Blog Archive » 2007 » October

Can't believe it. Sputnik is 50.

What's "Sputnik?" you ask?

No, it's not a new boy band, survivor show, or wireless gadget…. well, maybe it has characteristics of the latter.

Sputnik, for those under a certain age (like 40), was the first satellite to go into earth's orbit. Not a big deal, you say, in today's age with untold pieces of space junk now orbiting overhead?

Yes, it was a very big deal in 1957. Why? Not only because a satellite had actually reached orbit, but more importantly, because another country beat us to it — and that country was Russia, the Soviet Union, then the sworn enemy of the United States. The Space Race was on.

I grew up in those early years of the Space Race. I remember sitting in the back yard searching the night sky for the small blinking light we knew as Telstar, in 1962, the very first communications satellite. We watched breathlessly as John Glenn became the first person to orbit the earth in a space capsule, and later we cheered when Neil Armstrong stepped out onto the desolate moon surface just 12 years after Sputnik.

We have the Space Race to thank for so much of today's technology, and much of contemporary culture's excesses as well (like cell phones ringing in class). But in the 1970's and 1980's, public interest began to wane in this particular contest, troubles at NASA began to emerge, and then, the Challenger disaster in 1986 seemed to spell the end of the excitement forever. The space exploration program continues, but at a slower pace, with the emphasis now on exploration by robots to far-flung environments (the Mars rover, for example) and the unglamorous work of building the itnernational space station.

One of the most important by-products of Sputnik was a renewed emphasis on math and science education for American students in the 1960's. But as with the later waning of interest in the space program, the emphasis on developing math/science skills also waned, and today the United States lags other nations considerably in the production of scientists, engineers and mathematicians — and citizens generally — who have the math/science skills necessary for proficiency in the space age.

Let's hope that this 50th anniversary moment for Sputnik is a time for renewed commitment to math/science education in K-12 schools, so that higher education can welcome more students with the skills necessary to sustain majors in the science disciplines. Let's also hope that this anniversary provides a time to re-ignite energy and excitement in the idea of exploration and discovery, whether here on earth or on far planets. We wouldn't be enjoying this remarkably advanced civilization today if someone did not have the curiosity to launch a small boat across a large ocean. We are not at the end of exploration, but rather, on the edge of a whole new era loaded with remarkable potential for new discoveries in distant places.

See Charles Krauthammer's column today in the Washington Post

See sputnik

One of the most bizarre episodes in American jurisprudence occurred in 1991 when then-nominee to the Supreme Court Clarence Thomas appeared before the Senate Judiciary Committee. His former staff subordinate, a young lawyer named Anita Hill, accused him of sexual harassment. The hearings on his nomination became a drama with a volatile mix of race, gender and conservative-liberal ideologies. Clarence Thomas wound up confirmed for a seat on the Supreme Court, and Anita Hill went on to a career in teaching.

In the last week, the bitter memories and still-raw scars from that episode emerged anew with the unprecedented release of a memoir by Justice Thomas. Rarely, if ever, has a sitting Supreme Court Justice revealed so much about himself, his attitudes, opinions and still-raw emotions. Justice Thomas also gave a lengthy interview to the CBS Newsmagazine "60 Minutes." In the book and interview, his comments about Professor Hill are particularly pointed.

Anita Hill responded today in an oped column in the New York Times.

Only two people really know what really occurred so long ago between them. But in the contemporary environment for American political life, for race relations and gender politics, the resurgence of the Thomas-Hill drama seems unconstructive at best. But the Thomas memoir is now a matter of the public record, as is the Hill response, and both provide compelling reading and analysis.

Have we learned anything new in the 16 years since the hearings? Does this new retrospective on the Thomas-Hill debate provide any new illumination on issues of race and gender discrimination in this nation? Or is this just one more unresolved American tragedy?

Opinions are welcome, send email to president@trinitydc.edu or click on the envelope icon to send a comment.

This nation has already spent almost $600 BILLION (yes, that's with a B) on the War in Iraq, and economists forecast that the cost of the war could soon exceed $1 TRILLION.

Yet, President Bush says he will veto legislation to guarantee health care to children because it costs too much. He also rejects the idea that the funding could come from increasing the tax on cigarettes, go figure — such a tax would have the double benefit of dissuading some more people from the slow death of nicotine while funding basic health care for children.

Even conservative Republicans in Congress like Senator Charles Grassley are increasingly vocal in calling on the President to do the right thing and sign this bill. This is not a matter of partisan politics; if ever there were a moral issue ingrained in legislation, a program to care for the health of children would seem to be Priority One.

Tonight at a meeting of the presidents of the nation's women's colleges — the annual meeting of the Women's College Coalition — I heard one of the great civil rights and human rights leaders of our time speak passionately about the children who are the focus of her life's work. Marian Wright Edelman, founder and President of the Children's Defense Fund, called on all of us who lead the women's colleges to be more passionate advocates for the causes affecting women and children. Quoting Eleanor Roosevelt, she reminded us that if women in power don't care about women and children who lack power, who will? We have a great obligation to raise our voices for those who cannot be heard.

President Edelman is a great friend of Trinity — she holds an honorary doctorate from Trinity, and many Trinity students have had internships at CDF, including Maggie Williams '77, former chief of staff to then-First Lady Hillary Clinton. Mrs. Edelman reminded me to recommend more Trinity interns for CDF, since the track record of our students and alumnae there is great. She also talked to our group about establishing a global education alliance to support women and girls internationally; we've also talked about this here at Trinity, and we will join forces with the Children's Defense Fund in this new project.

Last weekend, during the excellent Sower's Seed Lecture by Amy Costello '92, and then during our Cap and Gown Convocation where D.C. Schools Chancellor Michelle Rhee addressed our seniors, we heard repeated calls to action for social justice, which is a central tenet of the Catholic faith and a core component of the mission of the Sisters of Notre Dame. Chancellor Rhee called improving education for D.C. children one of the great civil rights issues in our city (listen to her speech here). Amy Costello spoke about how she has used her skills as a journalist to tell the stories of the women and children she has seen in Darfur and Sudan and other places of great human suffering.

In all of these messages, we remind our community here at Trinity of the vital importance of standing up for those whom the U.S. bishops call "the least, the lost, the left out among us." All major faiths share this fundamental idea of charity and the obligation to serve justice.

In thinking about the sheer financial costs of the current war and the sheer social costs of allowing children to grow up without a decent education and without proper health care, it seems that our moral values as a society have gone profoundly awry. We invest in what we believe in. Right now, this nation is investing a pittance in children compared to the stunning investment in a war whose end seems as far off today as ever. Truly, these are not just political matters, these are matters of conscience. We all must do more to restore some sense of balance — the balance of justice, which also is essential for peace — in the calculus of national investment.