Highland – Upperclass housing by the Rec center; consists of Morgan, Lewis, Mayfields, and Chaffins.

On the Card – Restaurants and services (both on and off campus) that take Meal Money. Unfortunately does not include Lacoste.

The Wall – Outside Sarratt/Rand, student orgs and sororities/fraternities try to steal your money.

Last Drop – Coffee shop downstairs in Sarratt.

The Pub – Traditional bar food upstairs in Sarratt. Beer on the card.

AnchorLink – Vanderbilt’s online student organization system. Nobody likes it.

The Anchor – Study space above New Rand. Supplies to make banners, posters, etc.

Kensington – The cross street affectionately known as “Greek Row”

Natty – Beverage of choice.

Dank New Rand – Ridiculous nickname given to Rand Lounge. The section of Rand with Pie and Leaf.

Printer’s Alley – Location of the world famous Lonnie’s Western Room. If half of your freshman nights out aren’t here, you’re doing it wrong.

VanderBubble – Needless to say, we can get a little pre-occupied with ourselves. The outside world takes a backseat when you’re “inside the bubble”.

Brookie – Rand’s world famous combination of a brownie and a cookie. Number 1 cause of the Freshman 15.

Estrogym – The gym in the Commons Center. You don’t want to be that guy.

Grins – Vegetarian café next to Branscomb. Pronounced “Greens”. Why? No idea.

Overheard at Vanderbilt – notorious Facebook group where Vandy stereotypes are reinforced. Relax, everyone hates the person who gets offended.

As someone who has lived in various parts of Texas for almost my entire lifetime, I find myself observing the flurry of petitions, blog posts, Internet articles, and heated arguments with a great deal of cynicism and just a touch of quiet amusement. Do the proponents of secession from Texas (not to mention the many other states who have filed petitions to leave the US) even have the popular support and legal grounds to warrant the uproar, concern, hope, and fear they have currently inspired? More than that, have they stopped to think about what would happen if they did, somehow, manage to remove themselves from the country?

Unfortunately for those involved in the debate, arguments both for and against secession are prolific, stubbornly argued, and based on materials that are somewhat subject to interpretation.  Most advocates against secession cite two specific details of US-Texan history to support their claim. The first is the presidential proclamation given out immediately after the Civil War, which expressly removes the right of states in the union to legally secede. Since presidential proclamations carry roughly the same legal weight as executive orders, most experts hold this removal to be final and definitive. Secondly, the Supreme Court case of Texas v. White ended in the ruling that when Texas originally joined the US, it entered into an “indissoluble relation” with the rest of the union of states, and therefore relinquished its right to secede.

However, most supporters of secession—many of whom are ardent states’ rights proponents—argue that neither the Constitution of the United States nor the Texas Constitution explicitly allow or disallow secession, and that both Texas v. White and the presidential proclamation rely on a definition of executive power far more heavy-handed than they (the states’-righters) will admit to being valid. While the consensus of most experts is that Texas and other states in the nation do not, in fact, have the right to secede, the arguments to the contrary strike a powerful chord with many of the more conservative Americans and others frustrated with feelings of powerlessness and political underrepresentation, making it difficult to quell the popular enthusiasm for secessionist dialogues among those populations.

In addition to the dubious legal precedent for Texan secession, the fact remains that there is so far simply not enough popular approval for it. A great deal is made of the fact that the Texas petition has garnered over 100,000 signatures (118,244 as it stands today), but most people don’t take into account the sheer size of Texas and its population when contemplating this statistic.  There are, according to the 2011 census, 25,674,681 people officially documented in the state; by these figures, the number of people desiring secession in Texas are roughly .46% of the population—not exactly a representative majority of the citizens. The metropolitan area of my hometown, San Antonio, contains 2.2 million officially documented people, a figure more than seventeen times larger than the number of signatures.  To further convince petitioners that their cause is not supported by many, people in a number of cities—such as Austin and Houston—have created counter-petitions to remain inside the US if Texas were to secede.

While many in favor of secession cite a desire to better self-determine the governing of their state, maintain individual liberties, and avoid the worst of the larger US’s economic difficulties (which many places in Texas have successfully rode out since the beginning of the recession), many skeptics point out that there is nothing preventing politicians in Texas from becoming just as bad as petitioners perceive those in Washington to be. There is nothing that guarantees Texans to be angels, although sometimes we might like to think of Texas as having heavenly aspects.  And what about those people within Texas who already feel underrepresented and marginalized within the political systems of the state? Would a Texan government do more or less to guarantee their individual liberties?

Then there is the question of public universities and institutions across the state, which receive government funding—would they be left in the lurch, or would special dispensations be made for them to receive “foreign” aid?  What about infrastructure, education, transportation via national roads, and the economy?  The state may be good at balancing its budget, but in this age of global, let alone inter-state, commerce, how self-sufficient would Texas, or any other seceding states, really be?  If one thing is for certain, there’s nothing that would legally obligate the United States to maintain trade with its errant offspring.  And let’s not forget that we couldn’t exactly skip out on any debts we still had with the broader country.  Truth be told—although this is just the personal opinion of a rather tired Texan—I simply don’t think that the idea of Texan secession would be workable, even if it were certifiably legal.  We are a much bigger, more complicated, more interesting place than we were in the days of Sam Houston and Stephen F. Austin.  All I can hope is that if by some extraordinary turn of events the state were to secede, I would be able to successfully lodge my own petition—to Vanderbilt, for International Student scholarships.

-Ames Sanders is a junior in the College of Arts and Sciences and can be reached at amethyst.w.sanders@vanderbilt.edu.

“This race is far from over” is what I found myself tweeting this morning before entering class. I had barley paid attention to the polls during the months of August and September. Mr. Romney had cost himself the race by a set of speaking blunders at home and abroad that distanced himself from the American people. I have studied political science and I knew the Incumbent owed this presidential race, it was Mr. Obama’s to win

Or so I thought.

Then Americans did something, en masse, that they were never “supposed” to do, according to many political scientists- actually watch and pay attention to the debate last Wednesday. Over 50 million Americans from across the country tuned into PBS, rejecting other more flashy channels with new “exciting” series, to engage themselves in civic life. Through Mr. Romney, a man they had never known to be “one of them”, became them, vicariously, demanding a head-down, conflict-avoiding Mr. Obama to answer “Why did you fund Solyndra?”, “Why did you ignore Simpson-Bowles?”, and most importantly “Why did you promise change four years ago that has not come?”. Mr. Romney finally transcended himself to stand next to Mr. Obama and become what the GOP always wanted him to be- the referendum choice.

A pew poll released Monday showed Mr. Romney ahead 4 points in the Presidential race, even though Obama had a buffer of 12 points over his challenger in mid-September. In the electoral race, Mr. Romney has Indiana, the Carolinas, and Missouri secured and is even closing the gap in Ohio. Politicians need to take this as a reminder that fundraising speeches win money, but debates win voters (and quickly). What I like most about this shift, however, is that it did not come from negative campaign ads, a huge individual or corporate donor with an agenda, or the position of an interest group- it came from the American people honorably defying their critics and actually tuning into the issues that face our republic today. They have shown that a new generation is taking civic responsibility very seriously.

We have yet to find a solution on the 2013 “Fiscal Cliff” because of extreme polarization in Congress, but maybe if we can revive what Robert Putnam at Harvard calls “social capital” or a rise in social and civic trust around America, we can begin to solve our legislative problems. Americans showed they cared last Thursday during the debate, hopefully on election day those numbers will remain high. Whoever wins this presidential election is going to have a direct effect on all policy areas in the next four years, but how they win it could put America on a new course for the entire century. To me, the former takes precedent.

“Fiscally responsible, socially accepting … more liberal than Obama on several issues, more conservative than Romney on several issues,” responded Gary Johnson to a question of what it means to be libertarian. The Libertarian nominee believes that most Americans align with him in that regard. But most Americans don’t know about Johnson, and think the choice for president is limited to two candidates in November. This is in large part due to the political monopoly that is the bipartisan system in America. Johnson (and all third party candidates) will not be in the presidential debates, and he has filed an anti-trust lawsuit against the Commission on Presidential Debates for this exclusion.

Gary Johnson is the only candidate who will get us out of the mess our nation is in. Despite their rhetoric, both the Republican and Democratic candidates will “result in an increased police state, continued state of war, and continued unsustainable debt and spending.”

He is the only candidate who talks about cutting welfare spending and warfare spending in the same sentence. Johnson recognizes the difference between defense spending and military spending, and feels that the preemptive wars and nation building which both parties agree upon are counterproductive to national security. As president, he would bring our troops home immediately, from Afghanistan and around the globe. (There are US military personnel in 130 countries and we have 900 bases around the world.)

“Balance the federal budget now, not 15 years from now, not 20 years from now, but now. And throw out the entire federal tax system; replace it with a fair tax, a consumption tax that by all measurements is just that. It’s fair,” insists Governor Johnson, and his record as governor backs up his words. (Does Obama’s record back up his words? Do Romney’s words, let alone his record, back up his words?) And Johnson’s plan would balance the budget now, unlike Paul Ryan’s plan that would take 30 years. He plans to cut federal spending by 43% (the rate at which our government prints/borrows money), thereby eliminating the Department of Education—allowing the states to become “50 laboratories of innovation”—and the IRS. Johnson’s Fair Tax proposal would eliminate the income tax and replace it with a national sales tax—a progressive tax through which no one living at or below the poverty line would pay a cent—generating the same revenue as the current tax code (which has seven times as many words as the Bible).

Gary Johnson is the only presidential candidate who will end the unsuccessful War on Drugs. As he sees it, “This country would be a better place to live in if all the resources we currently put toward criminalizing marijuana were instead spent by law enforcement on protection from real crime, as opposed to victimless crime.” He recognizes that the current War on Drugs is “forcing drug disputes to be played out with guns in our streets.” Johnson would treat drugs as a medical problem, not a legal one: helping people instead of further inflating the largest prison population in the world.

As a libertarian and a self-described Ron Paul Revolutionary, Gary Johnson believes the government exists to protect us against individuals or groups that infringe on our rights and do us harm. He thinks the federal government should be reduced to that minimal function. However, Johnson does not agree with Dr. Paul on every issue, in ways that I think make him more electable.  He believes marriage equality is a constitutional right. Johnson would not dismantle the EPA or the FDA (he has celiac disease and needs food labels).

Gary Johnson joined the Libertarian Party to keep the message of Liberty alive. Thanks to Ron Paul, it is too strong, too important to stop. We need a president who will lead us out of recession. We need a president who will bring our troops home, stop the practice of torture, stop the indefinite detainment of citizens without due process, stop the crony capitalism, follow the Constitution, and restore America’s image around the world.

Although the media might hide this fact, Barack Obama and Mitt Romney are not the only two choices for president. I encourage you to vote for the candidate whose vision of America most aligns with yours, whether that be Obama, Romney, Gary Johnson, or Jill Stein. Some say a vote for Gary Johnson is a wasted vote or a vote for Obama. That logic perpetuates the political hegemony enjoyed by the Republicrats and Demoblicans. Follow Governor Johnson’s message: “A wasted vote, is voting for someone that you don’t believe in. If Obama or Romney are spoiled, they have themselves to blame.”

If Gary Johnson does not win the election, he will not have lost. If Americans vote for candidates they don’t trust and don’t want, then America will have lost. Vote for who you believe in, but I encourage you to vote for Gary Johnson.  Tell your country that Washington politics-as-usual isn’t cutting it—that you want liberty!

It would seem as though at first glance linking Friday’s dismal jobs report to the People’s Republic of China would scream “outsourcing”, “higher tariffs”, or for some “Bain Capital”. For this economist, however, those international tools from antiquity in this modern globalized market mean only higher prices on U.S. shelves, and less purchasing power for the struggling middle class. If we really want to begin moving U.S. jobs back from China, we have to face what we don’t like about China head on- and face the PRC with more creativity and boldness and less fear and ignorance.

The first unorthodox step is a compromise on capital flow. If we restrict U.S. firms from bringing back financial capital back into the united states, how can we expect them to posses the agency to bring back human capital (in the form of jobs)? Yes we do restrict them- through significantly steeper taxation than, say, Swiss banks and yes it is significant- over US $50 billion for Apple alone. If we allowed firms like Apple to repatriate their profits at a one-time 0% tax rate with the comprise that they would move manufacturing out of China and back into the United States, it would create tens of thousands of high paying jobs in the private sector.

The second step no one is discussing is a free trade agreement with the African Union, something that should have happened a long time ago. Our discussed competitor, China, already is emerging Africa’s largest trading partner, extending them long lines of credit in exchange for the continent’s vast resources. What’s worse, African countries like Ghana back China’s unjust initiatives within the United Nations, counterproductive to international growth and peace. If the United States steps up to the plate and agrees to the free flow of finances and goods between here and Africa, both would prosper. Manufacturing would move out of China and begin to take root in places like Tanzania and Angola. Prices on U.S. commodities like gasoline would also likely drop, benefiting individuals and small businesses. African democracies would be strengthened and the regime in Beijing would be weakened.

It’s imperative that we leave our children with a sustainable planet, but after that pressing need is the desire for a strong and vibrant economy and a world where a free nation, founded in liberty and dedicated to justice, can rise above a Communist country that muzzles the voice of free expression and murders, without consent, the illegal second child directly after birth. With some common sense, creativity, and bipartisanship we can create jobs, strengthen our economy long term, and weaken the Chinese regime all at once with several minor public policy initiatives. Before you buy the upcoming iPhone 5 ask “Where was this made?” and “What responsibilities do I have to the people that made this?” and “Why couldn’t this be made in the United States?”

Ian Duncan is a Junior in the College of Arts and Sciences. He can be reached at ian.r.duncan@vanderbilt.edu

By Ian Duncan

In the midst of classes starting, work beginning, football opening and, of course, tailgating, it was easy for most Vanderbilt students to forget the Republican Nation Convention in Tampa this week. Fortunately, this publication found time to review and analyze the events that unfolded and we found three characteristics that really defined the week.

First, for all the criticism of Governor Romney as an out-of-touch, wealthy white American who has comparatively faced less adversity than others who have accepted the Republican nomination before him, the convention organizers selected a diverse group of speakers who varied in race, gender, affluence, and biography. Seemingly trying to reach out to voters to say “You may not be able to look in the mirror and see a Mr. Romney, but there will be people in his administration and in this party who are similar to you”. Time and again, from the young and humble Mr. Ryan to the Latino Senator Marco Rubio to all the many powerful republican women who spoke, this point was hammered in.

Second, there certainly was some surprises. No one thought Ann Romney would make such a profound speech, and no one thought Clint Eastwood would make such a bizarre one (Invisible Obama apparently is very feisty). The Hurricane wasn’t as bad as predicted, but Ron Paul supporters brought a storm and then some. Overall, everything, planned and unplanned, balanced itself out- and the small extra level of excitement may have helped ratings.

Finally, the convention may have been predictably decisive. All partisans right of centre were more than prepared to answer Mr. Romney’s battle cry against Mr. Obama. The practical politics of public policy at the congressional and state levels were swept aside for words of ideology and personality. Mr. Romney has drawn his line in the sand, and its now in the hands of a relatively small subset of voters to decide his fate.

Overall, this publication views the RNC as good publicity for Mr. Romeny and his party, a chance for the public spot used efficiently. However, next week Mr. Obama and his party, which contains no less amount of power orators and certainly no less diversity, will take the stage and make the case for “four more years”. For the political junkie, its like being a freshmen on frat row the first weekend.

Ian Duncan is a junior in the college of arts and sciences. He can be reached at ian.r.duncan@vanderbilt.edu

Here at the Torch we wanted to share a quick link with you. College Insurrection is a new website by noted blogger and Cornell Professor of Law William Jacobson. The site’s goal is to provide a fresh perspective on conservative and libertarian values on college campuses across the nation.

Check out their website here.

We hope you are as excited as we are for the upcoming school year!

The Vanderbilt Torch is Vanderbilt University’s only source for conservative and libertarian commentary. In addition to maintaining this website and our blog, the Torch  publishes eight print issues on Vanderbilt’s campus each year.

If you are a Vanderbilt student interested in contributing to the Torch, we would love to have you on board!

Columnists are given a platform to voice thoughtful, intelligent commentary. For those who are more interested in reporting, the Torch will be significantly increasing our resources committed to investigative reporting over the coming academic year. We are also looking for individuals interested in layout design and photography.

If you are interested, or if you would like to learn more about the Torch, please contact us here.

As the Board of Trust meets again this week, the religious organizations of Vanderbilt Solidarity—along with Vanderbilt Catholic and the Thomas More Society—have made plans to make their voices heard. These thirteen student organizations have open acknowledged that they anticipate being considered unregistered organizations in the fall.

Another comment that people are seeming to recall now is when, President Obama called Kanye West, “talented, but a Jackass” during what he thought was an off-the-record moment of CNBC.

As if being forced to resign from the highest office in the country was not embarrassing enough, Richard Nixon had to worry about being caught picking his nose on camera.

President Richard Nixon was caught on tape saying, “I’m afraid he’ll catch me picking my nose” in reference to White House photographer, Ollie Atkins.

The always adorable Regan made a joke that was leaked, and the then- USSR did not appreciate during a mic check. He said, “”My fellow Americans, I’m pleased to tell you today that I’ve signed legislation that will outlaw Russia forever. We begin bombing in five minutes.”

George W. Bush has also voiced frustrations during his 2000 campaign, calling a New York Times Reporter, “major league asshole.”