who has the power in an oligarchy government

Oligarchy (from Greek ὀλιγαρχία (oligarkhía); from ὀλίγος (olígos), meaning 'few', and ἄρχω (arkho), meaning 'to rule or to command')[1][2][3] is a form of power structure in which power rests with a small number of people. These people might be distinguished by nobility, wealth, family ties, education or corporate, religious or military control. Such states are often controlled by families who typically pass their influence from one generation to the next, but inheritance is not a necessary condition for the application of this term.

Oligarchy

Throughout history, oligarchies have often been tyrannical, relying on public obedience or oppression to exist. Aristotle pioneered the use of the term as a synonym for rule by the rich,[4] for which another term commonly used today is plutocracy.

Especially during the fourth century BCE, after the restoration of democracy from oligarchical coups, the Athenians used the drawing of lots for selecting government officers to counteract what the Athenians saw as a tendency toward oligarchy in government if a professional governing class were allowed to use their skills for their own benefit.[5][page needed] They drew lots from large groups of adult volunteers that pick selection technique for civil servants performing judicial, executive, and administrative functions (archai, boulē, and hēliastai).[6] They even used lots for posts, such as judges and jurors in the political courts (nomothetai), which had the power to overrule the Assembly.[7]

The exclusive consolidation of power by a dominant religious or ethnic minority has also been described as a form of oligarchy.[8] Examples of this system include South Africa under apartheid, Liberia under Americo-Liberians, the Sultanate of Zanzibar, and Rhodesia, where the installation of oligarchic rule by the descendants of foreign settlers were primarily regarded as a legacy of various forms of colonialism.[8]

Since the collapse of the Soviet Union in December 1991, privately owned Russia-based multinational corporations, including producers of petroleum, natural gas, and metal have, in the view of some analysts, led to the rise of Russian oligarchs.[9]

Some contemporary authors have characterized current conditions in the United States as oligarchic in nature.[10][11] Simon Johnson wrote that "the reemergence of an American financial oligarchy is quite recent", a structure which he delineated as being the "most advanced" in the world.[12] Jeffrey A. Winters wrote that "oligarchy and democracy operate within a single system, and American politics is a daily display of their interplay."[13] The top 1% of the U.S. population by wealth in 2007 had a larger share of total income than at any time since 1928.[14] In 2011, according to PolitiFact and others, the top 400 wealthiest Americans "have more wealth than half of all Americans combined."[15][16][17][18]

In 1998 Bob Herbert of The New York Times referred to modern American plutocrats as "The Donor Class"[19][20] (list of top donors)[21] and defined the class, for the first time,[22] as "a tiny group—just one-quarter of 1 percent of the population—and it is not representative of the rest of the nation. But its money buys plenty of access."[19]

French economist Thomas Piketty states in his 2013 book, Capital in the Twenty-First Century, that "the risk of a drift towards oligarchy is real and gives little reason for optimism about where the United States is headed."[23]

A study conducted by political scientists Martin Gilens of Princeton University and Benjamin Page of Northwestern University was released in April 2014,[24] which stated that their "analyses suggest that majorities of the American public actually have little influence over the policies our government adopts." The study analyzed nearly 1,800 policies enacted by the US government between 1981 and 2002 and compared them to the expressed preferences of the American public as opposed to wealthy Americans and large special interest groups.[25] It found that wealthy individuals and organizations representing business interests have substantial political influence, while average citizens and mass-based interest groups have little to none. The study did concede that "Americans do enjoy many features central to democratic governance, such as regular elections, freedom of speech and association, and a widespread (if still contested) franchise." Gilens and Page do not characterize the US as an "oligarchy" per se; however, they do apply the concept of "civil oligarchy" as used by Jeffrey Winters with respect to the US. Winters has posited a comparative theory of "oligarchy" in which the wealthiest citizens – even in a "civil oligarchy" like the United States – dominate policy concerning crucial issues of wealth- and income-protection.[26]

Gilens says that average citizens only get what they want if wealthy Americans and business-oriented interest groups also want it; and that when a policy favored by the majority of the American public is implemented, it is usually because the economic elites did not oppose it.[27] Other studies have questioned the Page and Gilens study.[28][29][30]

In a 2015 interview, former President Jimmy Carter stated that the United States is now "an oligarchy with unlimited political bribery", due to the Citizens United ruling, which effectively removed limits on donations to political candidates.[31]


who won the ncaa women's lacrosse championship

James Madison is the champion, having defeated Boston College in the 2018 NCAA Division I Women's Lacrosse Championship final.

The annual NCAA Division I Women's Lacrosse Championship tournament has determined the top women's lacrosse team in the NCAA Division I since 1982.

Lacrosse was one of twelve women's sports added to the NCAA championship program for the 1981-82 school year, as the NCAA engaged in battle with the AIAW for sole governance of women's collegiate sports. The AIAW continued to conduct its established championship program in the same twelve (and other) sports; however, after a year of dual women's championships, the AIAW held its last championship in 1982 and ceased operation.

Separate championships are held for Division II, founded in 2001, and Division III, founded in 1985.[1]

See Association for Intercollegiate Athletics for Women Champions for the women's lacrosse champions from 1978 to 1982. NOTE: In 1982 there were both NCAA and AIAW Division I champions.


what was alaska before it became a state

When Congress passed the Second Organic Act in 1912, Alaska was reorganized, and renamed the Territory of Alaska.[11] By 1916, its population was about 58,000. James Wickersham, a Delegate to Congress, introduced Alaska's first statehood bill, but it failed due to the small population and lack of interest from Alaskans. Even President Warren G. Harding's visit in 1923 could not create widespread interest in statehood. Under the conditions of the Second Organic Act, Alaska had been split into four divisions. The most populous of the divisions, whose capital was Juneau, wondered if it could become a separate state from the other three. Government control was a primary concern, with the territory having 52 federal agencies governing it.

History of Alaska

The history of Alaska dates back to the Upper Paleolithic period (around 14,000 BC), when wanderer groups crossed the Bering land bridge into what is now western Alaska. At the time of European contact by the Russian explorers, the area was populated by Alaska Native groups. The name "Alaska" derives from the Aleut word Alaxsxaq (also spelled Alyeska), meaning "mainland" (literally, "the object toward which the action of the sea is directed").[1]

The U.S. purchased Alaska from Russia in 1867. In the 1890s, gold rushes in Alaska and the nearby Yukon Territory brought thousands of miners and settlers to Alaska. Alaska was granted territorial status in 1912 by the United States of America.

In 1942, two of the outer Aleutian Islands—Attu and Kiska—were occupied by the Japanese and their recovery for the U.S. became a matter of national pride. The construction of military bases contributed to the population growth of some Alaskan cities.

Alaska was granted U.S. statehood on January 3, 1959.

In 1964, the massive "Good Friday earthquake" killed 131 people and leveled several villages.

The 1968 discovery of oil at Prudhoe Bay and the 1977 completion of the Trans-Alaska Pipeline led to an oil boom. In 1989, the Exxon Valdez hit a reef in Prince William Sound, spilling between 11 and 34 million US gallons (42,000 and 130,000 m³) of crude oil over 1,100 miles (1,600 km) of coastline. Today, the battle between philosophies of development and conservation is seen in the contentious debate over oil drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

Paleolithic families moved into northwestern North America sometime between 16,000 and 10,000Â BC across the Bering land bridge in  Alaska.[2] Alaska became populated by the Inuit and a variety of Native American groups. Today, early Alaskans are divided into several main groups: the Southeastern Coastal Indians (the Tlingit, Haida, and Tsimshian), the Athabascans, the Aleut, and the two groups of Eskimos, the Inupiat and the Yup'ik.[3]

The coastal migrants from Asia were probably the first wave of humans to cross the Bering Land Bridge in western Alaska, and many of them initially settled in the interior of what is now Canada. The Tlingit were the most numerous of this group, claiming most of the coastal Panhandle by the time of European contact and are the northernmost of the group of advanced cultures of the Pacific Northwest Coast renowned for its complex art and political systems and the ceremonial and legal system known as the potlatch. The southern portion of Prince of Wales Island was settled by the Haidas fleeing persecution by other Haidas from the Queen Charlotte Islands (which are now named Haida Gwaii and part of British Columbia). The Aleuts settled the islands of the Aleutian chain approximately 10,000 years ago.

Cultural and subsistence practices varied widely among native groups, who were spread across vast geographical distances.

On some islands and parts of the Alaskan peninsula, groups of traders had been capable of relatively peaceful coexistence with the local inhabitants. Other groups could not manage the tensions and perpetrated exactions. Hostages were taken, individuals were enslaved, families were split up, and other individuals were forced to leave their villages and settle elsewhere. In addition, eighty percent of the Aleut population was destroyed by Old World diseases, against which they had no immunity, during the first two generations of Russian contact.[4]

In 1784, Grigory Ivanovich Shelikhov arrived in Three Saints Bay on Kodiak Island, operating the Shelikhov-Golikov Company.[5] Shelikhov and his men killed hundreds of indigenous Koniag, then founded the first permanent Russian settlement in Alaska on the island's Three Saints Bay. By 1788 a number of Russian settlements had been established by Shelikhov and others over a large region, including the mainland areas around Cook Inlet.

The Russians had gained control of the habitats of the most valuable sea otters, the Kurilian-Kamchatkan and Aleutian sea otters. Their fur was thicker, glossier, and blacker than those of sea otters on the Pacific Northwest Coast and California. The Russians, therefore, advanced to the Northwest Coast only after the superior varieties of sea otters were depleted, around 1788. The Russian entry to the Northwest Coast was slow, however, due to a shortage of ships and sailors. Yakutat Bay was reached in 1794 and the settlement of Slavorossiya was built there in 1795. Reconnaissance of the coast as far as the Queen Charlotte Islands was carried out by James Shields, a British employee of the Golikov-Shelikhov Company. In 1795 Alexander Baranov, who had been hired in 1790 to manage Shelikhov's fur enterprise, sailed into Sitka Sound, claiming it for Russia. Hunting parties arrived in the following years and by 1800 three-quarters of Russian America's sea otter skins were coming from the Sitka Sound area. In July 1799 Baranov returned on the brig Oryol and established the settlement of Arkhangelsk. It was destroyed by Tlingits in 1802 but rebuilt nearby in 1804 and given the name Novo-Arkhangelsk (New Archangel). It soon become the primary settlement and colonial capital of Russian America. After the Alaska Purchase, it was renamed Sitka, the first capital of Alaska Territory.[6]

The Russian Orthodox religion (with its rituals and sacred texts, translated into Aleut at a very early stage) had been informally introduced, in the 1740sâ€“1780s, by the fur traders. During his settlement of Three Saints Bay in 1784, Shelikov introduced the first resident missionaries and clergymen. This missionary activity would continue into the 19th century, ultimately becoming the most visible trace of the Russian colonial period in contemporary Alaska.

Spanish claims to Alaska dated to the papal bull of 1493, but never involved colonization, forts, or settlements. Instead there were various naval expeditions to explore the region and claim it for Spain. In 1775, Bruno de Hezeta led an expedition; The Sonora, under Bodega y Quadra, ultimately reached latitude 58° north, entered Sitka Sound and formally claimed the region for Spain. The 1779 expedition of Ignacio de Arteaga and Bodega y Quadra reached Port Etches on Hinchinbrook Island, and entered Prince William Sound. They reached a latitude of 61° north, the most northern point obtained by Spain.

In 1788, Esteban José Martínez and Gonzalo López de Haro visited Russian settlements at Unalaska.[7]

The Nootka Crisis of 1789 almost led to a war between Britain and Spain, when Britain rejected Spanish claims to lands in British Columbia and Spain seized some British ships. The crisis was resolved by the Nootka Convention, which provided that the northwest coast would be open to traders of both Britain and Spain, that the captured British ships would be returned and an indemnity paid. It was a victory for Britain and Spain effectively withdrew from the North Pacific.[8] It transferred its claims in the region to the United States in the Adams-Onís Treaty of 1819. Today, Spain's Alaskan legacy endures as little more than a few place names, among these the Malaspina Glacier and the towns of Valdez and Cordova.

British settlements at the time in Alaska consisted of a few scattered trading outposts, with most settlers arriving by sea. Captain James Cook, midway through his third and final voyage of exploration in 1778, sailed along the west coast of North America aboard HMS Resolution, from then-Spanish California all the way to the Bering Strait. During the trip, he discovered what came to be known as Cook Inlet (named in honor of Cook in 1794 by George Vancouver, who had served under his command) in Alaska. The Bering Strait proved to be impassable, although the Resolution and its companion ship HMS Discovery made several attempts to sail through it. The ships left the straits to return to Hawaii in 1779.

Cook's expedition spurred the British to increase their sailings along the northwest coast, following in the wake of the Spanish. Alaska-based posts owned by the Hudson's Bay Company, operated at Fort Yukon, on the Yukon River, Fort Durham (aka Fort Taku) at the mouth of the Taku River, and Fort Stikine, near the mouth of the Stikine River (associated with Wrangell throughout the early 19th century).

In 1799, Shelikhov's son-in-law, Nikolay Petrovich Rezanov, acquired a monopoly on the American fur trade from Czar Paul I and formed the Russian-American Company. As part of the deal, the Tsar expected the company to establish new settlements in Alaska and carry out an expanded colonization program.

By 1804, Alexander Baranov, now manager of the Russianâ€“American Company, had consolidated the company's hold on the American fur trade following his victory over the local Tlingit clan at the Battle of Sitka. Despite these efforts the Russians never fully colonized Alaska. The Russian monopoly on trade was also being weakened by the Hudson's Bay Company, which set up a post on the southern edge of Russian America in 1833.

In 1818 management of the Russian-American Company was turned over to the Imperial Russian Navy and the Ukase of 1821 banned foreigners from participating in the Alaskan economy. It soon entered into the Anglo-Russian Convention of 1825 which allowed British merchants to trade in Alaska. The Convention also settled most of the border between Alaska and British North America.

The Russo-American Treaty of 1824, which banned American merchants above 54Â° 40' north latitude, was widely ignored and the Russians' hold on Alaska weakened further.

At the height of Russian America, the Russian population reached 700.

Although the midâ€“19th century were not a good time for Russians in Alaska, conditions improved for the coastal Alaska Natives who had survived contact. The Tlingits were never conquered and continued to wage war on the Russians into the 1850s. The Aleuts, though faced with a decreasing population in the 1840s, ultimately rebounded.

Financial difficulties in Russia, the desire to keep Alaska out of British hands, and the low profits of trade with Alaskan settlements all contributed to Russia's willingness to sell its possessions in North America. At the instigation of U.S. Secretary of State William Seward, the United States Senate approved the purchase of Alaska from Russia for $7,200,000 on August 1, 1867. This purchase was popularly known in the U.S. as "Seward's Folly,", "Seward's Icebox," or "Andrew Johnson's Polar Bear Garden", and was unpopular for some people at the time. Later discovery of gold and oil would show it to be a worthwhile one.  Scholars debate whether the purchase of Alaska was a financially profitable for the federal Treasury itself, apart from its benefits to Alaskans and to businesses, and to national defense.[9]

After Russian America was sold to the U.S., all the holdings of the Russianâ€“American Company were liquidated.

The United States flag was raised on October 18, 1867, now called Alaska Day, and the region changed from the Julian calendar to the Gregorian calendar. Therefore, for residents, Friday, October 6, 1867 was followed by Friday, October 18, 1867â€”two Fridays in a row because of the 12 day shift in the calendar minus one day for the date-line shift.[10]

During the Department era, from 1867 to 1884, Alaska was variously under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Army (until 1877), the United States Department of the Treasury from 1877 to 1879, and the U.S. Navy from 1879 to 1884. Civil administration of Alaska began in 1877 under the United States Treasury Department. A Collector of Customs was appointed by the President of the United States. The Collector was the highest-ranking official of the United States government in Alaska and de facto Governor. Henry C, DeAhna, a former Union Army Officer and Mottrom D. Ball, a former Confederate Army officer, were the first individuals to serve as Collector of Customs.

When Alaska was first purchased, most of its land remained unexplored. In 1865, Western Union laid a telegraph line across Alaska to the Bering Strait where it would connect, under water, with an Asian line. It also conducted the first scientific studies of the region and produced the first map of the entire Yukon River. The Alaska Commercial Company and the military also contributed to the growing exploration of Alaska in the last decades of the 19th century, building trading posts along the Interior's many rivers.

In 1884, the region was organized and the name was changed from the Department of Alaska to the District of Alaska. At the time, legislators in Washington, D.C., were occupied with post-Civil War reconstruction issues, and had little time to dedicate to Alaska. In 1896, the discovery of gold in Yukon Territory in neighboring Canada, brought many thousands of miners and new settlers to Alaska, and very quickly ended the nation's four year economic depression. Although it was uncertain whether gold would also be found in Alaska, Alaska greatly profited because it was along the easiest transportation route to the Yukon goldfields. Numerous new cities, such as Skagway, Alaska, owe their existence to a gold rush in Canada. No history of Alaska would be complete without mention of Soapy Smith, the crime boss confidence man who operated the largest criminal empire in gold rush era Alaska, until he was shot down by vigilantes in the famed Shootout on Juneau Wharf. Today, he is known as "Alaska's Outlaw."

In 1899, gold was found in Alaska itself in Nome, and several towns subsequently began to be built, such as Fairbanks and Ruby. In 1902, the Alaska Railroad began to be built, which would connect from Seward to Fairbanks by 1914, though Alaska still does not have a railroad connecting it to the lower 48 states today. Still, an overland route was built, cutting transportation times to the contiguous states by days. The industries of copper mining, fishing, and canning began to become popular in the early 20th century, with 10 canneries in some major towns.

In 1903, a boundary dispute with Canada was finally resolved.

By the turn of the 20th century, commercial fishing was gaining a foothold in the Aleutian Islands. Packing houses salted cod and herring, and salmon canneries were opened. Another commercial occupation, whaling, continued with no regard for over-hunting. They pushed the bowhead whales to the edge of extinction for the oil in their tissue. The Aleuts soon suffered severe problems due to the depletion of fur seals and sea otters which they needed for survival. As well as requiring the flesh for food, they also used the skins to cover their boats, without which they could not hunt. The Americans also expanded into the Interior and Arctic Alaska, exploiting the furbearers, fish, and other game on which Natives depended.

Then, in 1920, the Jones Act required U.S.-flagged vessels to be built in the United States, owned by U.S. citizens, and documented under the laws of the United States. All goods entering or leaving Alaska had to be transported by American carriers and shipped to Seattle prior to further shipment, making Alaska dependent on Washington. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the provision of the Constitution saying one state should not hold sway over another's commerce did not apply because Alaska was only a territory. The prices Seattle shipping businesses charged began to rise to take advantage of the situation. This situation created an atmosphere of enmity among Alaskans who watched the wealth being generated by their labors flowing into the hands of Seattle business holdings.

In July 1923 Warren Harding became the first sitting President to visit Alaska as part of his Pacific Northwest 'Voyage of Understanding." Harding arrived by boat from Seattle and made nine stops in the Territory via train which went from Seward to Fairbanks. On July 15 Harding drove in a golden railroad spike at Nenana. The train car in which he rode now sits in Fairbanks' Pioneer Park.[12]

The Depression caused prices of fish and copper, which were vital to Alaska's economy at the time, to decline. Wages were dropped and the workforce decreased by more than half. In 1935, President Franklin D. Roosevelt thought Americans from agricultural areas could be transferred to Alaska's Matanuska-Susitna Valley for a fresh chance at agricultural self-sustainment. Colonists were largely from northern states, such as Michigan, Wisconsin, and Minnesota under the belief that only those who grew up with climates similar to that of Alaska's could handle settler life there. The United Congo Improvement Association asked the president to settle 400 African-American farmers in Alaska, saying that the territory would offer full political rights, but racial prejudice and the belief that only those from northern states would make suitable colonists caused the proposal to fail.

The exploration and settlement of Alaska would not have been possible without the development of the aircraft, which allowed for the influx of settlers into the state's interior, and rapid transportation of people and supplies throughout. However, due to the unfavorable weather conditions of the state, and high ratio of pilots-to-population, over 1700 aircraft wreck sites are scattered throughout its domain. Numerous wrecks also trace their origins to the military build-up of the state during both World War II and the Cold War.

During World War II, two of the outer Aleutian Islands—Attu and Kiska—were invaded and occupied by Japanese troops. They were the only part of the continental territory of the United States to be occupied by the enemy during the war. Their recovery became a matter of national pride.

On June 3, 1942, the Japanese launched an air attack on Dutch Harbor, a U.S. naval base on Unalaska Island, but were repelled by U.S. forces.[13] A few days later, the Japanese landed on the islands of Kiska and Attu, where they overwhelmed Attu villagers. The villagers were taken to Japan, where they were interned for the remainder of the war. Aleuts from the Pribilofs and Aleutian villages were evacuated by the United States to Southeast Alaska. Many suffered during their two years internment there, and the federal government, charged with their care, provided inadequate health care, food, and shelter.[14]

Attu was regained in May 1943 after two weeks of intense fighting and 3,929 American casualties:[15] 549 killed, 1148 injured and 1200 severe cold injuries, 614 to disease and 318 dead of miscellaneous causes,[16] The U.S. then turned its attention to the other occupied island, Kiska. From June through August, a multitude of bombs were dropped on the tiny island, though the Japanese ultimately escaped via transport ships. After the war, the Native Attuans who had survived their internment were resettled to Atka by the federal government, which considered their home villages too remote to defend.

In 1942, the Alaskaâ€“Canada Military Highway was completed, in part to form an overland supply route to the Soviet Union on the other side of the Bering Strait.[17] Running from Great Falls, Montana, to Fairbanks, the road was the first stable link between Alaska and the rest of America. The construction of military bases, such as the Adak base, contributed to the population growth of some Alaskan cities. Anchorage almost doubled in size, from 4,200 people in 1940 to 8,000 in 1945.

By the turn of the 20th century, a movement pushing for Alaska statehood began, but in the contiguous 48 states, legislators were worried that Alaska's population was too sparse, distant, and isolated, and its economy was too unstable for it to be a worthwhile addition to the United States.[18] World War II and the Japanese invasion highlighted Alaska's strategic importance, and the issue of statehood was taken more seriously, but it was the discovery of oil at Swanson River on the Kenai Peninsula that dispelled the image of Alaska as a weak, dependent region. President Dwight D. Eisenhower signed the Alaska Statehood Act into United States law on July 4, 1958,[19] which paved the way for Alaska's admission into the Union on January 3, 1959. Juneau, the territorial capital, continued as state capital, and William A. Egan was sworn in as the first governor.

Alaska does not have counties unlike every other American state except Louisiana.  (Louisiana has parishes). Instead, it is divided into 16 boroughs and one "unorganized borough" made up of all land not within any borough. Boroughs have organized area-wide governments, but within the unorganized borough, where there is no such government, services are provided by the state. The unorganized borough is divided into artificially-created census areas by the United States Census Bureau for statistical purposes only.[neutrality is disputed]

On March 27, 1964 the Good Friday earthquake struck South-central Alaska, churning the earth for four minutes with a magnitude of 9.2. The earthquake was one of the most powerful ever recorded and killed 139 people.[20] Most of them were drowned by the tsunamis that tore apart the towns of Valdez and Chenega. Throughout the Prince William Sound region, towns and ports were destroyed and land was uplifted or shoved downward. The uplift destroyed salmon streams, as the fish could no longer jump the various newly created barriers to reach their spawning grounds. Ports at Valdez and Cordova were beyond repair, and the fires destroyed what the mudslides had not. At Valdez, an Alaska Steamship Company ship was lifted by a huge wave over the docks and out to sea, but most hands survived. At Turnagain Arm, off Cook Inlet, the incoming water destroyed trees and caused cabins to sink into the mud. On Kodiak, a tsunami wiped out the villages of Afognak, Old Harbor, and Kaguyak and damaged other communities, while Seward lost its harbor. Despite the extent of the catastrophe, Alaskans rebuilt many of the communities.

"North to the Future" is the official state motto of Alaska, adopted in 1967 for the centennial of the Alaska Purchase. As one of the events leading up to the celebration, the Alaska Centennial Commission sponsored a contest in 1963 to come up with a centennial motto and emblem that would express the unique character of the State of Alaska. They offered a $300.00 (which is about $2000 in 2010 dollars[21]) prize to the winning entry. 761 entries were received by the Commission. In December 1963, the commission announced that they had selected Juneau journalist Richard Peter's suggestion. He stated that the motto "...is a reminder that beyond the horizon of urban clutter there is a Great Land beneath our flag that can provide a new tomorrow for this century's 'huddled masses yearning to be free'." The motto represents a visionary optimism for a state filled with promise; promoting the State of Alaska by advising that the future lies with the next-to-the-last United States star located to the north of the Lower 48.

The 1968 discovery of oil on the North Slope's Prudhoe Bay—which would turn out to have the most recoverable oil of any field in the United States—would change Alaska's political landscape for decades.

This discovery catapulted the issue of Native land ownership into the headlines.[22] In the mid-1960s, Alaska Natives from many tribal groups had united in an effort to gain title to lands wrested from them by Europeans, but the government had responded slowly before the Prudhoe Bay discovery. The government finally took action when permitting for a pipeline crossing the state, necessary to get Alaskan oil to market, was stalled pending the settlement of Native land claims.

In 1971, with major petroleum dollars on the line, the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act was signed into law by Richard Nixon. Under the Act, Natives relinquished aboriginal claims to their lands in exchange for access to 44 million acres (180,000 km²) of land and payment of $963 million.[23] The settlement was divided among regional, urban, and village corporations, which managed their funds with varying degrees of success.

Though a pipeline from the North Slope to the nearest ice-free port, almost 800 miles (1,300Â km) to the south, was the only way to get Alaska's oil to market, significant engineering challenges lay ahead. Between the North Slope and Valdez, there were active fault lines, three mountain ranges, miles of unstable, boggy ground underlain with frost, and migration paths of caribou and moose. The Trans-Alaska Pipeline was ultimately completed in 1977 at a total cost of $8 billion.

The pipeline allowed an oil bonanza to take shape. Per capita incomes rose throughout the state, with virtually every community benefiting. State leaders were determined that this boom would not end like the fur and gold booms, in an economic bust as soon as the resource had disappeared. In 1976, the state's constitution was amended to establish the Alaska Permanent Fund, in which a quarter of all mineral lease proceeds is invested. Income from the fund is used to pay annual dividends to all residents who qualify, to increase the fund's principal as a hedge against inflation, and to provide funds for the state legislature.[citation needed] Since 1993, the fund has produced more money than the Prudhoe Bay oil fields, whose production is diminishing. In March 2005[update], the fund's value was over $30 billion.

Oil production was not the only economic value of Alaska's land, however. In the second half of the 20th century, Alaska discovered tourism as an important source of revenue. Tourism became popular after World War II, when men stationed in the region returned home praising its natural splendor. The Alcan Highway, built during the war, and the Alaska Marine Highway System, completed in 1963, made the state more accessible than before. Tourism became increasingly important in Alaska, and today over 1.4 million people visit the state each year.

With tourism more vital to the economy, environmentalism also rose in importance. The Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA) of 1980 added 53.7 million acres (217,000 km²) to the National Wildlife Refuge system, parts of 25 rivers to the National Wild and Scenic Rivers system, 3.3 million acres (13,000 km²) to National Forest lands, and 43.6 million acres (176,000 km²) to National Park land. Because of the Act, Alaska now contains two-thirds of all American national parklands. Today, more than half of Alaskan land is owned by the Federal Government.

The possible environmental repercussions of oil production became clear in the Exxon Valdez oil spill of 1989. On March 24, the tanker Exxon Valdez ran aground in Prince William Sound, releasing 11 million gallons of crude oil into the water, spreading along 1,100 miles (1,800 km) of shoreline.[24] According to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, at least 300,000 sea birds, 2,000 otters, and other marine animals died because of the spill. Exxon spent US$2 billion on cleaning up in the first year alone. Exxon, working with state and federal agencies, continued its cleanup into the early 1990s. Government studies show that the oil and the cleaning process itself did long-term harm to the ecology of the Sound, interfering with the reproduction of birds and animals in ways that still aren't fully understood. Prince William Sound seems to have recuperated, but scientists still dispute the extent of the recovery. In a civil settlement, Exxon agreed to pay $900 million in ten annual payments, plus an additional $100 million for newly discovered damages. In a class action suit against Exxon, a jury awarded punitive damages of US$5 billion, but as of 2008 no money has been disbursed and appellate litigation continues.

Today, the tension between preservation and development is seen in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) drilling controversy. The question of whether to allow drilling for oil in ANWR has been a political football for every sitting American president since Jimmy Carter. Studies performed by the US Geological Survey have shown that the "1002 area" of ANWR, located just east of Prudhoe Bay, contains large deposits of crude oil.[25][26] Traditionally, Alaskan residents, trade unions, and business interests have supported drilling in the refuge, while environmental groups and many within the Democratic Party have traditionally opposed it. Among native Alaskan tribes, support is mixed. In the 1990s and first decade of the 21st century, votes about the status of the refuge occurred repeatedly in the U.S. House and Senate, but as of 2007 efforts to allow drilling have always been ultimately thwarted by filibusters, amendments, or vetoes.


where is the pollution in delhi coming from

Overpopulation and the ensuing overuse of scarce resources such as water put heavy pressure on the environment. The city suffers from air pollution caused by road dust and industry,[7] with comparatively smaller contributions from unclean engines in transportation, especially diesel-powered city buses and trucks, and 2-wheelers and 3-wheelers with two-stroke engines.[8]Another known cause of pollution is slow moving traffic due to pedestrians crossing the road just about anywhere. Noise pollution comes mainly from motorcycle and automobile traffic.[9] Water pollution and a lack of solid waste treatment facilities have caused serious damage to the river on whose banks Delhi grew, the Yamuna. Besides human and environmental damage, pollution has caused economic damage as well; Delhi may have lost the competition to host the 2014 Asian Games because of its poor environment.[10]

Environmental issues in Delhi

Environmental problems in Delhi, India, are a threat to the well-being of the city's and area's inhabitants as well as the flora and fauna. Delhi, the sixth-most populated metropolis in the world (second largest if the entire NCR is included), is one of the most heavily polluted cities in India,[4] having for instance one of the country's highest volumes of particulate matter pollution.[5] In May 2014 the World Health Organization announced New Delhi as the most polluted city in the world.[6]

The river Yamuna, the reason for Delhi's existence, has suffered heavily from pollution. At its point of entry into Delhi, at Wazirabad, its dissolved oxygen (DO) content is 7.5 milligrammes per litre. At its point of exit from city limits, the DO level is only 1.3 mg/l. Similarly, coliform counts jump from 8,500 per 100 ml at entry to 329,312/100ml at exit (for DO 5 mg/litre is the norm and for coliforms 500/100ml).[11] In 2007, roughly half of all the city's raw sewage went straight into the river. 55% of the city's 15 million people are connected to the city's sewer system and its treatment plants, but because of corrosion and clogging in the system many of the treatment plants do not run at full capacity. Waste from 1,500 unplanned neighborhoods runs straight into the river.[12]

The Supreme Court of India took up the issue in 1994 after reports in the press,[12] and since 2001 is actively monitoring the river and the city's efforts to clean it; in 2011, the national government announced a Rs 1,357 crore drain interceptor plan (all waste water is to be cleaned before it reaches the river) that would clean up the river by 2014.

Underground hydrological resources are a substantial supplemental source of water in Delhi, especially in the affluent sections of the city. In the residential plots called the 'farmhouses' almost every household draws from this resource. Though water-storing rocks, i.e. aquifers, are renewed as surface rain-water percolates down, they are not inexhaustible. Delhi's aquifers stand in danger of depletion on account of excessive use. Furthermore, rampant construction activity has contaminated them with cement, paints, varnishes and other construction materials; leaky, poorly constructed and maintained sewage lines have added to the contamination. This is an irremediable loss, as aquifers, once polluted, cannot be decontaminated; they have no exposure to air and sunlight or to micro-organisms which clear-up chemical or biological pollutants.[13]

Contributing further to underground water degradation are Delhi's mushrooming landfill sites. Waste material leeches underground, contaminating aquifers. Besides, land-fill sites degrade land. Delhi has twenty-five landfill sites, and more are planned.[14]

There is significant dispute over the extent of the city's green cover. City authorities claimed in 2008 that the green cover had increased from 26 km2 to 300 km2; moreover, the Delhi Forest Act stipulated that for every felled tree ten saplings need to be planted. Critics point out that the data as well as the meaning of "green cover" are unclear. The actual increase may be only half of what was claimed, and there are estimates that some 100,000 trees had been cut in Delhi, due in part to the construction of the Delhi Metro and the Delhi Bus Rapid Transit System.[15]

Air pollution in Delhi is caused mainly by industry and vehicles.[16][7] As many as 10,000 people a year may die prematurely in Delhi as a result of air pollution.[17] According to one study, Delhi citizens would live on average an extra nine years if Delhi met WHO air quality standards.[18] The 1997 White Paper sponsored by the Ministry of Environment and Forests already proposed various measures to bring down pollution caused by traffic, including smoothing the flow of traffic with parking regulations and bringing down total traffic by mandatory limits on driving.[19] City authorities claim to have had some success in bringing down air pollution; for instance, during the bidding process for the 2014 Asian Games, the city's organizing committee had claimed that "pollution levels had come down drastically in Delhi with the arrival of Metro rail as well as all public transport vehicle being run compulsorily on CNG(Compressed Natural Gas)."[10]

For traffic related sources, growth in vehicle numbers and mileage seems to outpace efforts to reduce emissions.[20] A study by IIT Kanpur[16] states that the two most consistent sources for PM10 and PM2.5 are secondary particles and vehicles. Secondary particles themselves are generated by industry and vehicles. Road dust contributes significantly, esp in the summer. The EPCA report[21] indicates that particles from coal and diesel are more harmful than wind blown dust.

The Delhi Development Authority (DDA) is charged with providing "lung spaces". Of the city's 44,777 hectares, 8,422 hectares are reserved for "the Greens", of which the DDA manages more than 5050 hectares.[22] There is a policy for afforestation, atmospheric pollution, bio-medical waste, domestic refuse, and water and sewage treatment. Additionally, there are action plans to encourage public participation in environmental problems.[23]

Given the continued growth of the city and its population, problems are tackled only with difficultyâ€”for instance, the Yamuna clean-up projects spent $500 million between 1993 and 2005, yet the river's pollution actually doubled during this same period.[12]

Odd-Even Traffic Scheme: To tackle rising air pollution in Delhi, the Government of Delhi has come up with a controversial odd-even traffic scheme. The first phase was in January 2016 for the first 15 days in the month. The second phase was from April 15 to April 30.[24] According to the notification issued by the government, from 8 am to 8 pm, vehicles with odd registration numbers will be allowed to ply on odd dates and those with even registration numbers would be plying on even dates. There was no restriction on any vehicle on Sundays. According to Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal, if the scheme is a success, then it can be replicated every month, though no criteria of success or of failure of the scheme have ever been decided.[25]

It was declared on 9 November 2017 that in view of the smog situation prevalent in the NCR region, the Odd-Even rule would be implemented again, starting 13 November and ending on 17 November.

SC's Ban on sale of fireworks: Since air pollution spikes in Delhi during festivities for Diwali, on 9 October 2017 the Supreme Court of India banned the sale of fireworks—a main source of the spike—in the city.[18]

The Delhi government announced that all schools in the national capital will remain closed from 8 November to 12 November, Sunday in view of the "unbearable" air pollution.[26]

Pedestrian rules need to be made and enforced strictly among the Delhi population. This will ensure free flow of traffic which will in turn bring down the pollution from vehicles to half.[citation needed]


who became a spokesperson against the war in vietnam

James William Fulbright (April 9, 1905 â€“ February 9, 1995) was a United States Senator representing Arkansas from January 1945 until his resignation in December 1974. Fulbright is the longest serving chairman in the history of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. A Southern Democrat and a staunch multilateralist who supported the creation of the United Nations, he was also a segregationist who signed the Southern Manifesto. Fulbright opposed McCarthyism and the House Un-American Activities Committee and later became known for his opposition to American involvement in the Vietnam War. His efforts to establish an international exchange program eventually resulted in the creation of a fellowship program which bears his name, the Fulbright Program.

J. William Fulbright

Fulbright was born in Sumner, Missouri, the son of Roberta (nÃ©e Waugh) and Jay Fulbright.[1] In 1906 the Fulbright family moved to Fayetteville, Arkansas. Fulbright's parents enrolled him in the University of Arkansas's College of Education's experimental grammar and secondary school.[2]

Fulbright earned a history degree from the University of Arkansas in 1925, where he became a member of the Sigma Chi fraternity. He was elected president of the student body and a star four-year player for the Razorback football team from 1921 to 1924.[3][4]

Fulbright later studied at Oxford University, where he was a Rhodes Scholar at Pembroke College, graduating in 1928. He received his law degree from The George Washington University Law School in 1934,  was admitted to the bar in Washington, D.C. and became an attorney in the Antitrust Division of the U.S. Department of Justice.

Fulbright was a lecturer in law at the University of Arkansas from 1936 until 1939. He was appointed president of the school in 1939, making him the youngest university president in the country. He held this post until 1941. The School of Arts and Sciences at the University of Arkansas is named in his honor, and he was elected there into Phi Beta Kappa. He was a member of the Founding Council of the Rothermere American Institute, University of Oxford.[5]

Fulbright's sister, Roberta, married Gilbert C. Swanson, the head of the Swanson frozen-foods conglomerate, and was the maternal grandmother of media figure Tucker Carlson.[6]

Fulbright was elected to the United States House of Representatives in 1942, where he served one term. During this period, he became a member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee. The House adopted the Fulbright Resolution which supported international peace-keeping initiatives and encouraged the United States to participate in what became the United Nations in September 1943. This brought Fulbright to national attention.

In 1943 a confidential analysis by Isaiah Berlin of the House and Senate foreign relations committees for the British Foreign Office identified Fulbright as "a distinguished new-comer to the House."[7] It continued:

A young (age 38) wealthy ex-Rhodes scholar, whose major experience so far has been of farming and business. He has already shown versatile competence and ability in business as special attorney in the Anti-Trust Division of the Justice Department and as president of the University of Arkansas. An alert and intelligent member of the committee who recently drew a comparison between the British practice of making grants to her allies and America's World War practice of making loans on fixed financial terms, to show that it was America which had departed from the general international practice in the matter. Fulbright would like to see the United States obtain only non-material benefits from Lend-Lease, namely, political commitments from the countries receiving it, that would enable a system of post-war collective security to be set up. An internationalist.[7]

He was elected to the Senate in 1944, unseating incumbent Hattie Carraway, the first woman ever elected to the U.S. Senate.  He served five six-year terms. In his first general election to the Senate, Fulbright defeated the Republican Victor Wade of Batesville, 85.1 to 14.9 percent. Benjamin Travis Laney, a more conservative Democrat than Fulbright, won the race for governor of Arkansas in the same election by a similar margin, 86 to 14 percent for Republican Harley C. Stump, the former mayor of  Stuttgart.

He promoted the passage of legislation establishing the Fulbright Program in 1946, a program of educational grants (Fulbright Fellowships and Fulbright Scholarships), sponsored by the Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs of the United States Department of State, governments in other countries, and the private sector. The program was established to increase mutual understanding between the peoples of the United States and other countries through the exchange of persons, knowledge, and skills.[8] It is considered one of the most prestigious award programs and it operates in 155 countries.

Fulbright became a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in 1949, and served as chairman from 1959 to 1974â€“he was the longest-serving chair in that committee's history.

He was the only senator to vote against an appropriation for the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations in 1954, which was chaired by Senator Joseph McCarthy.[9]

In 1956, Fulbright campaigned across the country for the unsuccessful Stevenson-Kefauver ticket. He swamped his Republican challenger that year, Ben C. Henley, the state party chairman and a brother of U.S. District Judge Jesse Smith Henley of Harrison.

Fulbright signed The Southern Manifesto in opposition of the Supreme Court's historic 1954 Brown v. Board of Education decision which declared that "separate but equal" in segregating black and white children in schools was illegal and that all schools must be integrated.[10] With other southern Democrats, Fulbright filibustered the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as well as voting against the 1965 Voting Rights Act.[11] However, in 1970, during the Nixon administration, Fulbright voted for a five-year extension of the Voting Rights Act.[12] He also led the charge against confirming Nixon's conservative Supreme Court nominees Clement Haynsworth and Harold Carswell.[13]

According to historian and former Special Assistant to President Kennedy Arthur Schlesinger, Jr., Fulbright was Kennedy's first choice as Secretary of State, but it was felt he was too controversial. Rather the "lowest common denominator", Dean Rusk, was chosen.[14]

Fulbright raised serious objections to President John F. Kennedy about the impending Bay of Pigs Invasion in April 1961, and also to President Lyndon B. Johnson on the 1965 Dominican Civil War in Santo Domingo.[18]

On 30 July 1961, two weeks before the erection of the Berlin Wall, Fulbright said in a television interview, "I don't understand why the East Germans don't just close their border, because I think they have the right to close it."[19][20] Fulbright's statement was reported as a three-column spread on the front page of the East German Communist Party newspaper Neues Deutschland. The West German reception of his statement was extremely negative. A cable from US Embassy Bonn reported that "rarely has a statement by a prominent American official aroused so much consternation, chagrin and anger." Willy Brandt's Press Secretary Egon Bahr is quoted as saying: "We privately called him Fulbricht"[21] (after Walter Ulbricht, who was the East German head of state at that time).

McGeorge Bundy sent the press coverage of Fulbright's interview to the President with a comment about "the helpful impact of Senator Fulbright's remarks." Kennedy subsequently refused to distance himself from Fulbright's observation, which suggests that he asked Fulbright to make this statement as a way of signaling to Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev that the building of a wall would be viewed by the United States as an acceptable way of defusing the Berlin Crisis.[22]

The President (John Kennedy) is hobbled in his task of leading the American people to consensus and concerted action by the restrictions of power imposed on him by a constitutional system designed for an 18th century agrarian society far removed from the centers of world power.
He alone, among elected officials can rise above parochialism and private pressures. He alone, in his role as teacher and moral leader, can hope to overcome the excesses and inadequacies of a public opinion that is all too often ignorant of the needs, the dangers, and the opportunities in our foreign relations. It is imperative that we break out of the intellectual confines of cherished and traditional beliefs and open our minds to the possibility that Basic Changes in Our System may be essential to meet the requirements of the 20th century.'

Fulbright met with Kennedy during the latter's visit to Fort Smith, Arkansas in October 1961.[23]

Testimony to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in 1963, Fulbright claimed five million tax-deductible dollars from philanthropic Americans was sent to Israel and then recycled back to the U.S. for distribution to organizations seeking to influence public opinion in favor of Israel.[24] This statement led to friction with organized pro-Israeli groups in the U.S.

Perhaps his most notable case of dissent was his public condemnation of foreign and domestic policies, in particular, his concern that right-wing radicalism, as espoused by the John Birch Society and wealthy oil-man H. L. Hunt, had infected the United States military.[citation needed][25] He was, in turn, denounced by Republican Senators J. Strom Thurmond and Barry M. Goldwater.[citation needed] Goldwater and Texas Senator John Tower announced that they were going to Arkansas to campaign against Fulbright,[26] but Arkansas voters reelected him.

One of Fulbright's local staffers in Arkansas was James McDougal. While working for Fulbright, McDougal met the future Arkansas governor and US President Bill Clinton and the two of them, along with their wives, began investing in various development properties, including the parcel of land along the White River in the Ozarks that would later be the subject of an independent counsel investigation during Clinton's first term in office.[27]

Despite serving in the Senate for 30 years, Fulbright remained Arkansas' junior senator throughout his tenure, serving alongside senior Senator John L. McClellan. He along with Tom Harkin of Iowa who served alongside Chuck Grassley, are both the longest-serving senators in history to never become their state's senior senator.

Nixon mocked Fulbright's primary defeat while speaking to congressmen in the weeks following the loss.[28]

The Republicans gained a majority in the Senate following the 1952 elections, allowing Wisconsin Senator Joseph McCarthy to become chairman of the Senate Committee on Government Operations.[29] A month into McCarthy's tenure, Fulbright received a letter from former Connecticut Senator William Benton with whom he had developed a friendship during the Jessup hearings. Benton had lost his re-election bid the previous November after being targeted by anti-communist supporters of McCarthy. Benton urged Fulbright to assume a leading role in opposition to McCarthy and pledged he would receive support for doing so.[30] Fulbright, though sympathetic toward Benton, wished to follow the guideline set by Senate Minority Leader Lyndon B. Johnson who indicated his unwillingness to have Democrats become involved in condemnation of McCarthy. Fulbright was alarmed by McCarthy's attack on the VOA and the United States Information Agency, the latter agency at the time supervising educational exchange programs.[30] This was followed by the summer 1953 withdrawal by the State Department of a fellowship for a male student whose wife was suspected of communist affiliation and the scheduling by the Senate Appropriations Committee of a hearing on the annual appropriations of the USIA, the inquiry appearing to put the Fulbright Program at stake.[30]

The confrontation between Fulbright and McCarthy took place in the Supreme Court Chamber of Capitol Hill. McCarthy questioned Fulbright over his knowledge of whether the board clearing students for funding from the USIA received a security check, and on a policy that bars communists and communist sympathizers from receiving appointments as lecturers and professors. McCarthy pressed Fulbright to answer the second question while Fulbright recounted members of the board.[30] McCarthy explained that he believed Fulbright had some level of influence on the Fulbright Program since it bore his name, but Fulbright disagreed, stating that his exerting such influence would destroy the board.[30] After McCarthy insisted that he be authorized to release statements of some Fulbright Program students both praising the communist form of government and condemning American values, Fulbright countered that he was willing to submit thousands of names of students who had praised the US and its way of government in their statements. The encounter was the last time McCarthy made a public assault on the program; leading historian and original Fulbright Program board member Walter Johnson credited Fulbright with preventing the program from being ended by McCarthyism.[30]

In 1950, Fulbright co-sponsored an amendment, which, if enacted, would allow soldiers to choose whether or not to serve in a racially integrated unit.[31] Two years later, Fulbright assisted with blocking an Alaska statehood bill entirely due to his view that legislators from the state would be in favor of civil rights bills.[31]

To express southern disagreement with the 1954 U.S. Supreme Court decision in Brown v. Board of Education, which ruled that public school segregation was unconstitutional,[32] South Carolina Senator Strom Thurmond wrote the initial draft of the Southern Manifesto.[33] Fulbright signed a later version of the document along with eighteen other senators.[34] In a letter to a constituent in Little Rock, Fulbright stated that the South had no way of expressing how wrong its representatives believed the Supreme Court was except to attempt to replicate the seceding of the South from the Union prior to the beginning of the Civil War. Fulbright telephoned Alabama Senators John Sparkman and Lister Hill as well as Price Daniel, all of whom agreed to support a moderate version of the Southern Manifesto. Fulbright told his despondent aides that the new version would be the only way Hill and himself would retain influence within the Dixie delegation. The draft put forth by the four senators took a moderate approach to the Supreme Court decision, pledging the southern senators would reverse the ruling through legal moves and recognizing themselves as the minority in the Senate. Hardliners against civil rights were dismayed by the modifications to the document made by Fulbright because they viewed it as casting them as supplicants rather than victims. According to biographer Randall Bennett Woods, Fulbright believed that the South was not yet ready for integration but that education would eventually eradicate prejudice, allowing blacks to "take their rightful place in American society."[31] Fulbright's signing of the Southern Manifesto did not prevent him from being able to survive politically amid growing numbers of black voters in Arkansas. He delivered an address to the Arkansas Democratic Voters' Association where he insisted his intervention had led to the moderate version of the Southern Manifesto and his claims were generally accepted by Arkansan black leadership.[31]

In August 1961, as the Kennedy administration held firm in its commitment to a five-year foreign aid program, Fulbright and Pennsylvania representative Thomas E. Morgan accompanied Democratic congressional leadership to their weekly White House breakfast session with Kennedy.[35] In delivering opening statements on August 4, Fulbright spoke of the program introducing a new concept of foreign aid in the event of its passage.[36]

On March 25, 1964, Fulbright delivered an address calling on the US to adapt itself to a world that was both changing and complex, the address being said by Fulbright to have been meant to explore self-evident truths in the national vocabulary of the US regarding the Soviet Union, Cuba, China, Panama, and Latin America.[37]

In May 1964, Fulbright predicated that time would see a cessation in the misunderstanding within the relationship between France and the United States and that President of France Charles de Gaulle was deeply admired for his achievements in spite of confusion that might arise in others from his rhetoric.[38]

On August 7, 1964, a unanimous House of Representatives and all but two members of the Senate voted to approve the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, which led to a dramatic escalation of the Vietnam War. Fulbright, who not only voted for but also sponsored the resolution, would later write:

Many Senators who accepted the Gulf of Tonkin resolution without question might well not have done so had they foreseen that it would subsequently be interpreted as a sweeping Congressional endorsement for the conduct of a large-scale war in Asia.

As chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, Fulbright held several series of hearings on the Vietnam War. Many of the earlier hearings, in 1966, were televised to the nation in their entirety (a rarity in the preâ€“C-SPAN era); the 1971 hearings included the notable testimony of Vietnam veteran and future Senator and Secretary of State John Kerry.

In 1966, Fulbright published The Arrogance of Power, in which he attacked the justification of the Vietnam War, Congress's failure to set limits on it, and the impulses which gave rise to it. Fulbright's scathing critique undermined the elite consensus that U.S. military intervention in Indochina was necessitated by Cold War geopolitics.

In his book, Fulbright offered an analysis of American foreign policy:

Throughout our history two strands have coexisted uneasily; a dominant strand of democratic humanism and a lesser but durable strand of intolerant Puritanism. There has been a tendency through the years for reason and moderation to prevail as long as things are going tolerably well or as long as our problems seem clear and finite and manageable. But... when some event or leader of opinion has aroused the people to a state of high emotion, our puritan spirit has tended to break through, leading us to look at the world through the distorting prism of a harsh and angry moralism.

Fulbright also related his opposition to any American tendencies to intervene in the affairs of other nations:

Power tends to confuse itself with virtue and a great nation is particularly susceptible to the idea that its power is a sign of God's favor, conferring upon it a special responsibility for other nationsâ€”to make them richer and happier and wiser, to remake them, that is, in its own shining image. Power confuses itself with virtue and tends also to take itself for omnipotence. Once imbued with the idea of a mission, a great nation easily assumes that it has the means as well as the duty to do God's work.

He was also a strong believer in international law:

Law is the essential foundation of stability and order both within societies and in international relations. As a conservative power, the United States has a vital interest in upholding and expanding the reign of law in international relations. Insofar as international law is observed, it provides us with stability and order and with a means of predicting the behavior of those with whom we have reciprocal legal obligations. When we violate the law ourselves, whatever short-term advantage may be gained, we are obviously encouraging others to violate the law; we thus encourage disorder and instability and thereby do incalculable damage to our own long-term interests.

At the end of October 1968, after President Johnson announced a halt in bombing in North Vietnam in accordance with peace talks,[39] Fulbright stated his hopefulness that the announcement would lead to a general ceasefire.[40]

In March 1969, Secretary of State William P. Rogers testified at a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing regarding the Nixon administration's foreign policy, Fulbright telling Rogers that the appearance was both useful and promising.[41] In May 1969, Fulbright delivered a speech at National War College, advocating for the United States to withdraw from Vietnam in spite of possibly having to settle for something lower than a standoff against the Communists and spoke in favor of overhauling foreign policy that concentrates less on the power of the executive branch.[42]

In February 1970, South Dakota Senator George McGovern accused Fulbright and Senate Majority Leader Mike Mansfield along with former Vietcong detainee James N. Rowe of being dispatched by the Pentagon to criticize him and other senators who had indicated their opposition to continued American involvement in Vietnam.[43] On March 11, Fulbright introduced a resolution regarding the commitment of American troops or air forces for combat in Laos by President Nixon, who under the guidelines of the resolution would not be able to combat forces in or over Laos without congressional affirmative action. In his address introducing the resolution, Fulbright said in part, "The Senate must not remain silent now while the President uses the armed forces of the United States to, fight an undeclared and undisclosed war in Laos."[44] The following month, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee voted to repeal the 1964 Gulf of Tonkin resolution. Fulbright admitted the repeal by that point would have little to no legal impact and described the action as one intended to be part of an ongoing process of clearing out legislation now out of date.[45] On August 22, Fulbright stated his support for a bilateral treaty which would grant the United States authority to use military force for the purpose of guaranteeing both "territory and independence of Israel within the borders of 1967" and that the proposed measure would obligate Israel not to violate these frontiers, which were created prior to the Six-Day War.[46] In September 1970, Martha Mitchell, wife of Attorney General John N. Mitchell, was asked about the Vietnam War during an Air Force One trip to Washington. She expressed her belief that a united America would have ended the war some time ago, adding "The war would have been over 16 months ago if it hadn't been for Fulbright."[47]

On February 28, 1971, Fulbright announced his intent to submit a bill compelling the Secretary of State and other Nixon administration officials to appear before Congress to explain the administration's position on Vietnam, Fulbright saying the measure would be warrant due to the refusal of both William P. Rogers and Henry A. Kissinger as well as other officials to appear before Congress, reasoning that they would not appear because "they know there are a number of people who don't agree with them, and it makes it embarrassing and they don't like it; they especially don't like to have it in front of television."[49] On October 31, Fulbright pledged his support to less controversial aspects of foreign aid such as refugee relief and military aid to Israel while predicting the Nixon administration would be met with defeat or contention in the event of proposed aid for Cambodia, Vietnam, Laos, and Greece. Fulbright said a meeting between the Foreign Relations Committee the following day would see "that some kind of interim program will probably be devised" and concurrently expressing his disdain for "the continuing resolution approach".[50]

In March 1972, Fulbright sent a letter to Acting Attorney General Richard G. Kleindienst requesting the Justice Department not use the U.S.I.A. documentary Czechoslovakia 1968 for use in New York, stating that it appeared to violate the 1948 law that created the agency which he stated "was created for the purpose of the dissemination abroad of information about the United States, its people, and policies."[51] In April, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee announced the end of an inquiry into a drinking incident involving United States Ambassador to France Arthur K. Watson, Fulbright saying that he did not expect the committee to pursue the matter and publicizing a letter on the subject from Secretary of State Rogers.[52] On August 3, the Senate approved the treaty limiting defense missiles for the US and Soviet Union.[53] The following day, Fulbright held a closed meeting with members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in order to form a counter-strategy against the Nixon administration's attempts to attach additional reservations to the intercontinental missile agreement signed by Nixon the previous May.[54]

On July 11, 1973, during a speech at an American Bankers Association meeting, Fulbright criticized Capitol Hill attempts to block trade concessions to the Soviet Union until the country allows the emigration of Jews and other groups: "Learning to live together in peace is the most important issue for the Soviet Union and the United States, too important to be compromised by meddling — even idealistic meddling — in each other's affairs."[55] In August, President Nixon announced his choice of Henry Kissinger to replace the retiring Rogers as Secretary of State.[56] Ahead of the hearings, Kissinger was expected to have the advantage of cultivating relationships with members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Vermont Senator George Aiken noting that Kissinger "met with us at Senator Fulbright's house for breakfast at least twice a year".[57]
In November 1973, Fulbright endorsed the Middle East policy of Secretary of State Kissinger in a Senate speech, arguing in favor of the central requirement of a peace requirement prior to "another military truce hardens into another untenable and illusory status quo" and added that both sides would need to make concessions. Fulbright stated that Washington, Moscow and the United Nations were responsible for spearheading the peace settlement.[58]

In May 1974, Fulbright disclosed the existence of a weapon stockpile for South Korea, South Vietnam and Thailand, the Defense Department releasing a statement three days later confirming Fulbright's admission.[59] Throughout 1974, Kissinger was investigated for his possible role in initiating wiretaps of 13 Government officials and four newsmen from 1969 to 1971.[60][61] In July, Fulbright stated nothing significant had emerged from the Kissinger testimony during his nomination for Secretary of State the previous fall and indicated his belief that opponents of dÃ©tente with the Soviet Union were hoping to unseat Kissinger from the investigation into his role in the wiretapping.[62]

Fulbright left the Senate in 1974, after being defeated in the Democratic primary by then-Governor Dale Bumpers. His well-documented early condemnation of the Vietnamese war and anti-interventionist programs had long made him a target of his party's right wing.  Bumpers won by a landslide.

At the time that he left the Senate, Fulbright had spent his entire 30 years in the Senate as the junior senator from Arkansas, behind John Little McClellan who entered the Senate two years before him. After his retirement, Fulbright practiced international law at the Washington, D.C. office of the law firm Hogan & Hartson from 1975â€“1993.[63]

On May 5, 1993, President Bill Clinton presented the Presidential Medal of Freedom to Fulbright at his eighty-eighth birthday celebration from the Fulbright Association.[64]

Fulbright died of a stroke in 1995 at the age of 89 in Washington, D.C.  A year later, on the occasion of the 50th anniversary dinner of the Fulbright Program held June 5, 1996 at the White House, President Bill Clinton said, "Hillary and I have looked forward for some time to celebrating this 50th anniversary of the Fulbright Program, to honor the dream and legacy of a great American, a citizen of the world, a native of my home state and my mentor and friend, Senator Fulbright."[65]

Fulbright's ashes were interred at the Fulbright family plot in Evergreen Cemetery in Fayetteville, Arkansas.

In 1996, The George Washington University renamed a residence hall in his honor. The J. William Fulbright Hall is located 2223 H Street, N.W., at the corner of 23rd and H Streets. The Hall received historic designations as a District of Columbia historic site on January 28, 2010, and was listed on the National Register of Historic Places on June 18, 2010.[66][67]
[68]

On October 21, 2002, in a speech at the dedication of the Fulbright Sculpture at the University of Arkansas, Bill Clinton said,

I admired him. I liked him. On the occasions when we disagreed, I loved arguing with him. I never loved getting in an argument with anybody as much in my entire life as I loved fighting with Bill Fulbright. I'm quite sure I always lost, and yet he managed to make me think I might have won.[69]

The Fulbright Program was established in 1946 under legislation introduced by then-Senator J. William Fulbright of Arkansas. The Fulbright Program is sponsored by the Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs of the United States Department of State.

Approximately 294,000 "Fulbrighters", 111,000 from the United States and 183,000 from other countries, have participated in the Program since its inception over sixty years ago. The Fulbright Program awards approximately 6,000 new grants annually.

Currently, the Fulbright Program operates in over 155 countries worldwide.

The Thank You Fulbright project was created in April 2012 to provide an annual opportunity for alumni and friends of the Fulbright program to celebrate Fulbright's legacy.


where was john mccrae when he wrote in flanders fields

Though various legends have developed as to the inspiration for the poem, the most commonly held belief is that McCrae wrote "In Flanders Fields" on May 3, 1915, the day after presiding over the funeral and burial of his friend Lieutenant Alexis Helmer, who had been killed during the Second Battle of Ypres. The poem was written as he sat upon the back of a medical field ambulance near an advance dressing post at Essex Farm, just north of Ypres. The poppy, which was a central feature of the poem, grew in great numbers in the spoiled earth of the battlefields and cemeteries of Flanders.

John McCrae

Lieutenant Colonel John McCrae, MD (November 30, 1872 â€“ January 28, 1918) was a Canadian poet, physician, author, artist and soldier during World War I, and a surgeon during the Second Battle of Ypres, in Belgium. He is best known for writing the famous war memorial poem "In Flanders Fields". McCrae died of pneumonia near the end of the war.

McCrae was born in McCrae House in Guelph, Ontario to Lieutenant-Colonel David McCrae and Janet Simpson Eckford; he was the grandson of Scottish immigrants. His brother, Dr. Thomas McCrae, became professor of medicine at Johns Hopkins Medical School in Baltimore and close associate of Sir William Osler. His sister Geills married a lawyer, Kilgour, and moved to Winnipeg.[1]

McCrae attended the Guelph Collegiate Vocational Institute. He took a year off his studies due to recurring problems with asthma.

Among his papers in the John McCrae House in Guelph is a letter he wrote on July 18, 1893 to Laura Kains while he trained as an artilleryman at the Royal Military College of Canada in Kingston, Ontario. "I have a manservant.. Quite a nobby place it is, in fact.. My windows look right out across the bay, and are just near the waterâ€™s edge; there is a good deal of shipping at present in the port; and the river looks very pretty."

He was a resident master in English and Mathematics in 1894 at the Ontario Agricultural College in Guelph.[2]

McCrae returned to the University of Toronto and completed his B.A., then returned again to study medicine on a scholarship. While attending university he joined the Zeta Psi Fraternity (Theta Xi chapter; class of 1894) and published his first poems.

At medical school, McCrae tutored other students to help pay his tuition. Two of his students were among the first female doctors in Ontario.[3]

McCrae graduated in 1898. He was first a resident house-officer at Toronto General Hospital, then in 1899 at Johns Hopkins Hospital in Baltimore, Maryland.[4] In 1902, he was appointed resident pathologist at Montreal General Hospital and later became assistant pathologist to the Royal Victoria Hospital in Montreal, Quebec. In 1900 McCrae served in South Africa as a lieutenant in the Canadian Field Artillery during the Boer War (1899 to 1902). In 1904, he was appointed an associate in medicine at the Royal Victoria Hospital. Later that year, he went to England where he studied for several months and became a member of the Royal College of Physicians.

In 1905, McCrae set up his own practice although he continued to work and lecture at several hospitals. The same year, he was appointed pathologist to the Montreal Foundling and Baby Hospital. In 1908, he was appointed physician to the Alexandra Hospital for Contagious Diseases. In 1910, he accompanied Lord Grey, the Governor General of Canada, on a canoe trip to Hudson Bay to serve as expedition physician.

McCrae served in the artillery during the Second Boer War, and upon his return was appointed professor of pathology at the University of Vermont, where he taught until 1911; he also taught at McGill University in Montreal, Quebec.

McCrae was the co-author, with J. G. Adami, of a medical textbook, A Text-Book of Pathology for Students of Medicine (1912; 2nd ed., 1914).

When Britain declared war on Germany at the start of World War I, Canada, as a Dominion within the British Empire, was at war as well. McCrae was appointed as Medical Officer and Major of the 1st Brigade CFA (Canadian Field Artillery).[5] He treated wounded during the Second Battle of Ypres in 1915, from a hastily dug, 8 foot by 8 foot bunker dug in the back of the dyke along the Yser Canal about 2 miles north of Ypres.[6] McCrae's friend and former militia pal, Lt. Alexis Helmer,[7] was killed in the battle, and his burial inspired the poem, "In Flanders Fields", which was written on May 3, 1915 and first published in the magazine Punch.

From June 1, 1915, McCrae was ordered away from the artillery to set up No. 3 Canadian General Hospital at Dannes-Camiers near Boulogne-sur-Mer, northern France. C.L.C. Allinson reported that McCrae "most unmilitarily told [me] what he thought of being transferred to the medicals and being pulled away from his beloved guns. His last words to me were: 'Allinson, all the goddamn doctors in the world will not win this bloody war: what we need is more and more fighting men.'"[8]

"In Flanders Fields" appeared anonymously in Punch on December 8, 1915, but in the index to that year McCrae was named as the author. The verses swiftly became one of the most popular poems of the war, used in countless fund-raising campaigns and frequently translated (a Latin version begins In agro belgico...). "In Flanders Fields" was also extensively printed in the United States, which was contemplating joining the war, alongside a'reply' by R. W. Lillard, ("...Fear not that you have died for naught, / The torch ye threw to us we caught...").

For eight months the hospital operated in Durbar tents (donated by the Begum of Bhopal and shipped from India), but after suffering from storms, floods, and frosts it was moved in February 1916 into the old Jesuit College in Boulogne-sur-Mer.

McCrae, now "a household name, albeit a frequently misspelt one",[9] regarded his sudden fame with some amusement, wishing that "they would get to printing 'In F.F.' correctly: it never is nowadays"; but (writes his biographer) "he was satisfied if the poem enabled men to see where their duty lay."[10]

On January 28, 1918, while still commanding No. 3 Canadian General Hospital (McGill) at Boulogne, McCrae died of pneumonia with "extensive pneumococcus meningitis".[11] He was buried the following day in the Commonwealth War Graves Commission section of Wimereux Cemetery,[12] just a couple of kilometres up the coast from Boulogne, with full military honours.[13] His flag-draped coffin was borne on a gun carriage and the mourners – who included Sir Arthur Currie and many of McCrae's friends and staff – were preceded by McCrae's charger, "Bonfire", with McCrae's boots reversed in the stirrups. Bonfire was with McCrae from Valcartier, Quebec until his death and was much loved.[6][13] McCrae's gravestone is placed flat, as are all the others in the section, because of the unstable sandy soil.[14]

A collection of his poetry, In Flanders Fields and Other Poems[15] (1918), was published after his death.

"In Flanders Fields"
    In Flanders fields the poppies blow
          Between the crosses, row on row,
       That mark our place; and in the sky
       The larks, still bravely singing, fly
    Scarce heard amid the guns below.

        We are the dead, short days ago
      We lived, felt dawn, saw sunset glow,
       Loved and were loved, and now we lie
             In Flanders fields.

    Take up our quarrel with the foe:
    To you from failing hands we throw
       The torch; be yours to hold it high.
       If ye break faith with us who die
    We shall not sleep, though poppies grow
             In Flanders fields.

In 1855, British historian Lord Macaulay, writing about the site of the Battle of Landen (in modern Belgium, 100 miles from Ypres) in 1693, wrote "The next summer the soil, fertilised by twenty thousand corpses, broke forth into millions of poppies. The traveller who, on the road from Saint Tron to Tirlemont, saw that vast sheet of rich scarlet spreading from Landen to Neerwinden, could hardly help fancying that the figurative prediction of the Hebrew prophet was literally accomplished, that the earth was disclosing her blood,[16] and refusing to cover the slain."[citation needed]

The Canadian government has placed a memorial to John McCrae that features "In Flanders Fields" at the site of the dressing station which sits beside the Commonwealth War Graves Commission's Essex Farm Cemetery. The Belgian government has named this site the "John McCrae Memorial Site".

McCrae was designated a Person of National Historic Significance in 1946.[17]

McCrae was the great-uncle of former Alberta MP David Kilgour and of Kilgour's sister Geills Turner, who married former Canadian Prime Minister John Turner.

In 1918, Lieut. John Philip Sousa wrote the music to "In Flanders Fields the poppies grow" words by Lieut.-Col John McCrae.[18]

The Cloth Hall of the city of Ieper (Ypres in French and English) in Belgium has a permanent war museum[19] called the "In Flanders Fields Museum", named after the poem. There are also a photograph and a short biographical memorial to McCrae in the St George Memorial Church in Ypres. In May 2007, to commemorate the 90th anniversary of the writing of his best-known poem with a two-day literary conference.[20]

Several institutions have been named in McCrae's honour, including John McCrae Public School in Guelph, John McCrae Public School in Markham, John McCrae Senior Public School in Toronto and John McCrae Secondary School in Ottawa, Ontario.

A bronze plaque memorial dedicated to Lt. Col. John McCrae was erected by the Guelph Collegiate Vocational Institute.[21]

McCrae House was converted into a museum. The current Canadian War Museum has a gallery for special exhibits, called The Lieutenant-Colonel John McCrae Gallery.

In May 2015, a statue of McCrae by Ruth Abernathy was erected on Green Island (Rideau River) in Ottawa, Ontario. McCrae is dressed as an artillery officer and his medical bag nearby, as he writes. The statue shows the destruction of the battlefield and, at his feet, the poppies which are a symbol of Remembrance of World War I and all armed conflict since. A copy of that statue was erected at Guelph Civic Museum in Guelph in 2015.

The street next to the cemetery where he is buried is named in his honour, although the street is called "Rue Mac Crae".