Sarah Winchester was a loon, that’s for sure. If you have ever been to the Winchester Mystery House in San Jose, you will probably come to the same conclusion that I have. The strange and baffling architecture – along with endless rooms to nowhere – make the house an interesting curiosity.

Since Halloween is coming up, I thought I would use this spooky California destination to illustrate a frightening California problem. The Winchester House is, of course, named after the man who created Winchester rifles. He amassed a fortune from his lucrative business and passed it on to his wife when he died.

She felt great pangs of guilt that her husband’s creation was used for violence, so she came to what was – to her – the most logical course of action. She used her vast inherited fortune to construct an elaborate, never-ending, illogical and expensive mansion. This construction would confuse the angry ghosts of those who had been slain by gunmen wielding Winchester rifles.

Obviously lacking her husband’s business sense, Old Lady Winchester wasted her fortune on what amounts to nothing more than a modern day curiosity. Interesting, but altogether useless. Unfortunately, I’m afraid the modern day California High Speed Rail, or “bullet train,” project reminds me of Winchester’s endless construction to nowhere.

Now that the project has been voted on and approved by the California electorate, we must all hope that it is successful. If you take a look at the official website, cahighspeedrail.ca.gov, you can read – and see – all of the amazing things that the new train will do for Californians.

The list of promises is long. Reduced automobile traffic, reduced carbon emissions, speedy travel, silent running and 450,000 permanent jobs are some of the most prominent benefits. This all sounds wonderful doesn’t it? It seems like it is too good to be true.

That’s because it is. The bullet train will be a financial disaster for the state of California, and will drain the state coffers for decades to come. The project got the go-ahead from state voters last year, but many obstacles could derail the enormous project. In a time when California can’t afford to pay its employees on time, issues furloughs to teachers and dramatically raises fees for students, how can it afford to undertake this massive project?

The bullet train will be like the Winchester House with its winding, confusing and mostly illogical layout. The train must pass through many political districts that contain people and politicians with conflicting interests. Do you trust California representatives to get this done? The last time I checked, approval ratings of the California legislature were just above 10 percent. Some citizens will be outraged that a train will be passing through their neighborhood. Others will be angry that it doesn’t pass through their neighborhood. Environmental groups will be infuriated by the damage to ecosystems. The list of inevitable grievances is long.

The price tag for the bullet train project has been estimated to be $45 billion, a hefty bill. This, however, woefully under-predicts the eventual cost. Odds are the cost would be double that amount, like most other large, government-funded projects. To pay off the enormous bill, the project must be wildly successful once completed. The rather optimistic predictions given on the official site of 88 million to 117 million riders per year by 2035 leaves me skeptical.

Instead of a massive, complex, time consuming and budget-busting bullet train, California should focus on smaller, more manageable problems. Perhaps improving upon the public transportation already in place is the way to go. Simply filling the enormous amount of street potholes would be another useful and appreciated endeavor.

Let us not waste time and money on a state-funded Winchester Mystery House. Instead of soaking up the vast inheritance of an eccentric millionaire, it will be soaking up your hard earned money.

JARRETT STEPMAN can’t wait to take the flashlight tour at the Winchester Mystery House. You can contact him at jstepman@ucdavis.edu.

A vote for the future of Davis

Many of us come from the suburbs and we know what it’s like to drive past neighborhood after neighborhood of cookie cutter houses. In the ’80s and ’90s, developers began to build in this style every time Davis needed to expand.This irresponsible building never truly provided housing that was affordable for young families and professionals that were brought to the City of Davis by the university.

Fast-forward 20 years.

What if there was a way to provide innovative, affordable housing in Davis while allowing us to maintain the same small-town feel that draws people to the city and UC Davis every year?

There is such a project.

Coming from the suburban sprawl of Orange County, I have always been against development.That was until I learned about the standard for green and responsible building that Measure P will bring to the City of Davis.This project is a progressive model for building that will change how we think about growth – not just in our own city, but in Northern California as a whole.

The neighborhood will exceed the current standards for green building in California by 50 percent and the City of Davis’ standards by 100 percent. All of the units – including apartments, town homes and single-family homes – will be equipped with solar panels; they will receive 90 percent of their power from solar. Heating and cooling costs will be reduced by building the houses as solar oriented, staying cooler in the summer and warmer in the winter.

For those of you looking toward the future, there will be plug-ins for hybrid and electric vehicles. If it’s green enough for the Sierra Club, then it’s green enough for me.

Likewise, if you are like me and plan on living in Davis after you graduate, Wildhorse Ranch will provide the chance for you to live reasonably in this city. The project will not be built until 2012, but it will provide housing under the median price of a Davis home as well as rent control apartments. Whether you’ll be starting a career, attending graduate school, or starting a family when the homes and apartments go on the market, there will be an attainable housing solution available to yourself and fellow Aggies.

Many students may still be questioning why this city election is relevant to them. The significance of students in this election has been called into question by the opposition during the course of the campaign. Too many times I’ve been asked, “Do you live in Davis, or do you go to school here?” as if renting an apartment and living in the city while attending school does not count as living in Davis.

This is not to say you should vote for the project because a few members of the opposition have discredited the role of UC Davis students in the community. Instead, I would like all of the students to show their involvement in the city by voting in this election by saying “yes” to Measure P.

KELSEY MCQUAID

Junior, Political Science

Why I’m voting ‘no’ on P

Just a thought on Measure P’s “affordable” housing plan. I, for one, cannot afford a $350,000-$450,000 priced home. I’m a single mom of two kids. I laugh when I think about “affordable” rent for a two bedroom being $1,200. I work at UC Davis full time and only bring home $2,000 a month. That rent is over half of my income. Affordable? Are they kidding? This affordable housing is not for the low-income people of Davis.

Davis has been – and continues to be – an over priced area to live in. The only reason I stay is because I don’t want to move my children, who have already started high school. As soon as they graduate, though, I will move to a real affordable housing location, which will not be here in Davis.

I will be voting no on P because it is not affordable housing for the low income. These people have no clue what real low income is. Why don’t they start looking at the income of the people who work around here – not just the professors – and get the rent to be in line with those folks first? Get a real affordable housing plan that real people can actually afford. Then I would vote yes.

MICHELLE BRACKETT

Bindery Assistant/Lead Book Processor

Shields Library

Thoughts on sleep

In regard to the article “Study examines academic, social causes of sleep depravation” published on Oct. 20, the reporter, Kelley Rees, is correct in stating what most college students and adults can attest to: We’re sleep deprived! The National Sleep Foundation recommends that adults get seven to nine hours of sleep per night (this varies per individual).

Not getting enough sleep may result in negative health outcomes and can also negatively impact students’ academic performance. According to data from the 2009 National College Health Assessment, 22 percent of UC Davis undergraduates reported that sleep difficulties had negatively affected their academic performance.

However, the article’s statement that afternoon naps should be avoided in order to improve sleep hygiene is not entirely accurate. Naps can be very beneficial; a short nap can increase your productivity, enhance your concentration and even improve your academic success.

It is important to nap properly in order to maximize the benefits, though. This means limiting a nap to only 20 to 30 minutes, reducing outside disruptions and napping in the early afternoon so you don’t affect your sleep cycle. Naps are a great way to reduce daytime drowsiness by increasing alertness.

For more information regarding sleep and healthy napping tips, visit healthcenter.ucdavis.edu/hep/well/napping.html.

YASMINE ELSHERBINI

Wellness Student Assistant

Health & Education Promotion

“Survival of the fittest” was an evolutionary idea when Charles Darwin wrote the Origin of Species in the mid 1800s. More commonly referred to as “natural selection,” the idea is nature favored those who were most fit to survive the conditions of their environment. The strong would survive; the weak would die.

Don’t be bored! Come back! I promise this is interesting!

So, this process, this “natural selection,” is something that nature would take care of. If you’re a bird who is too skinny to survive the winter, you die. If you’re a bird who is too fat to fly, you die. What are left are the birds that are fat enough to survive winter, but thin enough to fly to get food – a stronger species. Darwin in a nutshell, I suppose.

Fast forward to the early 1900s, before World War II. In Lynchburg, Va. (kind of a redundant name, I’m sure), a hospital named Lynchburg State Colony for Epileptics and Feeble-Minded was opened in 1910. Not only were the feeble-minded and epileptics sent there, but the poor… and the tired… and the hungry…

But seriously, anyone who even just seemed or looked stupid could be sent to this hospital. And there, they were sterilized. Refer back to the “survival of the fittest.” The head honchos thought that by institutionalizing these unfit people, and then sterilizing them, they could prevent future generations of stupid babies from growing up and having to be institutionalized. The goal was to prevent “race degeneration.”

A seven-month-old was examined by a social worker and told the court, “There is a look about it that is not quite normal, but just what it is, I can’t tell.” And it was off with her uterus. No kidding.

They were kind of jumping in and playing nature – killing off the weak. By 1935, about 20,000 people in the United States were sterilized, according to the Kennedy Institute of Ethics. And more than half at the point were sterilized in our beloved California.

A man named Harry Laughlin, a strong proponent of Eugenics, was doing research on why most states were not taking advantage of this great way to solve America’s impurity problem. He said the problem was the laws were either not constitutionally focused, or too poorly written for anyone to implement them. So, Laughlin goes and writes “Model Eugenical Sterilization Law.” This apparently remedied the previous two problems, because in 1927 the United States Supreme Court found the law constitutional.

That seven-month-old I mentioned earlier? She was the deciding factor in that case. Look up Buck v. Bell for all the juicy gossip.

But what a slippery slope! Get ready for a shiver down your spine. In 1936, Laughlin received an honorary degree from the University of Heidelberg (that’s in Germany) for his work on “science of racial cleansing.” Once controlled by Hitler’s government, Heidelberg had announced that it had removed all the Jews and began promoting “Aryan physics.”

The Nazis took this sterilization idea and ran with it. They started sterilizing people in asylums, then warning people about how the health of the nation was being threatened by people with hereditary illnesses. In 1939, Hitler approved “mercy deaths-euthanasia-of those the state deemed unworthy of life.”

The next step? Well, we all know about that: “Six million Jews were exterminated in the gas chambers of the concentration camps as well as millions of political prisoners, Gypsies, the handicapped, those too ill to work, Jehovah’s Witnesses, homosexuals, Afro-Europeans and Soviet and Polish prisoners-of-war,” according to the Kennedy Institute of Ethics.

Just a few years earlier, American geneticist Joseph DeJarnette was complaining, “The Germans are beating us at our own game!” Even after World War II, sterilization continued in America until the 1970s.

I don’t really have an argument for this column, but I wanted to share this piece of history that never really makes it into our books somehow. Because whether it be slavery, religious persecution or planting seeds for genocide, American history is no better than any other country’s history. Like Tupac says, “I see no changes, all I see are racist faces, misplaced hate makes disgrace to races.”

SARA KOHGADAI thought this was an interesting topic, and really appreciates classes that address issues like this. She can be reached at sbkohgadai@ucdavis.edu.

ACHOOOOOOOO! A sneeze booms from the mouth of someone sitting behind me in lecture, so loud that I can barely regain my composure (if you consider thinking about Narwhals composure).

Excuse me?! Here I am sitting peacefully, pretending to understand the minutiae of chirality and hydrobromination in organic chemistry, when you have the audacity to shower me with saliva and nearly rupture my eardrums. I think the sonic boom might have even traveled down into the professor’s microphone for a little added reverberation. It’s a real gem for the podcasts.

OK, I can handle it once – or even a couple times – but it seems like Davis has been struck with an epidemic: I haven’t seen so many people sneeze this much before. It’s crazy. Oh, the joys of Swine Flu fall. I’m not sure if I should reach for my imaginary side-arm and brace myself for another World War scale attack or just cower in fear underneath my left-hand-discriminatory desk.

These sneezers have converted the once peaceful SciLec into a trench-style war where people are taking cover under hoods, hair and desks.

(Speaking of SciLec, I’m really bothered by the lack of light that professors use during lectures. Why do we have to listen to the lecture as if we’re in a cave? It’s mid afternoon, I just came from the Silo where I gorged in a pile of the type of food that doubles in size when it hits the bottom of your stomach, and you’re going to dim the lights?! Jesus. You might as well throw a Barry White LP on the acoustic record player and light some candles while you’re at it. But I digress.)

While everyone sneezes their brains out, I can’t help but notice the horrific obtuseness of some of the sneezes. These odd sneezes just bother me on some fundamental level that I can’t explain. You know what those sneezes sound like. You say, “God … what kind of sneeze is that?!” in your head. I say the same thing (out loud) … it’s about a sneeze that many of you already do. It’s the, “I’m-going-to-plug-every-hole-on-my-face-in-hopes-of-not-making-an-explosion-loud-enough-to-draw-attention-to-myself” sneeze.

It’s the biggest farce I’ve ever seen in my life. How in the hell can a human un-train himself from an involuntary response? How is that normal? You forcibly close your mouth and plug your nose when it was evolutionarily designed to be opened during such an event. The point of a sneeze is to kick that shit out, not keep it in. Putting up a defense barrier of clenched teeth and pinched nostrils is horrible … inhumane, even.

Imagine what it sounds like when you’re getting choked. Okay. Now imagine that the choker just let you go: UGHNNN-uhhhhh. That’s the sound I hear from people who choose this method of sneezing. If you don’t understand the point of a sneeze, then you are a lost cause in my eyes.

My friend Matt said, “The plug-up sneeze is designed to prevent the spread of sneeze-juice. It’s also a more humble of the sneeze varieties.” All right. Fair point. The plug-up sneezers are trying to save the world by keeping their sneeze-juice inside – those people sitting in front of you appreciate your unprompted magnanimity.

But for every humanitarian effort, there is a major setback looming around the corner. Let me explain: When you close two out of the three holes in your body, the last hole is bound to explode.

Let that baby simmer in your mind for a moment. Yes. That’s exactly what I meant. And it’s also my worst nightmare. How can you plug-up sneezers not be afraid of letting out a massive fart in the middle of an auditorium acoustically engineered to capture, amplify, and reflect sound? Let alone one that is chock full of over 500 silent and cynical people? Are you mad? The fart is GUARANTEED to be loud if it’s shooting out your ass with that much force!

By the way, don’t be fooled into thinking it can be the great “silent” escape. It’s like Russian roulette, but in this version of the game, the bullets take your dignity. How can you take such a devastatingly gaseous high-risk gamble? Is it really worth it?

DAVE KARIMI enjoys thinking about Narwhals. Have you seen these things? If a unicorn somehow fucked a whale real good, you’d get a Narwhal. No lie. E-mail him at dkarimi@ucdavis.edu to let him know if he’s tickling your funny bone. Please?

As California faces unprecedented budget shortfalls, the state’s higher education system is suffering like never before. What began as a promise of free education for all residents a generation ago now languishes under budget cuts and fee increases.

Despite these troubled economic times, a way to right this wrong exists. Instituting an oil severance tax – a tax on oil drilling – could bring $1 billion to California’s higher education system.

This idea has been thrown around several times in the past 30 years but is gathering steam once again in the form of a bill authored by Representative Alberto Torrico (D-Fremont).

Perhaps the most effective argument in favor of this tax is plain common sense. Of the 22 major oil-producing states in the U.S., California is the only one without a similar tax. Oil is the most valuable natural resource in history, and to give oil companies free reign to extract it without ensuring that Californians see some benefit is insanity.

Oil companies usually respond to bills like this with dramatic warnings about California losing jobs and companies moving elsewhere to avoid taxes. This may very well be true in just about any other business except oil production. Companies must drill where the oil is; there’s no getting around that, no matter what the tax code is. If California’s current oil executives don’t like it, there’s a long list of petroleum companies looking for new fields to develop.

This said, Torrico’s bill isn’t perfect. It mandates that 60 percent of the revenue go to the California State University system, 30 percent to the University of California and 10 percent to community colleges. The bill claims the proportions are based on need, but provides little explanation of the breakdown. According to the Legislative Analyst’s Office, the breakdown doesn’t reflect the relative amount of state support the institutions currently receive, the student populations or the cost to educate students.

Without further explanation, it’s difficult to justify giving the majority of these much-needed funds to a single branch of the education system. Nonetheless, the bill would bring vital funds to the UC, CSU and community college systems and should be taken seriously.

The 2010 Amgen Tour of California marks a significant moment for our little City of Davis.

Last year the race literally and figuratively took Davis by storm, flooding the streets with hundreds of people and a lot of relentless rain. Davis residents, students and people from out of town flocked to the event, even in the cold, to watch the race and get a chance to see Lance Armstrong. Let us repeat – THE Lance Armstrong. Neither the freezing rain nor Armstrong’s stolen bike could detract from the event; these incidents only added to the excitement.

The participating cyclists will be getting more and more serious as the Tour de France approaches this year. The professional cycling race was moved from February to May 17 and falls significantly closer to the Tour de France. This makes the Amgen Tour arguably the last major event before the participants head off to France and one of the last chances they will have to get into the racing mindset.

Like last year, the prestige of the cyclists will attract enormous attention. Armstrong will be back, along with other notable contenders: Levi Leipheimer, Dave Zabriskie and George Hincapie.

Not only will people make a special trip to our neighborhood from surrounding areas but the city could attract many international visitors as well. The weather is expected to be a bit nicer, although that did not stop bikers and onlookers in the past.

The event has great magnitude for California, and it is a unique honor for Davis to host. For a race of this enormity to be in the midst of the city’s specialty restaurants, boutiques and quaint downtown life is pretty special. Not to mention, downtown businesses and the local economy will see a boost.

Even though we may be a small city, Davisites can see why the most bicycle-friendly city in the nation is the perfect location for the second stage of the race. Hosting the race will give us another reason to appreciate what makes being a part of the Davis community so great.

In simpler words, it’s kind of a big deal.