sam Leven, communications director of Hoos Against the Single Sanction, made a joint presentation to the Committee.

Leven said their respective organizations agreed on five concerns: the amount of time it takes the Honor Committee to address problems, developing better relationships with students, addressing the problems faced by international students by printing the green Honor pamphlet in other languages and holding occasional meetings outside Newcomb.

“We don’t mean to be preachy — we just want to start the dialogue a little bit,” Hess said.

Leven and Hess also distributed a letter voicing their concerns to the Committee.

Honor counsel Ryan Martin suggested utilizing the resident advisor program to address Honor education issues.

Martin, who is also an RA, said he sees “a lack of understanding is breeding a sense of fear, instead of embracing our system. … We’ve got to do more than a 10-minute video at orientation.”

Martin added that he “encouraged” the Honor to increase faculty participation.

Honor also addressed the meeting procedure that will govern meetings for the current term.

Honor Chair Alison Tramba said the main concern was that conversations within Honor be open without being adversarial.

Honor members also discussed the code of ethics under which it will operate. Honor will vote on the final wording of the code of ethics at next week’s meeting.

“Basically the idea behind the code of ethics is to explicitly lay out our objectives as a committee and a system specifically in relation to professionalism,” Tramba said. “Honor is a professional organization — probably the most professional on-Grounds — as it should be, because the work we do is very serious.”

Vice Chair for Trials Jay Trickett expressed concern with the section dealing with conflict of interest.

“I frankly think there are some serious concerns that I have with this language” of the code of ethics, Trickett said.

If an Honor officer has previously been involved with a case, he or she is asked not to be involved with any appeal activities, according to Tramba.

A “significant prior relationship” with anyone involved in the case would also excuse an Honor officer from the case, Tramba added.

“Even if you feel like you could be unbiased, it will avoid any appearance of impropriety,” said Nicole Eramo, special assistant to the Honor Committee.

Trickett asked Honor to wait a week before approving the code.

“I know it was hashed out a lot with the old committee,” Trickett said. “If we as a body arecgoing to vote on this, I think we should really be given a chance to review it for a week.”

University holds American Society of Civil Engineers’ Virginias conference
During the month of April students from 13 colleges and universities in Virginia, West Virginia and Washington, D.C. gathered in Charlottesville this weekend to compete in the annual American Society of Civil Engineers’ Virginias Conference.

During the three-day event, students competed in a variety of civil engineering competitions, conference chair Emily Benko said.

The two largest competitions involved steel bridges and concrete canoes. In the first competition, students built miniature bridges which were judged based on criteria including aesthetics and the amount of weight the bridge could hold. In the other competition, students gave presentations about the chemical composition of their concrete canoes and raced them at Walnut Creek.

Fairmont State University won the canoe competition and Virginia Tech won the bridge competition, Benko said. Students from those schools will participate in the national competition, she added.

Benko said University students participated in the events but “didn’t fare so well” because they were busy with hosting duties.

–compiled by Kristin Hawkins

The Board of Visitors continued its April session into Friday with discussion on the University’s intellectual property policy, faculty diversity, alumni relations improvement efforts and various student issues.

Committee presentations to the Board continued on Friday, beginning with the Educational Policy Committee’s report.

Ariel Gomez, vice president for research and graduate studies, presented the Committee’s evaluation that focused primarily on intellectual property and “technology transfer” issues.

Gomez discussed the University’s intellectual property rights to products that develop through University research. Gomez described this as integral to the procurement of funds and a vital learning experience for students.

“There are more than 30 start-up companies both here and elsewhere … that got their start up at the University,” said Erik Hewlett, senior associate dean for research in the Medical School. “We are looking for ways to expand this further. … The one thing that we have been missing is available venture capital.”

Hewlett outlined ways in which the University is helping to facilitate research, including the development of the Angel fund — a pool of money which would serve to fund professors doing research before they receive an actual grant. Hewlett also emphasized the importance of the University’s patent office and the division of product profits to departmental programs.

Patricia Lampkin, vice president for student affairs, later addressed University student activities such as student safety, ISIS and voter participation in student elections.

“The transition in student leadership began earlier this year,” she said. “With the exception of Student Council and Resident Life, all the new leaders have assumed office for the 2006-2007 year. This increase shows the strength of students to run student office.”

Board members also questioned the low voter turnout among third and fourth years. Lampkin cited “quieter than usual Student Council races” as a possible reason for this decline.

Former Honor Chair David Hobbs outlined the Honor Committee’s actions during the year. Hobbs highlighted the Committee’s change in the Honor constitution’s wording from “serious” to “non-trivial,” as well as continued efforts to increase diversity within the Honor Committee.

Addressing the University’s broader efforts to increase diversity, Chief Diversity Officer Bill Harvey outlined the Special Committee on Diversity’s strategies to increase faculty diversity at the University.

Harvey presented the Board with an evaluation of tenure and tenure-tracked faculty at the University. Out of 1020 individuals, 29 are African-American, or about 2.5 percent.

“That’s obviously a much lower number than we’d like,” Harvey said.

Harvey noted, however, that because this is an evaluation of tenured faculty, many of the individuals have been at the University for 20-30 years, and this data “speaks to past patterns of hiring and promotion, and is contrasted with non-tenured faculty.”

Harvey added that in recent years the University has had greater success in hiring and retaining a more diverse faculty.

The External Affairs Committee concluded the committee reports, introducing the new president and chief executive officer of the alumni association, Tomas Faulders, and citing the need for an increased marketing campaign directed at alumni.

University President John T. Casteen, III, rejoined Committee members on Saturday to give his closing remarks. Board members subsequently joined Casteen to break ground at the future location of the University’s new nursing center. The Board met for the final time this month Saturday afternoon.

The role of Advanced Placement tests in college has changed dramatically in recent years. In the past, the AP program was a way for a few exceptional students to gain college credit by completing classes far above the level of their peers. Today, Advanced Placement credit is no longer an exception: Over one million students took AP classes last year, including 60 percent of students enrolling at the University. Also, as more students take AP classes, AP offerings have expanded from a few staple subjects to dozens of tests on almost every discipline. Given the changing landscape of AP testing, the University should restrict the number of credits that students can count toward area requirements in the College so that students can only get out of reasonable amount of courses. This would strengthen area requirements and encourage the University’s most driven students to explore disciplines that they might otherwise not have to.

The effect of the huge increase in AP popularity has been unquestionably good for secondary education. But the effect on college education is more of a conundrum. Students can use AP credit to get into more advanced classes, but they can also use the credit to avoid a certain area requirements, thus avoiding taking any College classes in a certain discipline at all. Allowing AP exemptions from area requirements risks compromising the point of a liberal education. With the huge number of students entering colleges with AP credit, many colleges have cut back or eliminated giving AP credit toward area requirements, because not to do so would be tantamount to rendering the area requirements irrelevant. Students should be able to choose some AP courses they want to count toward area requirements, but counting more than a semester’s worth of AP credit toward area requirements dilutes the purpose of a liberal education.

According to the current Undergraduate Record, 26 percent of students entered the University with between 16 and 61 credit hours due to of AP credit. This means that over a quarter of the students have eliminated an entire semester of courses. Many students apply the courses to area requirements that they don’t want to fulfill ­­– scientifically inclined students might use AP credit to avoid taking an English class, while others might use credit from high school to avoid taking a science or math class.

Some might fear that creating such a limit would discourage students from taking AP classes in high school. But in order to be accepted to the best colleges in the nation, students need to take the most challenging course load their high schools offer. There will still be a huge incentive for students to take AP classes even if the credit they receive for the classes won’t fill as many requirements. The point of area requirements is to make sure that students have explored many different disciplines and points of view before they graduate. But with so many students taking AP exams and placing out of area requirements, a lax AP policy allows students to self-select out of area requirements before they even get to college. A stricter AP credit policy would prove that a student who graduates from the University is a well-rounded student capable of succeeding in every area in college just as in high school.

SO HERE’S where we stand on the immigration issue, the policy question that has split the nation: The Senate, led by Democratic Leader Harry Reid and Republican Leader Bill Frist, had agreed to a “compromise” bill that allows for a “guest worker” program and limited amnesty for some long-term illegal immigrants. It also promised, in principle, to send back illegal immigrants who crossed the border in the last two years. Conservative senators stand behind the “tougher” House of Representatives bill, which would have made being in the country illegally a criminal offense and called for building a fence dividing the Mexican and U.S. borders. Despite splashy public demonstrations denouncing the House bill, the “silent majority” of American voters (52 percent according to a recent Pew poll) believe illegal immigrants are a burden on society.

Yet despite the national division on this issue, there is room for consensus that would prove more effective than the “compromise” bill. Democrats and President Bush would need to give up the demand for a guest-worker program while conservative Republicans must give up their demands to send illegal immigrants back to Mexico. Both sides must get serious about border enforcement.

We first need to acknowledge that there is a real problem here. National concern with illegal immigration is not a product of irrational caprice. Legitimate federal laws have been flouted — a harm in itself — as the hiring of illegal immigrants becomes widely accepted in many industries. The additional immigrants are overwhelmingly poor and lead to increasing poverty levels in the United States: 90 percent of the increase in individuals living below the poverty line has come from Hispanics. This is not because the immigrants are not hard-working but because they are unskilled and receive low wages because of the pressure exerted on wage levels by the constant stream of new arrivals. Previous generations of immigrants had space in which to assimilate into American culture because eventually the immigration ceased due to new laws, such as the National Origins Act passed during the 1920s. In these circumstances, residential segregation has increased among immigrants while the increased poverty has placed a huge strain on public services such as schools and housing.

One reason that consensus has been so hard to come by is that, as is so typical in American politics, the agendas of interest groups are being put ahead of the national interest. The benefits of cutting off illegal immigration are diffuse and will take time to materialize; the stream of cheap labor directly benefits businesses. Even many Democrats have expressed concern about the rising poverty, lower wages and strain on state governments necessitated by the arrival of the immigrants. But big businesses like the fact that the influx of labor keeps wages low and do not care about the social tensions produced by the immigrants. Thus, big business, supported by President Bush, has insisted on a guest-worker program designed to allow immigrants to cross the border in order to work. These “guest workers,” once they have arrived, rarely return home.

The argument is often made that the American economy “needs” these workers. Many bourgeois liberals decry “labor shortages” in industries where natives are simply unwilling to work. But as economist Robert Samuelson has pointed out, this “labor shortage” in entirely imaginary. What really attracts these immigrants is that wages are higher in the United States than in their home countries. If employers would simply raise wages, they would attract a sufficient number of laborers. Doing so would lift many out of poverty. But employers, ever-concerned with the bottom line, do not want to have to pay their employees more. As it is, wages have stagnated because of this inflow of illegal laborers. The “guest-worker” program is a sop to big business, and leaders from both parties should be ashamed for putting it into the “compromise” bill.

In turn, conservatives need to give up their utopian fantasy that by criminalizing the presence of illegal immigrants in the country they will force the immigrants to go home. Criminal laws of this sort that punish behavior that is not at all morally reprehensible conflict fundamentally with American values and would remove productive workers whom businesses have come to rely on. The demonstrations against the House bill were largely sparked by this provision.

Finally, both sides of the debate seem to have coalesced around more vigorous enforcement of immigration laws in the future. Employers should be required to verify that new workers are in the country legally, and employers should face sanctions for hiring illegal labor. Not even most liberals would oppose this measure. The proposal for building a wall across the Mexican border must also be considered.

A compromise along these lines, with more vigorous border enforcement plus limited amnesty for illegal immigrants already here, will allow Hispanic immigrants to assimilate by removing the constant stream of illegal labor that forces wages down and increases poverty and inequality.

Noah Peters’ column appears Mondays in The Cavalier Daily. He can be reached at npeters@cavalierdaily.com.

The Cavalier Daily’s Managing Board — comprising the Editor-in-Chief, Executive Editor, Managing Editor, Operations Manager and Chief Financial Officer — gathers daily to debate, decide and shape the opinion they will put forth as the lead editorial. It’s a prerogative of the top people on the newspaper, a podium of great power that comes with, as Spider-Man’s Uncle Ben reminded us, great responsibility.

Last week, one of its targets became pretty angry. Living Wage Campaign members felt their words were taken out of context and their message perverted. They said an editorial made it seem as if the Campaign strategically broke rules and believed those actions were justified.

The weekend before, Campaign members split up the Grounds and wrote “10.72″ on various surfaces, representing the number they say is a living wage for University employees. One member chalked on certain surfaces of the Lawn where the rules specifically prohibited chalking, such as brick or areas not hit by rain, and the Campaign later apologized for the member’s actions.

The editorial (“Chalk it up to defacement,” March 30) was marked by a tone of disgust and annoyance, a sentiment seen in this sarcastic statement: “reasoned debate includes graffiti.”

The Managing Board felt some Campaign members thought they were above the rules, their cause justifying their means. In proving this, they cited a letter from Campaign member Benjamin Van Dyne that said the following: “Issues that go to the heart of the University’s moral vision MUST have a place [on the Lawn], even if that is a little disruptive to the lives of its residents, no matter what the regulations say.”

Van Dyne said yesterday he wasn’t specifically saying chalking in prohibited places is excusable, but making a larger point — sometimes rules must be broken if the issue warrants it. He also said his words were not very clear and were easy to misinterpret.

The editorial also observed that because of a conscious decision against having a hierarchal leadership, the Campaign was devolving into anarchy. The Managing Board reminded the Campaign that its members should curry the favor of the administration, not antagonize it.

This sentence is where the Managing Board ran into trouble: “Van Dyne now admits that the chalking may not have been ‘strategically wise’ and says the campaign has since addressed it.” The sentence makes readers assume that Van Dyne and the Campaign originally made a strategic decision to break the rules, instead of the problem being with one person, as the group claims. The editorial did not include pledges to that point by Van Dyne and another Campaign member.

Including that pledge wouldn’t have meant the Board had to believe it was true. The editorial could have presented the Campaign’s pleading and countered with their own evidence. But including their explanation someplace would have gone a long way toward being fair.

I don’t think the editorial concluded that the Campaign strategically broke the rules, but that determination only comes after a very close reading.

Generally, here’s how the lead editorial is constructed, according to Editor-in-Chief Michael Slaven: Executive Editor Herb Ladley puts an idea to as many members of the Managing Board as possible — usually at least four, if not all five members. The Managing Board debates the issue, refines its points, tries to reach consensus and sends Ladley off to write the draft.

The Managing Board usually tries to reach consensus. They will run a position one person disagrees with, but for the most part they try to be unanimous. Sometimes this means not taking sides on an issue. Interestingly enough, one of the things the Managing Board has not reached consensus on is the issue of the living wage. The March 30 lead editorial is an example where the Managing Board found part of an issue upon which it could agree.

Ladley then contacts those affected by the editorial. He reports, filling in gaps and holes. Ladley interviewed Van Dyne and another Campaign member before March 30′s editorial was written. Sometimes, the information given by the person contacted will change the Managing Board’s opinion.

“We want to be as fair as possible,” Slaven said. “If there’s anything that they know that we don’t know that might mitigate our opinion, they’ll tell us that, and often-times it does.”

Later, Managing Board members comment on and approve the draft. This doesn’t mean that the people on the other end of the editorial are going to be happy with what’s written, but it is a pretty responsible way of putting together the daily message.

Just as the Campaign should not want to antagonize University leadership, the Managing Board should try not to antagonize student groups, but rather go out of its way to give students latitude and have their views represented.

The true power of the editorial space on the newspaper page is not in denunciations. The power lies in the ability make suggestions and produce change for what the managing board sees as positive alternatives.

Lisa Fleisher is The Cavalier Daily’s ombudsman. She can be reached at ombud@cavalierdaily.com