The Jan. 28, 2024 fight for the NFC Championship title came down to the San Francisco 49ers and the Detroit Lions, as they battled it out at Levi’s Stadium in Santa Clara, California, the home field of the 49ers. Things were not looking good for quarterback Brock Purdy and the 49ers, as they found themselves at a 17-point deficit by halftime, but they persevered and performed a miraculous comeback, outscoring the Lions 27-7 in the second half. The 49ers clinched the NFC Championship with a final score of 34-31, advancing to the Super Bowl.

The Kansas City Chiefs faced off against the Baltimore Ravens at M&T Bank Stadium in Baltimore for the AFC Championship game. Many people doubted the Chiefs’ ability to stop the Ravens’ explosive offense, but the Chiefs’ defense, coached by Steve Spagnuolo, was able to put pressure on quarterback Lamar Jackson and hold the Ravens to 10 points, tied for their season low. Chiefs quarterback Patrick Mahomes along with tight end Travis Kelce made an unstoppable duo, with Kelce scoring the first touchdown of the game to give the Chiefs an early lead. The game ended with a final score of 17-10 with the Chiefs claiming the AFC Championship title and moving on to compete in the Super Bowl yet again.

As Super Bowl LVIII approaches, we can look back and see what happened the last time the Chiefs and the 49ers competed against each other in Super Bowl LIV. Patrick Mahomes became the Chief’s starting quarterback in 2018 and has since led his team to the Super Bowl in four of the previous five seasons, winning two of them. Super Bowl LIV was Mahomes’ first appearance in the Super Bowl, and though the Chiefs were down early, Mahomes’ offense scored 21 unanswered points in the 4th quarter to win 31-20. 

This will be a challenging matchup between two teams led by talented young quarterbacks and two of the league’s top ten defenses, with both teams proven to be able to handle comeback situations. Chiefs fans hope to see their team win their second consecutive Super Bowl, while the 49ers aim to win their first Super Bowl since the 1994 season. Super Bowl LVIII will be played at Allegiant Stadium in Las Vegas, Nevada on Feb. 11 at 5:30 p.m. (CT) with Reba singing the National Anthem and Usher performing for the halftime show.

After enduring almost nine months of COVID-19 in the United States, it seems as if a vaccine may not be far away. On Nov. 9, the biopharmaceutical company Pfizer and the biotech company BioNTech announced that their vaccine candidate was more than 90 percent effective in phase three trials.

The study consisted of nearly 44,000 participants, with only 94 participants testing positive for COVID-19. Half of the participants received the vaccine and the other half received a placebo. The companies then waited for participants to get sick, then they were able to determine the effectiveness of the vaccine based on what group each infected person was a part of. No serious safety concerns related to the vaccine have been reported. The study will continue to gather more efficacy and safety data.

The clinical trial will continue until there are 164 confirmed cases in order to collect further data and characterize the vaccine’s performance against other study endpoints. This is what will likely cause the greatest delay in the vaccine being available to the general public. While these initial results are promising, it is much too small of a sample to determine just how effective the vaccine really is, as well as potential safety concerns. As well, the trial needs to collect two months of safety data as required by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

Pfizer will apply for emergency authorization after it collects the two months of data necessary, at which point the FDA will work with an outside group of experts to go through data about the effectiveness, safety and the company’s production potential. This process could take weeks to complete.

The vaccine could potentially be authorized for high-risk populations by the end of the year, but that is dependent on everything proceeding on schedule and the initial data holding up in a larger sample size. Once the vaccine is authorized, high-risk populations – such as health care workers, older adults and those with health conditions that put them at a higher risk – will be the first to get it. The vaccine will likely be available to the general public after that.

This will also depend on the production capability by Pfizer and BioNTech. The companies announced that, based on current projections, they expect to produce 50 million doses in 2020 and 1.3 billion doses in 2021. While this is not nearly enough doses to satisfy the world’s demand for a vaccine, if the vaccine is authorized, other companies will be able to manufacture it to help meet the demand.

Soon after Pfizer’s publicization of the results of its clinical trials, the American biotech company Moderna announced that its own coronavirus vaccine was 94.5 percent effective in preliminary trials. Like Pfizer, Moderna plans to apply for emergency authorization from the FDA.

In combination, officials have estimated that the two companies could produce vaccinations for over 20 million people in the United States by December.

Although it will still be quite a while before these vaccines are available to the general public, these initial results from the clinical trials are promising. It will be very important to keep an eye out for more information and data from Moderna, Pfizer and BioNTech in the coming weeks. But, if the initial data is confirmed, this could be the breakthrough that the world has been waiting for.

In most ways, the 2020 election served to underscore how contentious American politics are. Poring over the results, analysts have already begun emphasizing how highly polarized Americans are by metrics such as generation, gender, race, education and geography. Overlooked in this analysis is one important policy area where people  appear relatively unified. In a stunning rebuke to the War on Drugs, drug liberalization ballot initiatives passed across the country.  

This bipartisan revolt against the War on Drugs is striking when recalling that just over a decade ago, cannabis was illegal at the state level for non-medical use in every state. Now, with the results from this election, it stands poised to be fully legalized in 15 states, with some form of medicinal legalization in a further 28 states. Moreover, Gallup recently registered its highest level of support for cannabis legalization in fifty years, with 68 percent of Americans supporting legalization. 

Acknowledgment of the failure of the War on Drugs has also managed to transcend the political divide. In a time of intense political polarization, changed attitudes towards drug use occurred in strongholds of both parties. Voters in blue New Jersey, purple Arizona and red South Dakota all approved initiatives to liberalize drug laws. Indeed, at the state level, everywhere that drug liberalization was on the ballot, it notched a success. 

In ruby red Mississippi, voters resoundingly approved an initiative to legalize medicinal marijuana despite the opposition of Governor Tate Reeves (R). 

In New Jersey, Montana and Arizona, referendums to legalize recreational marijuana use were all passed. Meanwhile, South Dakota passed an initiative to legalize medicinal and recreational marijuana simultaneously. 

Elsewhere, victories were achieved in the decriminalization effort. Understanding the distinction between decriminalization and legalization is key. Decriminalization is not legalization. With decriminalization of certain drugs, though the drug possession and use will remain illegal, infractors will not face prosecution so long as the use is under a certain limit. Instead, violators would face penalties such as fines – similar to speeding tickets.

Additionally, with decriminalization one will not see the emergence of stores selling drugs commercially in contrast to the emergence of marijuana dispensaries following recreational legalization in states across the country. Commercial sale of drugs such as heroin remains criminalized even if personal possession and use is decriminalized.

Advocates have been urging drug decriminalization for years, citing criminalization as being part of the problem of mass incarceration, ineffective as a deterrent and counterproductive to those suffering from addiction. Proponents often point to Portugal as a model. In 2001, the European country decriminalized drug possession and has seen its overall drug usage rate remain stable while accruing reductions in overdose fatalities and incarceration.  

As a reckoning over mass incarceration, the role of the police and racial justice has ensued while more states legalized recreational cannabis use, the movement has notched city-level decriminalization victories across the U.S. Oakland and Santa Cruz, Calif.; Denver, Colo. and Ann Arbor, Mich. have all passed some form of psychedelic decriminalization prior to the 2020 election. 

In Washington D.C., where recreational cannabis use is already legalized, voters took another step to chip away against the War on Drugs. The District voted to decriminalize possession and noncommercial distribution of hallucinogenic mushrooms.  

It was in Oregon, though, that drug reform efforts saw their biggest win. Oregon held its own vote on legalizing psilocybin – the active agent in hallucinogenic mushrooms – for those over the age of 21, which passed comfortably. In an unprecedented move in the U.S., Oregon voters also approved a ballot initiative to decriminalize possession and personal use of all drugs. 

Sponsored by the Drug Policy Alliance, Measure 110 passed with over 55 percent of the vote. In addition to decriminalization, Measure 110 also expanded access to treatment options for those suffering from addiction. Oregon became the first state to decriminalize all drugs for personal use. Though other states, including California, Vermont, and Washington have mulled decriminalization, supporters are hoping that Oregon may act as a catalyst for other states. 

For now, observers can watch and see if Oregon’s experiment replicates Portugal’s success with drug decriminalization. 

Despite all these city and state-level victories, all the drugs discussed here, including cannabis, remain illegal under federal level. This dual nature has led to some obstacles for state-legal cannabis dispensaries and even allowed federal authorities to shut down some that were compliant with state law. Despite this,  there has been some movement in recent years at the federal level. The House is expected to hold a vote on legalizing cannabis at the federal level in the lame-duck session.

With the 2020 Election on the horizon, every eligible American must face the same crucial question: who do you trust to lead our country for the next four years? The 2020 election has dominated the political debate ever since President Trump won in 2016. 

College students are one of the most important demographics for voting. Besides making up a major demographic of eligible voters, they are our country’s future. The youth of today are the decision-makers of tomorrow. How are the students of William Jewell College voting in arguably the most contentious election in our nation’s history?

In an independent survey conducted by The Hilltop Monitor, the newspaper asked 55 random Jewell students three questions about the upcoming election. The questions are as follows: Are you going to vote in the upcoming election? What type of ballot are you going to use in the upcoming election? Who are you voting for in this election?

Voting is the most sacred tenant in our democracy. Voter turnout for college students historically in presidential elections is 51.4 percent of eligible students. This is one of the lowest participation percentages of any demographic group. According to this survey, 92.7 percent of Jewell students are planning on voting in this upcoming election. The sample size for this study was relatively small, but any number close to the sample size shows that William Jewell has astounding voter turnout compared to other colleges.

How people are going to vote has become a hot topic issue. With President Trump and the GOP raising concerns about voter fraud – however legitimate or not these concerns might be – the type of ballot being used has gotten a lot of attention. The three types of ballots being used are absentee, mail-in and in-person. William Jewell presents a unique situation as a sizable portion of students are out-of-state students. 

Out of the 55 students polled, 33 students said that they planned on voting in person, and 15 students said that they were going to use the mail-in option provided to them by their state of residence. Meanwhile, three students said that they had applied for and will vote with absentee ballots. Four students were either not voting or weren’t registered to vote in the first place.

Almost half of the people polled (26 students) said that they were voting for Joe Biden and Kamala Harris, while 19 students said that they were planning on voting for Donald Trump and Mike Pence. The spread between the two primary candidates between Jewell students is larger than the difference in the national polls. On average, Biden is leading Trump by almost 10 percent nationally. The Jewell survey has Biden with approximately a 12 percent lead over Trump. 

Oddly enough, nearly 11 percent (6 students) said that they were going to vote third-party. This amount of support for a third-party candidate on a national scale would have a tremendous effect on the next President of the United States. If the Jewell results were magnified on a national scale, it would be very similar to what happened in 1992 when Ross Perot ran and received about 19 percent of the popular vote.

Voter turnout has always been a big issue across the United States. The highest voter turnout was in 2008 when 61.58 percent of eligible voters voted in the Presidential election. One of the worst demographics of eligible voters for voter turnout is college students. 

The goal should always be for complete participation in an election, but the plausibility of that for any college is essentially impossible. With William Jewell having such a small community, the College has the unique ability to reach out to each student and promote voting. This is something that you simply can’t find in a big state school, and it might engender a more sizeable turnout among Jewell students as compared to that of other colleges and universities.