Here at The Aggie, we’ve made our New Year’s resolutions. After a tumultuous 2015, we’re looking forward to continuing to contribute our voice to the Davis community. These are some of the most important issues the Editorial Board wishes to see addressed in 2016:

Less sexual assault

Sexual violence is a huge issue on college campuses. In 2015, The Aggie published editorials on this topic and articles about sexual assault in local parks. But 2015 also saw the introduction of a campus-wide campaign aimed to stop sexually violence at UC Davis. The Editorial Board hopes that in 2016, we see fewer stories about rape on campus and more stories about the work that students are doing to create campaigns about consent and bystander intervention.

We hope that the discussion around sexual assault moves away from a victim-blaming mentality and toward a proactive, educational approach to reducing sexual assault in colleges. Teaching students about consent is helpful; instructing women to dress more conservatively to avoid getting raped is not. It’s good to create a dialogue around why language like “I raped that midterm” is problematic; it’s harmful to simply tell women to sign up for self-defense classes so they’re better prepared to protect themselves from sexual assault.

This isn’t an issue that’s going to go away on its own, and the Editorial Board commends the important steps taken in 2015 to curb sexual violence at UC Davis. It’s up to us, as a campus, to ensure that this dialogue and discussion continues in 2016 and on.

Better benefits to UC subcontractors, employees

In a move sure to please labor rights activists, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo issued an executive order on Monday that will raise the hourly minimum wage of state university workers to $15.

Last year, University of California President Janet Napolitano announced a plan that will raise the wage of workers here to the same amount by 2017.

Cuomo and Napolitano’s efforts are some of the most significant in a nationwide movement that aims to shift power back to employees hamstrung by decade long declines in their power.

Challenges remain. Governor Jerry Brown vetoed a bill last year that would have increased protections and benefits for subcontracted employees working at the UC, a move supported by Napolitano. These workers, who are not hired directly by the UC, ensure that day-to-day operations, like custodial, food and security services, run smoothly. Their work is largely the same as their UC-hired counterparts.

And yet too many of these employees, without specific protections under the law, will continue to work without the security of pensions and representation. In 2016, the UC should buck labor trends by ensuring that all workers who contribute to its communities earn a living wage.

Safer world for the LGBTQIA community

Each year, steps are taken to create a more accepting and approachable world for the LGBTQIA community. In 2015, the Supreme Court legalized gay marriage in the United States, bringing in an entirely new era for America, and for the world. On a smaller, yet equally important note, Napolitano issued a directive on June 10 requiring the conversion of all single-stall bathrooms on UC campuses into gender-neutral ones by February 2016.

Although unprecedented and in the right direction, these happenings still do not ensure a safe environment for LGBTQIA students and people. In 2015, more transgender people were killed than any year on record, and according to the Human Rights Campaign, 92 percent of young LGBT people reported hearing negative comments about the LGBT community at school, on the Internet and from their peers.

In this new year, the Editorial Board encourages UC Davis students to remember that no one deserves to feel unsafe for being who they are, let alone in a classroom or with friends. We encourage students to take action when overhearing negative comments about any person – whatever their identity – and to welcome the use of preferred gender pronouns. We also hope those who are interested in educating themselves about these topics visit the LGBTQIA Resource Center and utilize its information to better the campus and wider community.

Stronger commitment from ASUCD

In the last year, four ASUCD senators resigned from their posts, raising questions about whether recent uncontested elections have led to a handful of elected student leaders who are less committed to their positions.

It is vital that all future elected officials stand by the explicit commitments of their respective posts. With some legitimate exceptions, representatives have a responsibility to show the office the respect it deserves, approaching their duties with preparation, optimism and sincerity, knowing full well what is expected of them over the course of their service.

Most recently, 16 candidates participated in the fall quarter elections, a massive improvement from the uncontested debacle held during last year’s winter quarter race. The Editorial Board hopes that political participation and voter turnout will only continue to rise over the coming year, contributing to a healthy and invested student body.

Tightened gun safety laws

2015 was marred with mass shootings, including the Nov. 27 massacre in Colorado Springs, Colo. and the Dec. 2 attack in San Bernardino, Calif. According to a report by the Washington Post, the latter attack marked the 355th mass shooting in 2015. With only 365 days in a year, this number is almost unfathomable. So far it seems that 2016 may be off to a better start.

On Jan. 5, President Obama announced his plan to take executive action toward limiting gun violence in the U.S. through conducting more thorough background checks, tightening requirements for the selling of firearms, creating safer firearm technology, implementing current gun laws on a wider scale and increasing mental health services. The Editorial Board hopes that UC Davis students and other students across the country continue to critically evaluate current gun safety laws to make campuses and other public places safer.

More responsible UC investments, partnerships

While the UC system’s recent divestment from three of the country’s largest private prison corporations was a good step toward making a public university representative of its student body, there are still many other private companies that the university should look into divesting from in the coming year.

The UC Davis campus alone partners with several companies that provide services and funds for private prisons across the country. While partnering with these companies provides UC Davis with a huge chunk of income to spend on bettering the campus, students and administrators alike fail to acknowledge that UC Davis, along with the rest of the schools in the UC system, are supposed to be public universities and should be treated as such. The Editorial Board hopes that the UC will strive to partner with and invest in companies that reflect the values of the UC student body.

My name is Evan Lilley, and I’m here to introduce readers of The California Aggie to my new and “completely necessary” humor column. Some may doubt why the newspaper actually needs such a column when there are plenty of other good sources of satirical news such as The Onion or “The Daily Show.” Good point. However, this column will have some important aspects worth noting.

What makes this column special is that it will address issues that are relevant to UC Davis students, such as “why everyone looks so depressed on morning bus routes,” and whether the row of exotically named coffees at the CoHo are all just one batch with different labels to make it look like there is variety.

This column, along with columns from Ethan Victor and Alex Guzman — the other humorists — will include amazing stories that few journalists are willing to cover or discuss (primarily because they are absolutely false). It’s one thing to read about campus clubs hosting fundraisers and the latest football scores, but it’s another thing to investigate the Vampire Union Strikes against exclusion from blood drives and the growing epidemic of Vacuamanuaphobia (fear-of-not-having-a-smartphone-in your-hand). You might even read about conspiracies of the secret Unitrans bus line that sends you back in time to 1961, or tales of the horrid Arboretum Swamp Monster who comes out at night to run the Theater and Dance Department. These are the kinds of stories I promise to bring to the students of UC Davis.

I am a Senior in Studio Art and Film who was raised right here in Davis. Originally, I worked at the Aggie as a part-time cartoonist. My exploration into writing humor happened thanks to the encouragement of my professors. Whenever I handed in an essay for class assignment, they would ask me “Is this some kind of joke” and then they would label it “Funny” with a large red “F.”

This winter quarter, I intend to serve the Aggie and the campus to the best of my ability, and that I hope that you, the readers, will enjoy what I have to offer.

You can reach EVAN LILLEY at etlilley@ucdavis.edu.

With primary election season less than a month away, both Democrats and Republicans remain uncertain over who will become their eventual nominee. But one thing is clear: Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump have sent shockwaves across the country with their widespread popularity. So how are these candidates, often considered renegades by members of their own party, attracting support from all walks of life?

Not since the appearance of then-senator Barack Obama in 2008 and Ron Paul in 2012 have disillusioned voters seen such anti-establishment candidates (depending on your definition of the establishment) as genuine alternatives to politics as usual.

Trump and Sanders have been successful because of their ability to appeal to those who have stopped voting, or who feel at odds with the modern political establishment. While Sanders seems to be the leading voice on income inequality and mass incarceration, Trump brings public discourse towards our immigration system and Islamic extremism. In the eyes of their supporters, Trump and Sanders are raising issues that have, for the most part, disappeared from the national dialogue in the last few years.

Each candidate sheds light on issues that transcend party politics. They are issues that highlight what regular citizens are concerned about, and feel politicians have ignored. Despite how partisan certain views towards gun laws or Islamic extremism have become in recent years, both candidates are getting their opinions heard by people beyond their target audience. Their campaigns are utilizing media to widely disperse their viewpoints on issues long in need of solutions.

Sanders and Trump alike speak on their hot button issues with the audacity to voice their own opinions. To his supporters, what Trump says — on Islam, immigration and terrorism — has been left unsaid far too long. On the other side, Sanders has reinvigorated the debate on income inequality to a level unseen since the height of the Occupy Wall Street movement.

Some may argue that the each candidate is running on a platform that will do nothing but harm their respective party. Bernie Sanders has been compared to Jeremy Corbyn, the new leader of the U.K. Labour Party. Both men are viewed in terms of their socialist, left-wing views. In places like the United Kingdom, Corbyn has been called “unelectable” for bringing his party to the hard left, as many people claim that his platform is unpopular to large swathes of the populace. But Bernie Sanders’ platform hits home in all parts of our society, putting to doubt this need to remain moderate to be electable.

Trump has been compared to U.K. Independence Party leader Nigel Farage. Both men have used their hard-line voices to bring media attention toward immigration issues in a way that most people and the political elite would be careful to avoid. The appeal of Trump and Farage to their constituencies comes in part from each politician being unafraid to offend people in a rancorous, but real, debate over immigration.

It has also been said that Sanders and Trump are ploys by their respective party’s leadership to bring disillusioned voters to the polling station. Indeed, both candidates seem poised to increase party turnout in key target demographics. For example, blue-collar workers or college-educated adults may determine who steps into the White House in January 2017. But can we realistically see Trump or Sanders in the White House? Or does the populist platform just exist to re-engage a disenchanted part of the electorate tired of mainstream media, political classism and Washington inefficiency?

With all this talk about empowering voters, we will ultimately have to wait to see if either candidate can demonstrate enough power in the primaries to give him a chance to have his platform discussed in the general election. But it remains true that a scenario in which either Sanders or Trump is elected will disprove many theories about radical agendas. It will suggest that candidates with views closer to the fringes are not left or right-wing nut cases, but alternatives that can offer genuine change to the American political landscape.

Justin Chau is a new opinion columnist for the Aggie. Born and raised in San Francisco, he grew up watching the 49ers and Giants. His columns will deal with the dynamic nature of American politics as the 2016 election gets underway. A keen observer of the United Kingdom, Chau will also include tidbits from the political scene of America’s special cousin.

You can reach JUSTIN CHAU at jtchau@ucdavis.edu.