inside: a look at california's propositions
BERKELEY POLITICAL REVIEW
WHY WE VOTE
pg 6
California
pg 12
International
pg 17
National
+Education’s Fiscal Cliff +Capital and Capital Punishment +Going Over the Top-Two +A Feast for the Eyes +Bringing Back the Ballot +The Wolf Under the Red Hood
+Nigeria at a Crossroads +For Better or for Worse +Saving the EU +India in Peril +China a Superpower Slowed
+Econocentrics +The Lessons of the Occupy Movement +Voter Surplus +Breaking Tradition +Redefining the Deserving Poor +A Morality of Success and Failure +Mommy Michelle +The Chicago Teacher Strikes
pg 24
Opinion
pg 29
Arts & Entertainment
+Nigeria at a Crossroads +For better or for worse +China a Superpower Slowed +India +Saving the EU
+Art in Visual Culture +Censorship of Art. A Futile Battle? +The Performing Arts: Spreading the Love +Iran’s Underground Voice
The G ra du a t e S c h o o l o f J o u r n a l i s m I n v i t e s y o u t o:
AND NOW WHAT? A 2012 Election Recap Join us for a look at election results, voting patterns, the influence of money and digital technology, prospects for election reforms and, of course, what happens next. When: Friday, November 16, 6:15 PM Where: Banatao Auditorium, Sutardja Dai Hall FEATURING: Ron Elving, MJ '79, Senior Washington Editor, NPR Michelle Quinn, MJ '92, Silicon Valley-based technology correspondent, Politico Lisa Garcia-Bedolla, Associate Professor, Department of Political Science at UC Berkeley and the Berkeley Graduate School of Education David Kennedy, Pulitzer Prize-winning historian, Stanford University Bruce Cain, Professor of Political Science, Stanford University Moderated by Susan Rasky, Senior Lecturer, Berkeley Graduate School of Journalism Co-sponsored by the University Library, the Media Studies Group major, the Institute of Governmental Studies and The Berkeley Political Review
Romney spokeswoman Andrea Saul, in a Fox News interview on 8 Aug. 2012: “If people had been in Massachusetts, under Gov. Romney’s health care plan, they would have had health care.” “Everyone please take your seats, otherwise Clint Eastwood will yell at them.” -President Obama “As President Obama surveys the Waldorf banquet room, with everyone in white tie and finery, you have to wonder what he’s thinking: 'So little time, so much to redistribute'.” - Governor Romney
PHOTO OP FLOP:
On 15 Oct. 2012, GOP VP nominee Rep. Paul Ryan stopped by a homeless shelter in Youngstown, Ohio to volunteer. Unfortunately for him, the charity had already concluded meal service and cleaned all the pots. According to Brian Antal -- the charity’s president -- the Ryan entourage “ram- Source: Pensitoreview.com rodded their way” into the empty shelter and washed pans that appeared already clean, for a photo-op that went against the bylaws of the faith-based organization. Said Antal: “We are apolitical because the majority of our funding is from private donations. It’s strictly in our bylaws not to do it.”
to the point EPPUR SI MUOVE:
On 22 Oct. 2012, Judge Marco Billi of L’Aquila, Italy, sentenced six scientists and one ex-government official to six years in prison for failing to predict the earthquake that devastated his town on 6 Apr. 2009. Even public prosecutor Fabio Picuti was shocked by the severity of the decision. He had requested a four year sentence for the seven defendants, saying they had been “just too reassuring”, and thus, complicit in the “manslaughter” of 309 people. Said Picuti: “We’ll have to read the judge’s motivations to understand why” the defendants got six years. Judge Billi has three months to reveal the reasons for his ruling, which will affect the defendants’ appeals.
TO THE POLLS!
What will voters decide on November 6th?
M
ore than a decade ago, the Berkeley Political Review was founded to offer students, and others, a source of non-partisan political analysis. In the years since, we
have written on diverse issues ranging from the 9/11 attacks to California’s water crisis, offering original student reporting and
EDITOR’S NOTE
critical analysis on the important issues of the day. We, as a publication, also suffered through the decline of print
press; three years ago, buffeted by plummeting ad revenue and high turnover, we were on the verge of bankruptcy and dissolution. But under the leadership of former Editor-in-Chiefs David Hamilton and Jeremy Pilaar, we were able to recover and come roaring back. I hope to continue the growth of our publication and the fulfillment of our mission, and no other subject is better suited for that then the election. Four years ago, Americans went to the polls in the midst of war
and economic collapse to decide our nation’s future. I, and millions of other Americans under the age of 21, could only stand by and watch as the rest of the nation made our choices for us. This time around, however, our generation has come of age, and what confronts us is a series of momentous decisions, for our generation, for our country, and for the world. And so we will vote to decide if President Obama receives another term, or if Governor Romney is given a chance in the White House. We will vote to decide which party will control Congress, we will vote to decide if new taxes are necessary, we will vote to decide if sitting on sidewalks will become illegal. We will vote on all these things, and more, in the hope of a better future. To help people learn more about these issues, the Berkeley Political Review is proud to present an expanded, 32-page issue. On page 22, Woody Little writes about the morality of economics, while Ada Lin, on page 13, addresses American foreign policy in the Middle East. On issues closer to our hearts, Matthew Calvert takes a look at Prop 30 and its affect on California’s education system. We hope this issue will prove to be a guide when you cast your ballot on November 6th. Good luck and all the best, Hinh Tran Editor-in-Chief
EDITOR-IN-CHIEF Hinh Tran DEPUTY EDITOR-IN-CHIEF Niku Jafarnia MANAGING EDITOR Daniel Tuchler DEPUTY MANAGING EDITOR Tanay Kothari INTERNATIONAL EDITOR Alex Heyn NATIONAL EDITOR Luis Flores DEPUTY NATIONAL EDITOR Kyle Bowen CALIFORNIA EDITOR Elena Kempf OPINION EDITOR Alex Kravitz ARTS & ENTERTAINMENT EDITOR Norman Cahn BLOG EDITOR Wil Mumby DESIGN EDITORS Kathleen Sheffer Chris Chau OUTREACH EDITOR Justin Lin STAFF Ada Lin, Adeeba Hasan, Allison Arnold, Amanda Jaramillo, Ankit Aggarwal, Anna Bella Korbatov, Arjan Sidhu, Ben Goldblatt, Brendan Pinder, Carrie Yang, Celia Camacho, Chinmai Raman, Chris Chan, Disha Banik, Deepika Dilip, Felix Cruz, Ha Duong, Harkaran Singh, Jackie Alas, Julia Kuchman, Katie McCray, Keith Kuk, Komal Devjani, Laila Samimi, Mandy Honeychurch, Maria Buxton, Martina Chun, Mary Zhou, Matt Symonds, Matthew Calvert, Michael Manset, Nashilu Mouen-Makoua, Nik Kitchel, Nikhil Kotecha, Ryan Hang, Samuel Myers, Sebastian Welch, Shayna Howitt, Stuart Fine, Tina Parija, Tom Hughes, Vinayak Ganeshan, Viveka Jagadeeshan, Woody Little, Zac Commins ADVISOR Susan Rasky The content of this publication does not reflect the views of the University of California, Berkeley or the ASUC. Advertisements appearing in the Berkeley Political Review reflect the views of the advertisers only. They are not an expression of editorial opinion or views of the staff.
6
bpr.berkeley.edu
CALIFORNIA
Education’s Fiscal Cliff Cuts are looming if Prop 30 does not pass
BY MATTHEW CALVERT, Staff Writer
I
n November, voters have the op- early childhood development programs. tion of choosing what they want to Both initiatives need 50% of the vote to prioritize, education or lower taxes. pass, but in the event that both pass, Considering the negative effects that the initiative with the higher number previous budget cuts have inflicted of votes will become law and the other on state universities, another round will fail. If Prop 30 should fail, the $6 of them will cause irreparable harm billion in estimated revenue will imto California and its school system. mediately be cut from schools. If Prop Prop 30 is a ballot initiative backed 38 fails, it will have no immediate by Governor Jerry Brown that will increase thes income tax rate paid by individuals who earn more than $250,000 and married couples making $500,000 or more for the next seven years. It will simultaneously raise the state portion of the sales tax by twenty-five cents to 7.5% for four years. The measure is a combination of Brown’s first tax increase proposal and the so-called “Millionaires Tax,” a proposal backed by the California Federation of Teachers as well as other organizations. During his campaign, Brown promised not to raise taxes unless “you the people vote for them.” Through this proposition, Brown is fulfilling his promise by leaving it up to the voters to determine what should be prioritized in the budget. The initiative packages together a popular tax on the wealthy with an unpopular and regressive sales tax. Sacramento legislators have moved forward with a budget based on the assumption that Prop 30 will pass, but it faces some tough hurdles. Civil rights attorney Molly Munger Illustration by Kathleen Sheffer, Design Editor has championed and personally financed a proposition of her own on negative effects. The California Legisthe November ballot that seeks to aid lative Analyst’s Office estimates that education and raise taxes. Prop 38 will should Prop 30 fail, $500 million will increase the income tax on a majority be automatically cut from public uniof Californians, not just the wealthy, versities and an estimated $5.4 biland seek to raise $10 billion a year for lion will be cut from K-12 education. 12 years. That money will then be ear- Jerry Brown attempted to persuade marked for public school districts and Munger to drop her proposition earlier
in the year by arguing that with both proposals on the ballot, they might both fail. However, Munger refused and the debate has continued to escalate. A recent television ad put out by the 38 campaign attacks “Sacramento politicians” for underfunding education. The ad goes on to attack prop 30, claiming that “now these politicians say unless we send more tax dollars to Sacramento, they’ll cut education again.” This in-fighting between the two propositions is likely to decrease the popularity of both and raise the possibility that neither one passes. Ted Lempert, a former State Assemblyman, current UC Berkeley lecturer in political science, and President of the organization Children Now says that what is really needed is reform, but in the short term, it would be “a disaster if neither initiative passed.” Children Now has endorsed both propositions, and Lempert feels that “at a broader level, we have an ongoing struggle to prioritize education overall.” When asked about the impact of Prop 30 on UC Berkeley students, the former Assemblyman said that “as Berkeley students, you need it to pass.” Why? Because the governor has presented the voters with a stark choice: to agree to his proposition or face another round of debilitating cuts. Not only is this ballot box budgeting risky, but it should be unnecessary. Lempert recalls when he was in the legislature under then governor Pete Wilson. He says that “The governor and the legislature could raise taxes; they didn’t need to go to the people.”
See Prop 30 on page 7
CALIFORNIA
fall 2012
7
Capital and Capital Punishment
Is the death penalty too costly for California? BY MICHAEL MANSET, Staff Writer
D
ebates over capital punishment usually deal with moral issues such as the right of the state to take a life. This November, Californians will be considering these arguments when they vote on the SAFE California Act Proposition 34. However, one purely economic factor has entered the debate around the financial cost of capital punishment. California may simply be unable to afford the death penalty. Currently, 729 inmates are on death row in the state of California. Since the death penalty was reinstated in California in 1978, the state has executed only thirteen people, with no executions since 2006. A backlogged, lengthy appeals process and legal challenges have contributed to what both proponents and opponents of the death penalty consider a costly, broken system. Proposition 34 would abolish capital punishment in California, replacing it with life without the possibility of parole as the maximum sentence. Persons convicted of murder would be required to work in prison, with their wages going to victim restitution funds. Additionally, it will create a $100 million fund to be distributed to law enforcement over the course of three years to solve rape and murder cases. Opponents of Proposition 34 argue
that the death penalty is not only a deterrent to crime, but a moral necessity in the face of the most heinous of criminals. Mark Peterson, the District Attorney of Contra Costa County, said at a recent debate on Proposition 34 held at UC Berkeley of California’s worst murderers that “these individuals deserve the death penalty.” Proponents of Proposition 34, Source: Wikimedia Commons Quentin State Prison, claimed at the aforementioned debate however, assert that the death penalty has created a that these savings can help solve the priority problem in a cash-strapped cases of the 46% of homicides and state. They cite the Alacron-Mitchell 56% of rapes that remain unsolved. It may be, as Peterson argues, that report, a 2011 study by a federal judge and a law professor, which concluded justice demands the death of some crimthat the death penalty costs the state inals. Yet it is clear that capital punishof California $184 million more annu- ment diverts resources from other state ally than the alternative of life impris- responsibilities. When voters go to the onment. This money, they argue, can polls, they must do so knowing Califorbe better spent on other state priori- nia has a spending priorities problem.• ties, such as solving violent crimes or refunding public education. Jeanne Woodford, a former warden of San
Prop 30: From page 6 The legislature is either unable or unwilling leading Brown to try and reach over the legislature directly to the voters to pass his budget priorities. But times have changed in Sacramento. Local Assemblywoman Nancy Skinner spoke recently at the Berkeley Chamber of Commerce remarking that “change will primarily have to be done through initiatives.” Skinner has been advocating for Prop 30 and recently answered some questions about its effects. She supports the proposition because it “prevents mid-year tuition increases for UC students.” She continues that “by strengthening our education system, ensuring local public safety funding, and helping balance budget the budget, Prop 30 benefits everyone in our community.” Skinner also advanced some ideas
on reform. Notably, she argues that “the 2/3 vote requirement on raising taxes [be] eliminated.” She goes on that “returning to a simple majority vote to approve revenue measures, like 40 of our 50 states have, would enable California to secure the revenue needed to fund our schools.” By returning to a majority vote, the California legislature could avoid gridlock and avoid having live or die propositions on the ballot such as Prop 30 that put the funding of our schools at risk. There is no doubt that there are parts of California’s school system that need reform, but increasing income taxes on a majority of Californians is not the way to do it. Prop 38; therefore, is not the answer. Prop 30 may not be the answer either, but it is effective in the short term. A temporary tax to help
pay down the debt is not a popular agenda item, but it is vital to the health of the state economy. The system needs reform, but in this time of fiscal crisis, California voters need to set priorities about what they think is important. Hopefully both propositions 30 and 38 are just the start of a conversation about what California decides to prioritize in its system, and hopefully that conversation will end with meaningful reform. In passing Prop 30, voters will show that they prioritize the education of young people over the incomes of the wealthy, which may help spur future reform efforts. It is not a permanent solution, and it is not an elegant stopgap, but it is a necessary first step. •
8
bpr.berkeley.edu
CALIFORNIA
Going Over the Top-Two Testing Proposition 14
BY TOM HUGHES, Staff Writer
I
n June 2010, less than a quar- candidates competing for an open seat, ter of California’s eligible vot- incumbents facing challengers, both ers went to the polls and passed strong and weak, and sometimes of Proposition 14, an electoral reform their own party, and, thanks to the comeasure that has already had a ma- incidence of the decennial redistricting jor, and rather bizarre, influence on process, two incumbents facing off for how voters in the state choose their the same seat. Only two incumbents, federal and state representatives. both Democratic Assembly memProp 14 instituted a “top-two” pri- bers, are running entirely unopposed. mary system (also known as the nonProp 14 has created some odd partisan blanket primary, the jungle matchups. In one of the state’s highprimary, or the Louisiana primary) in est profile races, Democratic ConCalifornia. Under the rules of the top- gressman Brad Sherman is facing two system, all candidates for a single off against Democratic Congressman office, regardless of party affiliation, Howard Berman in the 30th Congresappear on the primary ballot together, sional District. While incumbent verand the two candidates who receive the most votes advance to the general election. These rules do not apply to parties’ presidential primaries or local races. Though the initiative was opposed by all six of California’s ballot-eligible political parties, it was supported by some moderate politicians and many newspaper editorials as a way to elect more moderates, with the idea being that traditionally “safe” districts could have competitive Source: mnginteractive.com general elections and all candidates sus incumbent races are not unheard would have to compete for a broad- of, especially after redistricting, under er range of the vote on Election Day. the Prop 14 rules, the very DemocratThe 2012 election will serve as the ic district sent two Democrats to the first statewide test of Prop 14’s effec- general election, creating a situation tiveness. Of the 173 Congressional, in which two liberal congressmen are State Senate, and State Assembly races competing for independent and Repubvoted on in the June 2012 primary, 19 lican votes. In the 15th Congressional resulted in general election races with District, 20-term incumbent Rep. Pete two Democrats facing off, 8 with two Stark faces his first serious challenge Republicans, and 8 with either a Dem- since 1972 from a slightly more centrist ocratic or a Republican being opposed Democrat, Eric Swalwell, who would by a minor party or independent can- have been eliminated in the primary didate. And of these 173 races, there without the institution of the top-two are countless political matchups: two system. Something similar nearly hap-
pened in the 2nd Congressional District, but frontrunner Jared Huffman was saved from running against another Democrat in the general election by a Republican who got the secondhighest number of votes, beating out a myriad of lower-tier Democrats. And in Congressional District 26, a traditional, competitive Democratic-Republican matchup was nearly sidelined by a popular independent county supervisor. Looking beyond 2012, however, some even more peculiar scenarios are possible in California’s future as candidates and strategists adjust to the top-two system. One possible scenario is a statewide race that features two Democrats. For example, if Governor Jerry Brown does not run for reelection in 2014, it is possible that two high-profile Democrats (for example Lieutenant Governor Gavin Newsom and Attorney General Kamala Harris) could garner more votes than a number of lesser-known Republicans, and then face off against each other in the primary. Or California could be one of a few states that elects an independent Senator, if a viable candidate arises who can appeal to the broad swath of independent voters. Under the top-two system, the number of candidates in a primary makes all the difference; a Republican could be elected to a heavily Democratic district if 6 Democrats and 2 Republicans split their parties’ respective bases. It seems that Prop 14 has not yet achieved its goal of electing more moderates to Congress and the California Legislature. It may. But it may also make the chaotic world of California politics a little more crazy than it already is. •
CALIFORNIA CALIFORNIA
fall 2012
9
A Feast for the Eyes The complex business of labeling GMO’s
BY MARIA BUXTON, Staff Writer
T
his November California farmers, food corporations, and conscious eaters will turn their attention to Proposition 37. The initiative requires that suppliers label all food products (except meat and alcohol) that contain genetically modified organisms (GMOs). This is the first time an American state has brought this issue to a vote. The US has been passively accepting the use of GMOs in over 80% of US-grown soybeans, corn, and cotton since 1996. This November could become a turning point in what has been called the “food revolution.” However, the issue is not as clear-cut as it appears, and natural might not be better in every case. UC Berkeley Agricultural Economics professor David Zilberman firmly believes that “GMOs are the greatest thing to happen to food.” He disagrees with Prop 37, citing the environmental and economic benefits of GMOs. He explains that because many GMOs are genetically modified to produce their own insecticide and herbicide, they reduce the amount of toxic chemicals used in farming. This allows farmers to practice “low tillage” farming, a practice that reduces greenhouse gas emissions. GMOs also increase the yield of a plot of land, which leads to less deforestation and a dramatic decrease in the cost of food. By requiring a labeling of GMOs, Professor Zilberman says, the state of California stigmatizes this beneficial scientific development, and prevents further research. In short, he says, “what’s going on right
now with GMOs is a witch hunt. But search may have the potential to create instead of a witch, anti-GMO groups crops that really do benefit consumers, are hunting what is really a princess.” Pollan argues that further research GMOs have the potential to change is necessary to prove that GMOs are the way farmers grow food. completely harmless to the environNext year, Monsanto plans ment and the consumer. In fact, a reto release a drought-resis- cently published study from a French tant corn crop, which may university showed that rats suffered be able to prevent the cata- “severe health effects” and premature strophic consequences of death after eating a diet of GM corn and droughts. This is good news trace amounts of RoundUp for 2 years. for the average taxpayer So, come November, should Califorwhose tax dollars go to pay nia voters force producers to label all for billions in crop insur- products that contain GMOs? If Prop ance when such droughts 37 passes, we can expect consumers strike American farms. Sci- to cut down on their consumption of entists are also hopeful that these products, simply because of the GMOs will have the abil- psychological effects of the label. This ity to fixate nitrogen from means a larger market share for organthe air or grow ic producers. But it could in salty soil. also mean that, with less In this sense, of a profit incentive, reGMOs have search surrounding GMOs the potential to will stagnate, and the pobe better than tential benefits of future natural crops. GMOs will be lost. HowH o w e v e r, ever, information about UC Berkeley what people are consumProfessor and ing should not be kept food journala secret. The key here is ist Michael Pollan is less education: while labeling hopeful. He points out that of GMOs is just, Califorusing herbicide-resistant nians need to make an efGMOs causes weeds to fort to educate themselves develop resistance to the before shying away from herbicide. These GMOs products simply because are convenient for farmthey have the phrase ers, who can now spray “Contains GMOs” slapped entire fields with herbiacross the front. With a cide, but this leads to little Internet research, more chemicals being reconsumers can decide leased into the air and for themselves whether water. “The problem is they believe GM products that when developers cre- Illustrations by Hilly Hess are worth buying or not. ated the GMOs currently on the marProp 37 gives us this choice, and ket, they were thinking of farmers, not for that reason, it is worth your vote. • consumers,” Pollan said. While GM re-
10
bpr.berkeley.edu
CALIFORNIA
Bringing Back the Ballot Restoring the promise of California’s initiative process
BY KATIE MCCRAY, Staff Writer
E
stablished in 1911 to counter the power of the Southern Pacific Railroad, the California Initiative Process is now yet another springboard for special interest groups. To return the Initiative Process to its initial purpose, a myriad of changes need to be made. The direct initiative process allows citizens to appeal directly to their peers for legislature reform, bypassing the California legislature completely. To qualify for the ballot, the proponent must obtain at least 504,760 signatures of registered voters in a 150-day circulation period. Once this is completed and the sigåΩplaced on the ballot. If the measure is accepted, it goes into effect the day after the election and does not face the risk of a Governor’s veto or revision by the legislature. Since its adoption, the initiative process has been a popular aspect of California policymaking. As Roy Ulrich, a lecturer at the Goldman School of Public Policy at UC Berkeley states, often “people trust themselves more than they trust elected officials.” Initiatives are created for issues such as affirmative action, educational reform, tax reform, the environment, and drug policy reform. In the past decade the Initiative Process boomed— according to the Public Policy Institute of California, “there were more initiatives circulated, placed on the ballot, and approved by the voters than in any other decade in the state’s history.” This sparks debate about the role that this process plays in California policymaking and the driving forces behind initiatives. Critics of the initiative process are questioning the role special interest groups play in the creation and implementation of initiatives. Advertising is a crucial yet controversial aspect of the
Source: calaborfed.org initiative process, as complicated issues are boiled down to appeal to voters. David Magleby, the author of Direct Legislation, first called attention to this issue, stating that “the majority of the ballot measures are decided by voters who cannot comprehend the printed description, who have only heard about the measure from a single source, and who are ignorant about the measure except at the highly emotional level of television advertising.” Many controversial aspects of the California initiative process are apparent in the current debate over Proposition 37 (Mandatory Labeling of Genetically Engineered Food), which was born through the direct initiative process and will be on November’s ballot. This proposition requires that genetically modified food sold in California be labeled as such, with exceptions for certain products such as milk and restaurant food. The campaigns supporting or opposing this proposition have either vilified genetic modification or spouted
its total safety and benefits. The Yes on 37 campaign’s biggest donor is Joseph Mercola, who has contributed about $1.1 million so far. Mercola’s company and website, which calls itself “the world’s #1 natural health website,” is dedicated to providing alternative solutions to traditional medicine. The other side of the ballot has received generous donations from Monsanto and PepsiCo, who have donated $4.2 million and $1.7 million, respectively. Knowing who is funding propositions can be as important as understanding the proposition itself. Today, advertisements only flash a brief message detailing its donors which often goes unnoticed. According to Ulrich, “donors should be identified verbally in the advertisements both for and against initiatives.”
See Initiative on page 11
CALIFORNIA CALIFORNIA
fall 2012
11
The Wolf Under the Red Hood
What is the “Paycheck Protection” initiative really about? BY ALLISON ARNOLD, Staff Writer
I
f passed this November, Prop 32 will end both union and corporate spending of payroll deductions for political purposes. Unions will have to face an even more imbalanced political playing field. The proposition claims to end special interest donations to political parties, but is that what the initiative is really about? Currently, employers are al- Source: Wikimedia Commons lowed to withdraw a small amount of 32 claim that this proposition is a “step money from an employee’s paycheck. in the right direction”; a fair attempt to These funds, called “payroll deduc- curb special interest donations to potions” are a major source of labor litical parties. ABC News reported that unions’ political funding. Prop 32 will the American Future Fund, an advoban this money from being spent on cacy group that champions free marcampaign donations, independent ex- ket ideals, dropped a grand total of $4 penditures, and other enterprises that million into the effort to pass Prop 32. influence California voters. When asked to comment on their supIt will also ban contributions from port of the initiative, the American Fugovernment contractors to politicians ture Fund did not respond. who are responsible for the contracts Prop 32 is an initiative designed to given to them. The supporters of Prop take power away from workers. Unions’
say in California politics will decrease relative to corporations since the latter use little to no money made from paycheck deductions to fund their political ventures. A Political Science professor at UC Berkeley stated that “Prop 32 is a great idea being executed in an entirely wrong and unbalanced way.” About 2.4 million workers in California are represented by labor unions. If Prop 32 is passed, these individuals will lose their organized voice in political undertakings. While unions will be frozen, corporations will still be able to donate profits to Super PACs with no new restrictions to even the playing field. The legislation needs to be rewritten so that unions and corporations are affected evenly instead of crippling one while causing the other to thrive. •
Initiative from page 10 Another initiative making an appearance on the upcoming November ballot is Proposition 39 (Income Tax Increase for Multistate Businesses). Currently, out of state businesses operating in California are able to calculate their tax bill differently each year, allowing them to greatly reduce their California income tax. If passed, Prop 39 will close this loophole, and out-of-state companies would be subjected to the same tax regulations as California-based ones. According to the California Legislative Analyst’s office, this would add about $1 billion to California’s revenue. For the first five years of this expected revenue, Prop 39 stipulates that $550 million be dedicated annually to the funding of clean energy jobs and projects in
California. This so-called “ballot-box budgeting” funnels almost half of the extra $1 billion into a single purpose at the encouragement of Thomas Stever, a drafter and main financial backer of Prop 39. Many voters believe that allocating such large sums of money for such a specific purpose detracts from the potential benefits of Prop 39. Ulrich suggests that initiatives have “better review before [they come] to the ballot,” giving the Legislature an “opportunity to comment on initiatives.” This would create discourse about initiatives from an objective standpoint and result in better initiative drafting. Though the California initiative process is an extremely flawed system, its original premise of giving greater gov-
ernmental power to the people could potentially be restored. The way that the direct initiative process will improve is through increased transparency throughout every step of the system. This would reveal corporations that are striving to pass legislature with the goal of furthering their own agendas. The initiative process should also be available to a wider group of people. “There needs to be a way for citizens groups to get on the ballot,” explains Ulrich, “even if they don’t have the money to pay for signature gatherers.” While the California initiative process is a flawed system, it has the potential to return to its initial purpose - providing the people of California with a forum for directly enacting legislature. •
12 12
bpr.berkeley.edu bpr.berkeley.edu
INTERNATIONAL
Nigeria at a Crossroads Can this African nation one day rise to the top?
BY ADEEBA HASAN, Staff Writer
T
o Dr. Abdul Mustapha of the University of Oxford, Nigeria is a “land of unrealized dreams,” a possible up-and-coming superpower. Akin to any of the BRIC nations, Nigeria appears to have both promising economic growth and rapid technological development. But do growth and development a superpower make? For Nigeria, no. The nation is currently approaching a crossroads of “present” and “potential superpower,” and turning away from the latter. From its 1967 civil war and to the present, Nigeria’s domestic turmoil keeps it, as Dr. Mustapha puts it, in an “unstable equilibrium,” which in turn prevents it from ripening into the political, economic and technological global force it could become. Despite certain shortcomings, Nigeria does have promising markers of a developing superpower. The rapid expansion of a middle class more educated and ambitious than ever before has led to a higher demand for retail products, thus propelling forward multiple economic sectors. Furthermore, Nigeria’s liberalization of the economy, privatization of public entities and limited governmental intervention have all encouraged the inflow of foreign investment. While its Growth Environment Score (measurement of the effect of structural conditions and policy settings on economic potential) is still quite low, it has nearly doubled in the past thirteen years, and a repeat of this increase could send Nigeria well on its way to economic success. Moreover, Nigeria’s technological leaps in mobile and wireless technology have contributed to the rapid development of basic services such as education, banking, finance and telecommunications. However, much of this progress is still in its earliest of phases. Development into a superpower is a long-term process and a country cannot speed through the stages of development. Unfortunately, social and political issues abundant in Nigerian life prevent its attainment of superpower status. Fragmentation among religious and ethnic groups, predominantly the northern, Muslim Hausa-Fulani and the southeastern Christian Igbo of the Yorubas, renders the populace far from harmonized. As for the political situation of Nigeria, it is just as appalling. The Nigerian Labor Congress is on ongoing, indefinite strike. Even the exist-
ing Nigerian government is ridiculed for its corruption, mismanagement, maladministration and inability to solve national problems. Yet perhaps worse are the terrorist attacks unleashed by Boko Haram, a jihadist militant organization based in northeastern Nigeria. The rebels’ ongoing fight with the Nigerian state has caused the deaths and dislocation of people as well as devastation to infrastructure. Unfortunately, despite the severe political conditions, Western African nations and the African Union fail to provide enough aid to ameliorate the situation. As for Nigerian non-political issues, they are as omnipresent as political ones. The irregularity of electricity and power supply, limited capacity of ports and transportation, low-quality of roads and bans on imported products all dissuade retailers from investing in the nation. The current volatility in currency, caused by the unequal income distribution among classes and inflation of the already-weak naira, has only served to worsen the economic conditions. Moreover, lacking its own nationally-controlled refineries, Nigeria finds difficulty in supporting itself despite being the largest crude oil producer in Africa. Instead, other countries come and harvest the resource for their own benefit, removing the coun-
try’s potential for economic success. Unfortunately, Nigeria’s grapple with a multitude of non-political issues has prevented it from developing into the superpower it could become. Thus, as Nigeria approaches that crossroads of “present” and “potential,” it seems to be turning away from the latter. While there are promising signs that Nigeria could one day begin to grow on the international stage, the myriad of issues prevents it from, in the present, being on its way to superpower status. Although solutions involving greater transparency, an improved environment for economic growth and a resolution of the political unrest could lead to the birth of the next superpower, for now Nigeria remains a land of unrealized dreams. •
A tragic scene in Nigeria, typical of the destruction caused by Boko Haram. Source: www.gaurdian.co.uk
INTERNATIONAL INTERNATIONAL
fall fall 2012 2012
For Better or for Worse
1313
The election and what it means for foreign policy
BY ADA LIN, Staff Writer
R
ecent turmoil in the Middle East has given much-needed incentive to the presidential campaigns to focus on foreign affairs. Sept. 11 of this year marked a wave of attacks on US embassies, supposedly sparked by antiAmerican sentiment. Meanwhile, armed conflict has only worsened in Syria, and more evidence has arisen that Iran is continuing to pursue its nuclear program, which is causing Israel to push for more direct action from the US. As both candidates weigh in with foreign policy positions on the Middle East, it gets harder and harder to separate the rhetoric from practical action. As the incumbent, Obama has an easier time of it, by being able to point to the past four years as evidence for combating terrorism and maintaining friendly relationships. The Obama administration and its allies in Europe have continued George W. Bush’s war on terror in the Romney and Obama discussing foreign policy in the Middle East in the first round form of drones and concisely-planned of debates. Source: Pool photo to Rick Wilking military strike and waged economic war against Iran through sanctions. Obama ing the emphasis made during his cam- sidering America’s sluggish economic has also resisted giving in to Israel’s paign on militarism and alliances, ana- recovery, the increases in military demand that military action be taken lysts predict he would be more likely to funding that Romney calls for does not before Iran achieves nuclear capability, support a war with Iran, as well as esca- seem reasonable, given that our armed although these actions have meant that late the conflict in Syria. His tendency forces are in the process of withdrawtalks with Iran and Israel have deterio- for political gaffes, such as those in re- ing from two countries, and such an rated. In regards to Libya and Syria, gards toward Great Britain, also makes increase would call for slashing supObama has shown marked restraint, one wonder if he would be able to nego- port to welfare programs that many in but it seems due more to prudence tiate with other world leaders on equal our still-struggling economy depend than strategic ‘weakness’ as Romney ground. Romney has already described on.We would also do well to rememaccuses. In Libya, rather than com- the recent democratic election of an Is- ber what recent conflicts have shown: mitting US to leading the military con- lamist as the new president of the Egypt that the Middle East is not a place that frontation, Obama insisted on a multi- as a disaster, and accused Palestinians will placidly accept our interference. lateral coalition that involved the Arab of being “committed to the destruc- In the past, there has been the assumpLeague. In Syria, where the adminis- tion and elimination of Israel”. Even if tion that only with US aid could Middle tration has focused on supplying weap- such comments might not be reflected Eastern countries reach the level of ons and other forms of support rather fully in Romney’s foreign policies, it’s development that Western states have than direct intervention, multiple rebel hard to imagine that they wouldn’t achieved. This crude understanding groups with conflicting agendas fight strain already tenuous relationships. cannot last, especially if the US wants each other as much as the government. Though both candidates’ official plat- to protect its interests and improve our Although Romney has indicated that forms on Middle East foreign policy relations with the various countries his more forceful foreign policy stance differ mostly in subtle details, com- there. Instead, changes toward democwill not translate rushing into armed ments from both campaigns have racy must be recognized as the signs conflict, there are doubts that his posi- made it clear that their worldviews dif- of progress that they are, and an untion can maintain the delicate balance fer greatly, with Romney focused on derstanding of the complicated interthat has been created during Obama’s maintaining America’s influence, and relations within the Middle East must first term, especially if his priority is to Obama trying to maintain credibility be promoted that allows careful decimaintain a “strong America”. Consider- through a more neutral stance. Con- sions about such controversial topics. •
14
bpr.berkeley.edu
Saving the EU
INTERNATIONAL
Disaster awaits for the troubled European Union BY HA DUONG, Staff Writer
S
Germany is the euro zone’s greatest lender, keeping the EU intact is a critical German interest. If an EU country were to default on their debt, Germany would have to pay for much of the debt, and if the euro were to collapse, Germany would suffer enormous costs, as it would be unable to recover the large amount of money owed to it under the EU system. Germany currently has not, however, invested heavily in revitalizing the EU, instead focusing on its own immediate domestic interests. Given the dynamics of the EU, the need for financial unity is clear. Because the PIIGS are a part of the EU, they are unable to devalue their cur-
new president of the ECB, Mario Draghi allowed the unlimited purchase of bonds of troubled euro zone countries, in an effort to make the entire EU collectively responsible for PIIGS’s debts. Germany’s Federal Constitution Court additionally accepted the European Stability Mechanism, which will help bail out EU countries and, in conjunction with the ECB, will buy bonds from countries suffering from high interest rates. These changes will lessen austerity, relieve investor pressure, and extend the time suffering countries and the EU have to resolve structural failures, which will most likely require amendments to previous agreements.
ince the global financial crisis hit in 2008, the European Union (EU) has been struggling to keep its member countries afloat - particularly the deeply troubled PIIGS (Portugal, Ireland, Italy, Greece, and Spain). The EU desperately needs a cooperative restructuring of their fiscal policies in order to stave off further economic failure. Since its inception, the euro has been inherently flawed - the currency has a central bank, but no common treasury to issue bonds. This inability to issue bonds means that member countries are susceptible to the risk of default, and, consequently, perpetual recession. Only until the crisis emerged did this flaw become apparent, when massive deficits from Greece’s previous government left it unable to borrow at feasible interest rates, which led to a 110 billion euro bailout from the “Troika” the EU, the International Monetary Fund (IMF), and the European Central Bank (ECB). Since then, the PIIGS have faced drastic measures and political unrest as a result of being overwrought with debt, dismal productivity growth, unemployment, and structural problems. Austerity has been In Madrid, new austerity measures are met with massive protests. The political inability of a predominant guiding countries such as Greece and Spain to push for more change through austerity measures is principle since the crisis began, but for most coun- but one of the many reasons the European Union must rely on each other through fiscal unity tries, particularly the PI- to overcome the crisis. Source: Jasper Juinen/Getty Images IGS, it has reached its These efforts alone will not be limits. Because lenders have lost faith rency and thus regain their competiin the EU’s financial regulation, EU tiveness—stifling their efforts to end the enough to save the EU, however, as governments are burdened by immense recession. These countries have very Greece continues to fall into deprespressure from foreign lenders to imple- few options to revive their economies, sion. Now that the EU has agreed on ment even more severe cuts to public making cooperation the best choice. continuing financial union, in order to funding. However, most austerity pack- The bottom line is this: if the EU does resolve the issues troubling all member ages face large protests, as EU citizens not tighten its fiscal relationships with countries, more stable countries must suffer from unemployment and pover- one another, and Germany does not work with the ECB and the rest of the ty. The unstable economic climate has commit more than the bare minimum EU to revise treaties and constitutions also led to growing xenophobia and the to keep the EU alive, the recession in to allow for higher inflation and growth, rise of extremist groups. Further aus- Europe will only deepen, benefitting as well as create a more equal and coterity measures will only deepen politi- no one. Failing countries will default operative EU. Considering the inflexcal turmoil, making an alternative so- on their debt, impacting every country ibility of the euro, governments need lution necessary if the EU is to survive. negatively, and the possibility of the to focus on financial unity to press for While the PIIGS are wracked with EU rising from recession will persist. change under dire circumstances. • In an effort to fight the crisis, the debt, Germany remains stable. Since
INTERNATIONAL
fall 2012
15
India in Peril
Indian politicians gamble away their country’s economic opportunity BY VINAYAK GANESHAN, Staff Writer
only expanded by 4%. Similar trends abound in development of sewage systems, access to potable water and facildeafening silence has fallen upon ities for education. Again, these probinvestors in Mumbai, the finanlems stand in stark contrast to India’s cial capital of India. Just a year economic competitor, China, which has ago, Indian business leaders were devoted over 51% of its GDP towards bullish about continuing growth rates investment into the economy. This has near 10%. Credit ratings agencies have reaped rewards in terms of transit and disagreed. On September 24th 2012, livability in cities - two factors that InStandard and Poor’s joined Moody’s dian states score abysmally in. Analytics in downgrading the India’s Investors are also seeing China as a GDP forecast to 5.5%. This is not the stronger investment than India due to first time that the Indian economy has China’s comparatively positive manudisappointed, but it is the most sigfacturing climate and the existence of nificant drop in growth since former necessary infrastructure. Whether or Finance Minister Manmohan Singh not that qualification is true, foreign diliberalized the country’s antiquated rect investment into the manufacturing economy in 1991. Since that time, an industry certain reflects a huge advaneconomically-empowered electorate tage on China’s part. Many economists has been increasing its governmental have noted the role of manufacturing in demands. Unfortunately, the ruling cocreating and sustaining a middle class; alition (composed of the UPA and BJP by not capitalizing on this opportunity, parties) has done little but underwhelm India’s GDP per capita will remain far in return. As of now, India’s leaders are lower than its neighbor (currently the jeopardizing its vaunted BRIC status difference stands at 7000 dollars per over simple reforms that should have person). Endemic poverty never makes been implemented years before. for good politics or economics. The first sector of the economy Thus, it seems as if the world has that needs revision is foreign investforgotten the advice of Ruchir Sharma, ment. Due to the current byzantine author of “Breakout Nations”, who investment system, noted that there are foreign corporatruly few nations tions are strongly in the world that discouraged from can maintain high investing in Ingrowth rates of over dia. On September decades. India has 14th, the execufallen victim to its tive branch issued own jubilant optian order passing mism, and now the much-needed legcountry must make islation to revise some politicallylegal codes for cortough decisions in porations such as order to return to IKEA and Walmart. previous figures. If But this legislation these requirements carried a significant are not met, the caveat: individual government runs states were given the risk of the anger permission to disof millions of Indiregard federal law ans, all too optimisand maintain the tic for a real chance old system. Given in the global econthe decentralized omy. Outsiders are nature of Indian watching for this politics, it is exAsian Tiger’s next ceedingly likely move, ever hopeful that opposition-led that it can reverse local governments track and assume will undermine the the role of economic efforts of Prime heavyweight that Minister Singh and Goldman Sachs current Finance The Dharavi slums are a sore spot in Mumbai, India’s Financial Capital. once predicted. • Minister Mr. Pa-
A
laniappan to jump-start the flagging economy. Such political squabbles present the BJP as the “people’s party” in the short run, but will likely incense the Indian electorate once their economic consequences become clear. After implementing reforms nearly two decades ago, Congress has largely sat on its heels, content to watch growth figures rise. But now that they are falling, change is required. Counterintuitive legislation subsidizing fuel is acting as an artificial restraints on the economy, and must be eliminated in order to increase efficiency. And these are just some of the petty political problems ossifying the political and bureaucratic system. Lastly, India’s antiquated infrastructure must also be revitalized. The recent power blackouts, in which roughly one-tenth of the world’s population was denied electricity for 2 days, best illustrates India’s infrastructure shortfalls. India is rapidly urbanizing; it has 53 cities with populations over one million people. The majority of these cities are, however, ill-equipped to deal with their rapid property expansion. While cities have grown at an average rate of 11% per year, their road networks have
Source: Times of India
16
bpr.berkeley.edu
INTERNATIONAL
Beijing faces economic, political, and diplomatic challenges BY RYAN HANG, Staff Writer
A
per China’s industrial productivity and exports in the long term, which is currently the driving force for its rapid economic growth. The general industrial slow down only sets back investment in high tech manufacturing and technology which are what China needs to become an economic super power. On the political front, the recent surge in protests cast doubt on China’s future political stability. The number of protests and demonstrations stemming from government corruption to Internet accessibility has dramatically
fter decades of civil and political strife, the People’s Republic of China has roared onto the global stage. China has grown an average of 10% of its GDP per year for the past 30 years and is scheduled to overtake the United States in Gross Domestic Product growth as early as 2018. Startling economic growth paired with dramatic increases in defense spending has nations around the world wondering how to deal with this rising superpower. While China’s transformation from an impoverished agrarian state to a dominant global power has certainly not been seamless, recent economic and political developments have still been jarring enough to put Chinese policymakers on fresh notice. In the wake of the global economic crisis, even Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao has acknowledged China’s economic slowdown. Slumping global demand has slowed Chinese exports and forced its economy into gridlock. Despite massive economic inter- Aug. 19, 2012. Thousands of protesters take the streets of vention in the form of protest Japan’s claims to the Diaoyu/Senkaku islands. stimulus packages, the Chinese econo- Source: STR AFP/Getty Images. my has still slowed to a 7.8% expected surged in China since 2006 and congrowth rate in the second quarter of tinues to rise. The latest round of pro2012 - the slowest growth rate in over tests in Hong Kong, driven by China’s three years. The economic slowdown proposal to implement “patriotism” has also put a freeze on China’s fixed classes in Hong Kong schools, have asset investment, which grew 20.2% in drawn the ire of Hong Kong residents the first 8 months of the year, the sec- who see the move as “brainwashing” ond lowest pace since December 2002. by the Chinese government. The ChiFixed assets, which are the means of nese government’s retreat from these production such as factories and prop- education policies in the face of proerties, are crucial to the Chinese econ- tests might indicate, however, that the omy as they gauge China’s industrial Chinese government is entering a new production, the mainstay of the Chinese era of compromise. This is not the first economy. Lagging investment in Chi- time that the Chinese government has na’s means of production, when paired backed off in the face of resistance. In with a shrinking labor force caused by 2011 when alleged land grabs by local China’s “One Child Policy,” could ham-
officials sparked a violent uprising in Wukan, the usually hardline Chinese government agreed to release prisoners and recognize the village’s democratically elected governing committee. Rising unrest and added scrutiny on the world stage establishes a space for the advancement of greater freedoms as China progresses into the future. The final problem that Chinese policymakers might face in the midst of economic and political uncertainty is the risk of regional war. As tensions flare over territorial claims to the Senkaku/Diaoyu islands, regional cooperation and civility are deteriorating. In the backdrop of naval deployments from Japan, China, and Taiwan to the disputed islands, nationalist tensions have flared as protests in at least 85 cities in China have seen the destruction of Sushi restaurants, Japanese-made cars and calls for war. Even without a war, this recent territorial dispute damages the regional ties that China needs to become a superpower, and only reinforces the fact that Chinese political and military projections Chengdu to are still constrained by other powers. Flaring nationalism also generates larger audiences, which make it increasingly difficult for both sides to back down and still save face. Under such economic pressure, China should continue to stimulate its economy through infrastructure packages and direct governmental spending to buy time for longer-term economic reforms. In the face of internal and external political pressures, China must ease off its normally tough stance and seek compromise with its internal and external opposition. Only then, can China resolve its underlying political unrest that could threaten to destabilize the country in the future. •
INTERNATIONAL NATIONAL NATIONAL
fall 2012
17
How the economic focus of U.S. Energy Policy drove environmental issues under the radar BY WIL MUMBY, Blog Editor
D
espite all the discussion of energy policy during this election season, there has been very little serious talk of environmental issues. Energy policy has become another forum for discussion of the economy, the seminal issue of the election, with perpetual usage of buzz words like “energy independence” and “jobs.” Governor Romney’s energy policy purports to help the U.S. acquire energy independence by 2020 by tapping abundant fossil fuel reserves in North America, virtually ignoring the environmental consequences of fossil fuel dependence. President Obama has given renewable energy attention during his first term, but as election politics beckoned he opted for an “All of the above” approach, refocusing on natural gas, oil, and coal. Professor Catherine Wolfram, co-director of the Energy Institute at Haas, acknowledged the economic rationality behind Obama’s decision, but expressed concerns about energy policy being so intertwined with the goals of job creation. “It’s kind of too bad that people feel like they need to wrap together job creation with some kind of energy policy,” Prof. Wolfram said. “I think they’re two different objectives and usually you get the best outcome if you use a targeted policy.” By focusing on the economy, it becomes easy for pressing environmental problems like climate change to get lost in the discussion. ESPM graduate student and Berkeley Energy and Resources Collaborative blogger, Patrick Donnelly-Shores, links this to a hard-right tilt in American politics that emerged during the Reagan administration and continues today with political platforms of both parties taking shape around the notions of free-market economic growth. “I don’t think either of these candi-
vironmental concerns can embolden themselves in a capitalist framework, but that it would require reforms in our institutions and policies. He suggests restructuring utilities in favor of publically owned utilities, like those more prevalent in water services that favor conservation, as opposed to investor owned utilities that are profit and consumption driven. In addition, he advocates for distributed generation, an energy production strategy favoring more localized production Source: Wikipedia Commons of alternative energy through smaller scale sources such as rooftop dates has an interest in sustainable development at all because their interest solar panels, echoing the “buy local” is in perpetuating our capitalist econo- ideology popularized by the food movemy,” Donnelly-Shores said. “They want ment. Such modifications offer interesting to continue growing this economy – you hear growth all the time, and perpetual new ways to tackle the energy problem growth is the ideology of a cancer cell.” that would thwart heavy dependence Such views, though underrepresent- on concentrated money interests and ed in the current political sphere, offer spread out investments and risk. Yet, insight into why environmental prob- as promising as such ideas seem, the lems don’t get more attention. While corporate influence in politics would President Obama has given consider- likely make implementing them at the ation to the importance of green energy federal level impossible. This is why as an alternative to carbon intensive Donnelly-Shores believes that it would sources, it is clear that he, like Rom- be most effective to implement these shifts at the state level through a federney, is transfixed on the economy. The current dichotomous political ally sponsored program. By using “Race climate makes addressing concerns, to the Top” as a model, states could be such as the dependence of the renew- prompted to compete for renewable enable energy industry on federal subsi- ergy subsidies. The parameters could dies, all the more problematic. With the be adjusted to whatever standards prevalence of monetized lobbying from were desired, motivating states to make special interests, it becomes difficult more environmentally friendly plans for unconventional opinions to make and reforms. Even as taxes remain unrealistic, headway. However, there are many ideas about how to combat the fragil- incentivizing progressive reforms could ity of alternative energy and make ad- help make these changes more appealdressing climate change a more central ing across the country and the political spectrum. By using state competition part of energy policy. Prof. Wolfram argues that a carbon as a vessel for environmental awaretax would really help the energy indus- ness and action, these ideas could betry move forward by incentivizing wiser come more politically feasible on the consumption of energy while raising federal level in the long-run. Through revenue. However, she acknowledges these means, outside ideas could pull a Trojan Horse on the citadel of “econothe infeasibility of such a measure. Donnelly-Shores contends that en- centric” politics. •
18
bpr.berkeley.edu
NATIONAL
The Lessons of the Occupy Movement BY JULIA KUCHMAN, Staff Writer
I
t is undeniable that the ideals of the Occupiers, such as widespread economic equality for the masses, have failed to materialize. An important factor behind the movement’s politically inconsequential dissipation was its reluctance to engage with the elite political structure it publically critiqued. This did not, nor should it have, implied support for the Democratic Party, but the movement could have worked toward a tangible change in the electoral composition of the political system— perhaps even for the rise of a formidable third party. In acknowledging the failings and shortcomings of Occupy a year later, it is important to consider what lessons it holds for future social movements. The movement began with cries to change the economic structure and power relations in society, with particular disapproval leveraged towards the global financial system said to undermine democracy and the common good of the masses. These broad claims— though they may hold some degree of truth about American capitalism— were met with an absence of plans to move forward and take action on their thoughts. The failure of Occupy to act on its ideals has nonetheless raised awareness of the issues among Americans, with the Pew Research Center finding this month that 61 percent of Americans say that the economic system in this country unfairly favors the wealthy, with only 36 percent saying that this system is generally fair to most Americans. S o c i ology Professor Claude Fischer, whom has held skepticism towards the move-
ment since its early weeks last year, described that the energy of movement has dissipated due to a lack of clear means and a clear end. In particular, Fischer pointed to the reluctance of the movement to seek goals in the political realm as a key failing of the movement. The initial energy of the movement that could have been put to more productive use, according to Fischer, saying, “They could have hooked on to the 99 percent idea, asking each protestor to register 99 voters. But it was very clear that they didn’t want to do straight politics.” Fischer drew a parallel of the
attention issues that more radical activists had been discussing for years. After the media took up attention, for at least a short while Americans began talking amongst themselves about inequality, bringing a sense of community to common grievances. Moreover, Obama brought inequality to the forefront of his response to the economic crisis by framing the crisis in terms of inequality in his State of the Union address and again in April at a luncheon with the Associate Press saying, “What drags down our entire economy is when there is an ultra-wide chasm between the ultra-wealthy and everyone else.” Even Kanye West co-opted the rhetoric of the Occupy movement, incorporating criticism of Mitt Romney for only paying 14 percent in income taxes last year. It is not likely that American figures could have discussed such topics without the media attention and priming sparked largely by Occupy, even if such discussion never led to clear change. Thus, in considering the impact of Occupy a Source: AP Photo/Seth Wenig year after it first began, while the Occupy moveOccupy Movement to the Berkeley stu- ment never coalesced into a distinct dent protests about rising tuition last political party, wrote new policy or oryear, saying, “Protestors spent much ganized to support regulation of Big time assailing the administration when Business, it has created a model for they could have been organizing voters future social movements to improve to change the composition of the state upon. Moreover, in order to address an legislature. They would have had a bet- issue as complex as income inequality, ter change of actually changing the tu- it appears necessary that some sort of ition if had changed two or three seats political action is incorporated into the in the state legislature, which really efforts of future social movements. This can make a difference.” key lesson may be the lasting legacy of Despite the absence of clear political Occupy. • goals, as inequality continued to widen each day in America, Occupy protestors brought to the center of national
NATIONAL
fall 2012
Voter Surplus
19
What gets lost when two parties own the national conversation BY MATTHEW SYMONDS, Staff Writer
E
very four years Republicans and Democrats line up to fight one another in brutal contests for public support. Behind the scenes, however, the two parties sustain a set of shared interests. They co-own the Commission on Presidential Debates, a non-profit organization that, by requiring 15% support in five national polls to participate in presidential debates, works to ensure elephants and donkeys are all that enter the American political mind. Third parties know debates are important to a candidate’s visibility and reputation. So Jill Stein, the Green Party candidate for President, tried to enter the town hall debate October 16th. She was arrested on-site and handcuffed to a chair for eight hours, restrained like a scoundrel, out of sight and out of mind. Upon release she forwarded a calm and sensible appeal to make the debate “more full, fair and inclusive.” Libertarian presidential candidate and former New Mexico Governor Gary Johnson took a more institutional approach, which in a way became the more visible and compelling act of resistance. He filed a lawsuit against the Commission on Presidential Debates, claiming they are in violation the Sherman Antitrust Act. The law outlaws acting to “conspire with any other person or persons, to monopolize any part of the trade or commerce among the several States.” I pressed Governor Johnson on the legal details of the suit during his visit to campus September 28th. He explained, “This is a private organization dictating to the rest of the country what they can and can’t hear… They are picking Republicans and Democrats to participate in the debates.” Unfortunately for Gary Johnson, the lawsuit will likely go nowhere. His reasoning does not connect the presidential debates to any form of interstate commerce. Nevertheless, the symbolic message the move conveys is striking. The two main parties don’t just block competition in the national economy; they maintain a monopoly on the political process that shuts Libertarians and other parties out. Monopolistic firms raise prices to convert consumer surplus into profits; the mainstream parties convert ‘voter surplus’ into political dividends: less work to attain more power and flexibility in office. Like a market with limited choice, a
Source: Associated Press ballot with few viable candidates creates intractable problems. Voters have less power to push elected officials to make good decisions. It is also harder to punish politicians for breaking past campaign promises. Instead of finding a spectrum of voices on an issue, voters encounter a discrete few, none of which may agree with their own. Cynical and dissatisfied tongue-biters of all stripes line up at polling stations to vote for the lesser of two evils, over and over again. Gallup polling in 2011 found Americans support marijuana legalization 50% to 46%. Both President Obama and Republican candidate Mitt Romney however, oppose legalization; whoever wins will continue the aggressive federal crackdown on medical dispensaries in states like California and Colorado, and there is little voters can do to threaten their dissatisfaction. Limited choice compels voters to support teams, not policies or values. This tendency is a sad hallmark of our political culture. Under President Bush, a 2007 Pew Research poll found 57% of Democrats opposed the detainment without charge of prisoners in Guantanamo Bay. A 2012 Washington Post/ABC News Poll, during Obama’s term, found 53% of liberal Democrats and 67% of moderate or conservative Democrats supported keeping the prison open. Rather than letting their values decide which policies they support, some Democrats back poli-
cies simply because the Obama administration authorized them. There are, however, limits to the monopoly analogy. An important part of the reason third parties have trouble gaining traction is because most voters disagree with major third party positions. Gary Johnson’s budget, the centerpiece of his platform, is a political non-starter: he wants deep cuts to Medicare, a proposal the Washington Post in August found 77% of Americans oppose. So to conclude that Libertarians’ lack of support is driven entirely by a lack of exposure would be naïve. Still, the country would be better off if third parties got the chance to debate with mainstream candidates. On October 23rd Larry King commendably hosted an online debate with third party candidates, but separate is not equal. Sharing a stage, the third parties could pressure the Democrats and Republicans to address the war on drugs, the detention provisions of the NDAA and other important policies absent from the national political conversation. Reciprocally, folks like Gary Johnson would likely be forced to acknowledge that it takes more than just a spotlight to win an election. When the voters are watching, they have to like what they see. •
20
bpr.berkeley.edu
NATIONAL
Voter ID Laws and Democratic Suppression BY ZAC COMMINS, Staff Writer
G
enerations of activists fought institutions of injustice to advance the voting rights for all Americans. However even in modern America, a new generation of voting laws threatens the voting rights of the vulnerable and undermines the foundation of our democracy. In the past two years, a wave of strict voter ID laws requiring voters to present state- or federal-issued identification at polling stations has struck states such as Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Texas. Many proponents of these laws believe these provisions preserve the integrity of our electoral process. “At the heart of every true democracy is the certainty of open and fair elections. At the heart of every open and fair election is the integrity of each and every vote,” Gov. Rick Perry commented on Texas’s Senate Bill 14. “It’s our duty to ensure that our elections are fair be-
yond reproach and accurately reflect the will of the voters.” Although Perry describes the impetus for voter ID laws as the preservation of electoral integrity, many opponents contend voter ID laws disenfranchise voters. UC Student Regent and California Common Cause board member Jonathan Stein contends these provisions infringe on the rights of students, low-income, and elderly voters. “We are talking about a lot of folks who, for a variety of reasons, have not been active participants in our democracy anyway with the exception of the elderly,” Stein said. “We are taking marginalized groups and we are marginalizing them even further.” Stein believes that the threat of voter fraud does not signify that states should institute voter ID laws. “While you may say there are vulnerabilities with voting machines or the
election system, we are potentially excluding certain people from our democracy in order to prevent a fake threat that never really happens,” he said. As many other states have enacted voter ID laws that may violate voting rights, California has implemented online voter registration and will add election-day voter registration for future elections. “We should be really proud that we are increasing voting rights in California while many other states are going backwards,” Stein said. The restrictive voting laws spreading across the nation not only threaten the voting rights of students and other groups but also undermine our democratic tradition. Students should advocate protections of the voting rights of every American rather than combating an imaginary threat. •
NATIONAL
fall 2012
21
Redefining The Deserving Poor
Source: Wikipedia Commons
BY LUIS FLORES, National Editor & MANDY HONEYCHURCH, Staff Writer
I
n a weekly viral address on September 29, 2012, President Obama announced a plan to “help responsible homeowners refinance their mortgages” by cutting red tape in the refinance process. The President identified responsible homeowners as those who “shopped for a home, secured a mortgage they could afford, and made their payments on time.” The implication is that a large proportion of underwater homeowners have brought their condition upon themselves. Such narratives are problematized by recent evidence of what Deputy Attorney General James Cole, in a suit filed against Wells Fargo for charging higher mortgage interest rates to minorities, described as “systemic discrimination.” The crisis of the Great Recession has largely been the crisis of the middle class. The Market’s latest collapse introduced the middle class to the conditions that had been geographically confined to inner cities or rural slums. Poverty has seeped into the suburbs. Described by some as the “new poor,” this class aims to mitigate its declining social condition by claiming responsible behavior. According to the Census Bureau, the number of poor people in the suburbs of metropolitan areas rose 24% from 2006 to 2010, rising from 14.4 million people to 17.8 million people. The suburbs may no longer be the safe haven they once were from the city, as the effects of poverty continue to seep into suburban neighborhoods. In response to the growing need for a middle-class safety net, the President downplayed the system of asymmetric information, both financial and cultural, that leads to what he suggests is “irresponsible behavior.” Such narratives are neither new nor accidental. During a recent UC Berkeley conference on the Territories of Poverty, University of Pennsylvania historian Michael Katz underscored the historic prevalence of the “deserving” and “undeserving” poor in the rhetoric of welfare policy. The deserving poor have historically been the disabled, widows, children, and now “respon-
sible homeowners” and “hard-working Americans,” have been characterized by their innocence in their unfavorable conditions. The undeserving poor are often morally stigmatized as “welfare queens,” dependant, or irresponsible. These scapegoats often divert attention away from the adverse effects of the American market system, and recently, the predatory habits of the American financial system. UC Berkeley’s dean of the College of Environmental Design, Jennifer Wolch, explained at this same conference that beginning in 1996 with President Clinton’s welfare reform, “the welfare state as we know it was effectively dismantled.” Wolch decried the gutting of “entitlements in recognition that economic systems had economic effects no matter the amount of individual effort.” Clinton’s 1996 Welfare Reform Act focused on the dependent and thus undeserving poor. While debates in Congress continue to reflect the fear of breeding dependency, the new undeserving poor introduced by President Obama are irresponsible market participants. Defaulting on loans and unskilled for employment in emerging industries, the Democrat’s undeserving poor are inadequate capitalists. The President has not significantly challenged the course set by Clinton’s welfare reforms, but this is not entirely his fault. President Obama has occasionally mentioned structural inequalities and predatory financial practices; in fact, his record as a community organizer in Chicago’s south side suggests that he understood this at a young age. Yet the polarization of Republican and Democratic platforms constrain each other to blaming poverty on people and places (the irresponsible, the dependent, the urban). Faced with an opponent who categorizes 47% of the nation as dependant, the President has no incentive to muster the political courage required to vehemently combat the systems of American poverty—leaving completely unmentioned American practices that produce poverty abroad. As other stories in this issue sug-
gest, there are a multitude of forces involved in producing and constraining public policy discourses and the legislative possibilities they enable. While dichotomous political platforms are an important part of it, moral and social anxieties, financial fetishisms, and even gendered relationships (i.e. welfare queens), all contribute to this process. When it came to addressing the Great Recession four years ago, the administration’s focus was not on decreasing poverty but on spurring economic growth—goals that history shows to be weakly related. Irresponsible, but “essential” (arguably criminal), financial institutions were bailed out with urgency. By virtue of their centrality to American enterprise, these institutions were deserving of fiscal and monetary aid. The discursive juxtaposition between the deserving and undeserving poor has found its way into the rhetoric of the Obama administration after the recession; however, this resurgence should not be narrated as a ghostly remnant of the Clinton administration. The discourse is taking a central role in justifying and moralizing the American economic system and in mitigating the anxieties that now occupy the social space of the “New Poor.” •
22
bpr.berkeley.edu
A Morality of Success and Failure
NATIONAL NATIONAL
Ayn Rand and the rise of moral economics BY WOODY LITTLE, Staff Writer
I
n a 2011 interview, Rep. Paul Ryan was asked, “Do you think Republicans are doing a successful job making the moral case for capitalism?” He responded, “Not enough.” The discussion of a “moral case for capitalism” revives the ideas of Ayn Rand, a novelist and philosopher active in the 1950s and 60s who advocated a morality based on selfish action. Rand proclaims that free market capitalism effectively channels this moral human selfishness and is thus the only moral economic system, allowing the morally successful to become wealthy and the moral failures to fail financially. Though many modern Republican economic polices can be traced back to the Reagan era, the rhetoric and thinking surrounding them has greatly transformed since then. Reagan’s GOP kick-started the conservative push for free markets with their deregulatory and tax-cutting policies in the 1980s. However, they did so based on amoral, pseudo-scientific arguments that predicted quantitative economic growth to follow qualitatively-instructed policy. The presence of strong economic growth following the recession of 1981 earned Reagan’s policies significant acceptance. However, the Bush tax cuts, which lowered taxes most on the wealthy, preceded the slowest period of growth under any postwar president. Several recent studies have debunked the correlation between high-income tax cuts and growth scientifically. Owen Zidar, a UC Berkeley Ph.D candidate in economics, found it to be “statistically insignificant.” Additionally, expanded deregulation is credited as a major cause of the 2008 financial crash and the Great Recession. With the evidence largely against their scientific and predictive economic policies, conservatives have rebuilt their economics on Randian moral grounds, attempting to change the discussion from market failure to moral failure. To some degree this project has
succeeded. Debate over substantive financial reform stagnated after the passage of Dodd-Frank, even though critics such as UC Berkeley professor Source: Wikipedia Commons Robert Reich contend the bill was “effectively neutered” by Wall the Laffer curve or supply side economStreet lobbying. In the policy vacuum, ics, conservatives now intone the job Republicans have shifted focus to re- creator mantra when advocating for tax cuts. While Newt Gingrich tried to forming the social safety net. Jennifer Wolch, Dean of the Col- privatize Social Security in the 1990s lege of Environmental Design at UC to prevent it from “going broke,” Paul Berkeley, claims, “Americans, steeped Ryan sought to do the same in 2005 in ideologies of individualism and self- because he views it as a “collectivist reliance…have always been uneasy system.” Scientific theory and pragmawith welfare.” Proponents of the 1990s tism have given way to an ideology that welfare reform tapped into this unease deifies “job creators” and abandons the by alleging the existence of “welfare poor to their moral failure. The relaqueens,” single women so morally de- tive policy focus on the wealthy and the graded by government dependency that poor has followed from this structure. The GOP’s rapid embrace of Randthey cheated the system for ever more ian morals may help explain recent benefits. Modern Republican reformers evoke Republican intransigence. Counter to the same individualist legacy but with the narrative of Reagan the unbendmore morally charged language. Rep. ing conservative, an LA Times editorial Allen West has alleged, “the Democratic reminds that “at bottom, Reagan was appetite for ever-increasing redistribu- a pragmatist, willing, when necessary, tionary handouts is in fact the most to cut a deal and compromise.” Forcinsidious form of slavery remaining in ing economic policy into a moral framethe world today.” Painting Democratic work eliminates much of the flexibility redistributive polices as slavery puts needed for such compromise. Randian rhetoric, by deifying the the GOP in the moral position of abolitionists, and in doing so evokes a moral rich and castigating the poor, also paternalism that reinforces a Randian threatens to reinforce an already stratified socio-economic hierarchy. These narrative of the poor’s moral failure. Mitt Romney’s recent comments divisions will only widen as economic about the 47% of Americans who pay inequality increases. “Not enough” for Paul Ryan, the shift no net income tax illustrate how far moral economics have penetrated into towards a morality of success and failthe mainstream. Lamenting his inabil- ure may yet continue. So will the conity to persuade those in this 47% to sequences. • vote for him, he characterized them as “victims” of dependency, and declared that he could “never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives.” This is a moral judgment. Whether or not he reads Rand, Mr. Romney’s comments broadly reflect her ideology. Instead of pointing to theories like
NATIONAL
fall 2012
23
Mommy Michelle
ing to Washington was filled with simple joys...Saturdays at soccer games, Sundays at grandma’s house....” This desire to project the image of a tradition, nuclear family is of particular importance to the first African-American president. Even when inin, like Barack... For volved in policy, Miwhat I’m trying to do chelle focuses on at the hospital, getting issues that are dehim elected is a better cidedly domestic. way for me to reach Despite her roots as that goal.” a litigator and proThe criticism of fessed interest in the Mrs. Obama’s $6800 racial issues, she is J. Mendel jacket as chiefly involved in efinsensitive to the ecoforts to reduce childnomic woes of the hood obesity. This public –coupled with emphasis on “femithe absence of comnine” issues is perparable censure dihaps a result of the rected towards the backlash engendered President’s fashion by Hillary Clinton’s sense –illustrates the extensive involvemedia’s desire for Miment in the healthchelle to conform to an care reform efforts of antiquated gender role 1993. and serve as an accesThe First Lady’s sory to her husband. role illustrates the As an accessory, Source: Wikipedia Commons compromises that all Michelle is especially women face. Despite important to Barack through her role as wife and mother. their increasing education and indeShe testifies to his strong commitment pendence, their choices continue to be to family, saying “Our life before mov- constrained by their gender. •
The Role of the Political Wife BY DISHA BANIK & VIVEKA JAGADEESAN, Staff Writers
A
t September’s Democratic National Convention, Mrs. Obama announced, “My first job in all honesty is going to continue to be mom-in-chief.” This would have been surprising to hear from Michelle Robinson thirty years ago, an associate at Sidley Austin law firm assigned to mentor Barack Obama. Despite her media portrayal as an independent First Lady, Michelle’s role in the campaign and at the White House seems largely determined by her gender and status as Barack’s wife rather than by her individual capabilities. She seems to have made the same sacrifice as many women of her generation; she left her job as Vice President of External Affairs at University of Chicago Hospitals to work on her husband’s campaign. Michelle justified her choice, saying, “… the bigger goal here is to get a good president—somebody I believe
The Chicago Teacher Strikes Some Inconvenient Truths About Party Allegiance
BY CHINMAI RAMAN & FELIX CRUZ, Staff Writers
L
ast month’s teachers strike in Chicago – launched in protest over education policy reforms introduced by the city’s democratic mayor, Rahm Emmanuel – highlighted the increasingly fractious relationship between organized labor and the Democratic party. While Mitt Romney was quick to voice his opposition to the strike, frustrated teachers hoped to find a sympathetic ear in the Oval Office. However, President Obama – who previously employed Mr. Emmanuel as his Chief of Staff –largely remained silent on the issue until an agreement between the mayor and the union had been reached, at which point he emphasized America’s need for “important results” while also taking the opportunity to excoriate Romney for “teacher bashing.” In part, the strike suggests that an ideological gulf has developed within the historically populist Democratic party that now separates two major democratic constituencies: those who support labor unequivocally, and the
increasing number of liberals that view unions with a more skeptical eye. Moreover, it lends credence to the notion that our political system, through increasing austerity and consumerism, has subordinated the interests of labor to private interests. Such a new and tense dynamic between the party of the people and unions has implications far beyond the city limits of Chicago. With the continually increasing cost of elections, the priorities of the Democratic party has shifted away from interests of labor; now the benefits of aligning with labor or the working class come at the potentially high cost of aggravating corporate donors. This trend, coupled with the decidedly pro-business, anti-union stance of the Republican Party, relegates the interests of organized labor to the margins of mainstream public discourse and to the bottom of either major party’s list of political priorities. So while the Obama and Romney campaigns try to illustrate dramatic contrasts between the respective can-
Source: Associated Press didates, it seems both agree that catering to the interests of organized labor is not a viable campaign strategy. This effectively alienates an entire socioeconomic class from a political system supposedly predicated on equal representation. Such a scenario has often historically resulted in demands for reform or revolution, and the two major parties would do well to address the situation before more coercive and disruptive methods of political action are adopted. •
24
bpr.berkeley.edu
OPINION
Measure S: Out of Sight, Out of Mind? The “Civil Sidewalks” ballot measure will conform Berkeley, eradicating poverty only from our consciousness, not our reality BY MARTINA CHUN, Staff Writer
H
aving been raised in Calabasas, a small, upper middle-class suburban town, with practically nonexistent homeless population, Berkeley came as a culture shock for me. I still remember when I first stumbled out of the Bart Station onto Shattuck. It was dirty, loud, and homeless people were sitting everywhere, blurting out incomprehensible words. Honestly, I was scared of this place I would soon be calling home. But overall, it was eye-opening. Many people in my hometown strive for a rather scary aurora of “perfection”. Despite all the perks of growing up in Calabasas, it never taught me to think about poverty. Rather, it hid the problems of the world in its clean streets lined with flowers and palm trees, impeccably safe behind the grandiose gates, and wide backyards with fancy swimming pools and tennis courts. Thus, just living in Berkeley itself has been a kind of education for me. Berkeley is a place of higher education, immense privilege and prestige. But Berkeley is also a place that incessantly reminds students of inequality and poverty -- no covering or sugarcoating. On the other hand, we’ve all been there on Telegraph; homeless people are often smelly, unsightly, and we avoid them when we can (unless we have had experience with homelessness that contradicts the aforementioned stereotypes). But their presence prohibits us, in a sense, from forgetting. It prompts admittance of the fact that the real world is more than maintaining the perfect GPA, making the flawless résumé, and finding the perfect career. That’s why Measure S -- a city ordinance the Mayor proposed in July for the ballot this November that would make it
illegal to sit on commercially zoned sidewalks during business hours -- will cost us on a level that far outweighs the assumed benefits of clear streets. Mayor Bates claimed in his July 19th contribution to The Daily Californian: “When homeless people take up residence in commercial corridors where services for them are not generally available, it perpetuates the cycle of poverty”. Does the Mayor believe Measure S will help homeless people into the seemingly numerous services of which they are not aware? On the contrary, Berkeley has approximately 135 shelter beds for more than 600 homeless people. Those who get beds for the night are kicked out at six in the morning. Many have disabilities that do not necessarily require wheelchairs, but do require sitting to rest over the course of the day -- Measure S makes no exception for them. Since Berkeley banned sleeping on sidewalks fifteen years ago, the City Council has not brought forward measures to expand homeless services or streamline participation. Councilmember Jesse Arreguin proposed a five-point process on July 10th of this year for reviewing existing homelesstargeted laws in a community-directed fashion and expanding day services to allow 24/7 homeless support, but the Council instead voted to place Measure S on the ballot. The idea that the
homeless are to blame for their poverty is a common -- and false -- argument used in support of law and order punitive “solutions” like Measure S. Also, according to the Mayor’s June report to the City Council, the Measure would cost approximately $26,000 to enforce the goal of getting people off sidewalks, with nothing in the text of the law explaining how homeless people would go from streets to services. The goal seems to be to drive homeless people out of Berkeley, fueled by the myth of roving gangs of young hooligans being to blame for the countrywide economic downturn that -- go figure -- is also affecting Berkeley. That $26,000 would be worth spending to help the homeless, but not to harass them. The Berkeley Peace and Justice Commission similarly reports in a September 10th letter to the City Council that “such focus on non-violent behavior issues puts a burden on police resources and draws their focus from crime prevention and investigation”. Measure S carries an underlying, frightening mission to sweep homeless people out of our sight, and thus, our consciousness, so that we allegedly will feel comfortable and safe to go to local businesses. But draconian harassment of people sitting on sidewalks is not a solution. Of course, we can avoid this fiasco by re-evaluating the measure’s provided implications before casting a vote. •
Source: ABC News 7, KGO-TV San Francisco
OPINION
fall 2012
25
Running on Empty Obama’s “all of the above” energy plan is anything but BY BEN GOLDBLATT, Staff Writer
P
resident O b a m a has repeatedly claimed his administration is devoted to an “all of the above” energy strategy. While this might make for a clever slogan on the campaign trail, it doesn’t quite match up with reality. More accurately, the Obama Administration has taken a lopsided approach, imposing numerous barriers to harvesting energy from America’s most easily accessible and abundant resources while recklessly investing taxpayer funds in newer and more unreliable energy sources. This raises serious questions about whether the President can capably lead the country on energy policy now and in the future. A March U.S. Energy Information Agency (USEIA) report revealed that oil production on federal lands dropped by 14% from 2010 to 2011. Rather than trying to reverse this trend, the Obama Administration is now seeking new regulations that would further reduce oil extraction. For example, the Department of the Interior is currently pursuing rules that would limit hydraulic fracturing on federal lands. Called “fracking” by detractors, hydraulic fracturing is a remarkable technology where fluid is pumped into a well, creating pressure on solid bedrock, which then enables oil and natural gas to seep out. The Administration is going after coal, too. Citing compliance costs imposed by the government as a major contributing factor, USEIA estimated that 175 coal-fired generators will likely be turned off from 2012 to 2016, reducing America’s coal-fired capac-
ity by a total of 8.5%. This can be attributed to the rise of regulations like the EPA’s proposed Coal Ash Rule, which would force plants to modify core operations to meet stringent pollution standards, leaving many companies that cannot afford the transition to terminate operations completely. Under the direction of the Obama Administration, the Department of Energy (DOE) used stimulus funds to distribute nearly $35 billion to various renewable energy companies. While Solyndra became notorious last year for taking part in this program and going bankrupt, the House Committee on Energy and Commerce recently released a list with four other companies that went bankrupt, as well as two that have experienced mass layoffs, and another one on the brink of bankruptcy. The DOE estimates that the allocated funds have created approximately 60,000 jobs, which means each job cost taxpayers about $580,000. In August, Mitt Romney released a report on the energy policy he would pursue if elected. In it, Romney called for the emergence of America as an “energy superpower,” arguing that government must “restore transparency and fairness to permitting and regulation” and “facilitate private-sector-led development of new energy technologies”— just the opposite of what has gone on under the Obama Administration. The Nuclear Energy Institute cites both candidates as favoring nuclear energy, but only Romney as promising to direct the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission to “ensure that licensing decisions based on pre-approved designs are issued within two years”. With Nevada as a swing state -- and both candidates favoring local consent
Source: Al Goldis/AP for the Yucca Mountain used fuel repository -- nuclear energy is unlikely to be a campaign issue. But which candidate will move forward after the election: The one who stalled progress on Yucca Mountain approval for four years without seeking alternatives, or the one who pledged to “let other states make bids” if Nevadans don’t want it? President Obama’s assault on traditional energy resources -- such as oil and coal -- demonstrates more of an “anything but…” deflection than the “all of the above” policy he likes to tout. His pro-nuclear stance without significant progress on gaining used fuel repository site approval shows a middling mentality, not an “all of the above” approach. If you value a government that promotes immediate and vast domestic energy production, frugality with taxpayer dollars, and a pathway toward energy independence, then you don’t share President Obama’s views on energy.•
26
bpr.berkeley.edu
OPINION
No Assassination Without Representation
The global community deserves to be heard in U.S. presidential elections, through the ballot rather than the bullet BY NASHILU MOUEN-MAKOUA, Staff Writer
T
he ire facing Laden within the borders of a nonthe U.S. to- consenting Pakistan, and expanded seday is lost on cret military operations in Africa—the many nationals. purpose of which has yet to be seen. Late last month, These aggressive campaigns of foroffense turned to eign intervention are not questionanger before the able solely in terms of morality, but scenes unravel- -- more importantly -- through the ing across the lenses of responsibility and accountMuslim World, ability. The international community as precious U.S. has not asked to be policed by this flags were trampled and KFCs were superpower, and yet we now find ourtorched. Watching this vocal, violent selves administered by a President minority of Muslims riot against U.S. embassies, USA Today aptly articulated the dose of Shock and Awe that had landed back in the homeland, wondering “how people the USA helped free from murderous dictators [could] treat it in such a way?” But the question is misplaced. This is a case of ‘why’ and ‘when’ rather than ‘how’. When did we foreigners, the other 95% of the world, become a mere annexation, an extension of the United States of America, governed by officials who owe us neither justification nor explanation? (Full disclosure -- I’m a foreigner.) Backlash against the U.S. is not so much anti-Americanism as anti-Stateism, in reaction to the U.S. use of legislative and military power to virtually annex the global community. In the past 18 months alone, the Source: USAID Bangladesh Obama Administration has peppered the Mali skies with covert drone operations, spread judiciary tentacles whose election is out of our reach. into New Zealand pulling out one Kim Rather than cowering in fear each DotCom –Megaupload founder— and time the POTUS announces a drone pressured the U.K. into ensnaring Ju- strike, let’s make the annexation oflian Assange in London. U.S. rhetoric ficial. We, too, should be able to take laced with threat has pressed West- to the ballot box, though solely in the ern hegemony firmly and repeatedly election of the POTUS. Where Romneyonto the Iranian psyche in demands Ryan or Obama-Biden arguably hold to limit unsavory nuclear develop- superficial domestic differences, their ment. Covert and overt military opera- foreign polices have greater implications have armed Libyan rebels in the tions on the countries that stray from battles against Qaddafi, performed the American favor. The U.S. is founded stealthy assassination of Osama Bin on a principle of “no taxation without
representation”, a phrase that tickles the taste buds of patriotism. But what of coercion, obligation or intimidation without representation? I call for the global community to become the semi-51st State. Make a little space for the rest of the world in the Electoral College. There are currently over 300 diplomatic missions scattered across over 180 nations -- let these stand in as polling stations. Rather than attempt to crowd entire countries into the physical ballot booth, the absentee ballot should be the default method of voting. These ballots will then be counted by U.S. diplomats and staff at each polling point, keeping the election well within American hands. On the all important matter of voter eligibility, let us keep to the standards set by the U.S., enfranchising all citizens of the concerned countries over the age of 18 who have registered – with a valid national ID of course—at least 30 days prior to the election. As in the majority of U.S. states, voter rights will be restored to foreign felons only once they have completed both their sentence and five years of state supervision. The small print necessary to make this modest proposal a reality will inevitably follow, tediously scrawling out rules and regulations until the American populace is satisfied. Complex as they may be, these steps must be taken. The question can no longer be whether to listen or ignore the world, but rather, how best to do the former, as unheard voices clamor more loudly and urgently to be heard above the drones or extradition orders ringing on above them. To ignore these cries is to claim to hear no evil and see no evil, leaving only the American mouth firmly set in an indignant and unanswerable “why.” •
OPINION
fall 2012
27
28
bpr.berkeley.edu
OPINION
Art in Visual Culture BY JACQUELINE ALAS, Staff Writer
W
ith the unanswerable question, “what is art,” still insoluble, one could politely say this question has not been explored sufficiently. Although it seems that the importance of artistic expression often takes a back seat to political and economic changes, the “we’re-just-toobusy-to-care” sentiment does not explain the indiscernibility of the question. Ultimately, the objectifying nature of the question sends any approach to the question off on a misguided tangent. Whatever “art” is—from every time period, it is embedded in our visual culture—not separated and pedestalled. Ordinary experiences and commonplace objects, innocuous in their presence, become powerful signs that provide us with a lens to understand how the visual as a structure, transforms, or even disrupts political, social, and cultural forms. For instance, a label for a hair product produced in 1930s-India might at the first glance might not seem like a powerful image that could enable a radical politics. But, if we think about how this label would be used; one can imagine that the very act of using the product was immensely political when situated within the anti-colonial movement that was raging across India at this point. According to UC Berkeley Professor Sugata Ray, “everyday practices that engage with the visual emerge as powerful sites where subjectivities are formed. As much as the power of images emerges in grand gestures of nation-making or political ferment, the everyday—the world in which this label was pried from its bottle and carefully preserved—gestures towards a rethinking of the inherently political nature of images and objects we inhibit.” The crux of interpreting art partially lies in discerning two common questions of an artist: what is my subject and how shall I portray it? Still, an artist’s intention while producing art does not determine the how an audience will receive the work. The audience’s interpretation of the work is the second part of interpretation. Between the artist’s intention and receptivity of an audience, different interpretations of artistic representational qualities diverge across different artistic movements. The external process of seeing art in visual culture to internalizing one’s sensation of art in interpretation further entrenches art in society beyond visual realms. This translation of art from its material form to conceptual interpretation, gives art its timeless quality and an ease of integrating itself in daily life. As a result, art gains potent repre-
sentational power that can condense a field of possible interpretations of situations in visual objects. The modern representational power of subjects and historical moments in art presented itself in CNN’s 2012 Digital Art Gallery “Power.” At face value, CNN’s very theme of power grasps the strife between agents in power relationships. Agents depicted in the gallery ranged from the collective public audience, authority figures, and the individual. While it is clear how groups of people and individuals are agents portrayed in art, objects are symbolic of inanimate agents that act in power relationships. In a sense our interpretations of those inanimate agents imbue life into them. By dividing the gallery into themes of power entitled: Collective Power, Power of Authority, Power Struggle, Personal Power, and Origins of Power, videos and images take us through present elements in power relationships though art. But, the immediate artistic importance of CNN’s gallery does not lie in its portrayal of political tensions of this year’s election. At hand, the gallery shows us that art uniquely has the representational power to make social and historical forces transparent to its audience.
In the relation to the historical trend of art, we can see that CNN’s gallery demonstrates how art can present subjects that are not instantly observable without art. The CNN Digital Art Gallery unearths the veneer of absolute reality that we encounter daily to present hidden tensions and sentiments that can only be revealed in art. By passing political rhetoric that inspires a presence of confidence, unity, and stability in each of the candidate’s public image, the art in CNN Gallery reveals the instability and distant relationship between the desires of the people and the 2012 candidates. Without art, these agents could not be represented. •
Art has always evoked a sense of power. Elizabeth I is painted here resting her hand on a globe.
ARTS & ENTERTAINMENT
fall 2012
29
Censorship of Art. A Futile Battle?
BY CARRIE YANG, Staff Writer
A
series of battles between artist Ai Weiwei and the Chinese government reached its climax with the arrest of Ai on April 3rd, 2011 for alleged economic crimes. His arrest was immediately met with international outcry, as many believed that it was simply a ruse of censorship. According to UC Berkeley Art History professor Patricia Berger, his arrest was shocking because few expected that “somebody who was from such a high level communist party family could still become subjected to this kind of restriction.” Ai was eventually released, and in June 2012 his bail was lifted. While it seems unsurprising that a controlling, centralized government would want to censor a politically critical artist, the nature of that censorship has changed because the internet has altered the ability to fully control the flow of information. Censorship is not a new concept. After commissioning Michelangelo to paint the Sistine Chapel, the Catholic Church censored The Last Judgment because of obscenity. Indeed, in the last decade, a reproduction of Pablo Picasso’s famous anti-war mural Guernica was censored at the entrance of the
Michelangelo’s “The Last Judgement” was considered controversial for its time.
United Nations Security Council preceding Iraq war talks. Governments, not just authoritarian ones, have both moral and political reasons to censor art and have done so for a long time. However, complete censorship may not be possible anymore. Berger states, “Even with the control on the internet on China proper, [the Chinese government] can’t control the internet globally. There is no controlling information anymore and that is a big problem for the government.” As with the Chinese
government, censorship has become more discreet, although in Ai’s case the international art community doubted that his arrest was really on the grounds of alleged economic crimes. In other places like the Middle East, heavy government restrictions on the internet did little to prevent the viral spread of revolutionary Arab Spring videos and blogs. Even in America the government has unsuccessfully tried to censor Wikileaks, a website that the government believes threatens national security. No matter how much a country lauds free speech, governments will try to censor what they consider to be especially dangerous. Whether this censorship is good or bad is a question that people will continue to debate, though because of the internet, governments no longer have the ability to fully do so. Governments have always and will always seek to censorship of what they consider dangerous; however, with the spread of information, that is now practically impossible. Free speech is no longer a privilege for free countries, it is a right that all people have so long as they can access to the internet. We have been handed a doubleedged sword and not even people like Ai Weiwei can control how we use it. •
The Performing Arts: Spreading the Love BY NORMAN CAHN, A&E Editor
through the spine; hair on the arms and legs rise; and as a lump rises in the throat, one cannot hold back tears of stillness comes over the audi- emotion. Much of the audience during ence as the stage lights fade, the Mariinsky Ballet and Orchestra’s signaling the start of the per- performance of Swan Lake, hosted by formance. The silence is broken by the Cal Performances, were in awe. Prior slender mourn of an oboe. As the strings to the show, elderly ballet lovers filled take on the oboe’s theme, a tingle runs the rows, many speaking excited Russian, and fidgeting in their seats like children on Christm a s mor ning. Indeed, the tour of the Mariinsky Ballet signifies pride, awe, and prestige. Lisa Gold, a Professor of muUC Berkeley’s Zellerbach Hall plays host to many international sic and performance groups, such as the Mariinsky Ballet. expert on
A
the international music of Gamelan at UC Berkeley claims, “countries intend when sending national troupes to show the diversity of cultures,” In Europe, these groups have been promoted by their association with a nation’s prestige, and the social benefits they bring. Ensembles such as the Mariinsky rely on both public subsidies and private funding, with the high capital costs of building venues, bourn by central and local government. However, major performance groups rely on a high proportion of low-paying part-time or limited contracts. Most have seasons and intervals in which they are not performing. Even those employed with longterm contracts work intermittently. Nevertheless, while the performing arts will always have issues, it will remain a rallying point for those separated from their homeland. As I sat awaiting the curtains to arise at the Mariinsky Ballet, I caught a snippet of the conversation behind me: an American woman turned to her friend asking, “Why are you here?” to which the other, in a thick Russian accent, with a broad, unquenchable grin replied, “Because they are here.” •
30
bpr.berkeley.edu
ARTS & ENTERTAINMENT
Iran’s Underground Voice
BY LAILA SAMIMI, Staff Writer
I
t seems as though not a day goes by without Iran being mentioned in a negative news headline or Ahmadinejad appearing as the butt of Jon Stewart’s latest satirical rant. The country’s glaring political presence is undeniable, calling to American minds images of a strict theocratic regime and an oppressed population. However, what often fades into the background of the media’s noise is Iran’s underground art scene—the echo of a nation’s youthful and vibrant identity. Iran’s underground arts movement has become an increasingly influential force in recent years, ranging from poetry, to music, social media, and film. While these artistic expressions offer far more than merely political commentary, the vast majority of them do possess political undertones that reflect the public discontent with the harsh and socially suffocating Islamic regime. The major spearheading force of Iran’s underground arts scene is the enormous demographic of new-generation Iranian youth. According to UC Berkeley Professor Zahedi, “65% of the population in Iran is under the age of thirty,” and are not willing to settle for censored media. Iran’s population today is more fragmented than ever before—but this has opened up creative borders that even censorship cannot constrain. Underground art in the form of music and it seems as though not a day goes by without Iran being mentioned in a negative news headline or Ahmadinejad appearing as the butt of Jon Stewart’s latest satirical rant. The country’s glaring political presence is undeniable, calling to American minds images of a strict theocratic regime and an oppressed population. However, what often fades into the background of the media’s noise is Iran’s underground art scene—the echo of a nation’s youthful and vibrant identity. Iran’s underground arts movement has become an increasingly influential force in recent years, ranging from poetry, to music, social media, and film. While these artistic expressions offer far more than merely political commentary, the vast majority of them do pos-
sess political undertones that reflect the public discontent with the harsh and socially suffocating Islamic regime. The major spearheading force of Iran’s underground arts scene is the enormous demographic of newgeneration Iranian youth. According to UC Berkeley Professor Zahedi, “65% of the population in Iran is under the age of thirty,” and are not willing to settle for censored media. Iran’s population today is more fragmented than ever before—but this has opened up creative borders that even censorship cannot constrain. Underground art in the form of music and film has become activism not only because it can mobilize, but because it can be shared with a vast number of people all over the world, largely
through the Internet. The Internet has become both a tool for the artist, as well as a new art form on its own. It has allowed Iranians to globalize and create larger networks, and is a lot harder for the government to control. In generations past, music was absorbed as a source of nostalgia— widely popular artists like Googoosh and Sattar let Iranians reminisce on love and good times. In recent years, however, the younger generation has taken the music industry and reinvented it, as evidenced the rapid prominence of rock, metal, hip-hop,
and rap underground movements. Award-winning documentary No One Knows about Persian Cats is perhaps the best embodiment of the underground Iranian music identity. The film is a denunciation of the government’s repression of Iran’s thriving artists, and a celebration of the new generation of Iranian youth yearning for artistic creative freedom. Shot in secret and written and directed by imprisoned Iranians, the documentary follows a group of young musicians recently released from jail who are forbidden by authorities to play in Iran, and therefore plan a mission to take their band to Europe. This film depicts the struggle of Iran’s exciting underground music scene, home to approximately 2,000 illegal independent bands. One of the foremost artists in Iranian protest music, Shahin Najafi, explains Iranian underground music as “an athlete who is preparing for the Olympics in a state of hunger and starvation. Even in this state, today the Iranian underground music can speak very clearly and specifically about its abilities in composing, songwriting, and performance—which means that we are running, even without running shoes!” Iran’s underground arts scene is no longer just a sub-culture. It is a movement—a manifestation of a national identity more representative than any state propaganda or rhetoric. No matter how hard the regime tries to suppress the artistic flame, nothing can curb the Iranian thirst for art that has been running in Persian veins since ancient times. Iran’s underground voice is exemplified by artists willing to risk their livelihood for the sake of artistic expression— a basic freedom that we as Americans don’t even think twice about. Perhaps Farhadi said it best as he accepted his Oscar—“At a time when talk of war, intimidation, and aggression is exchanged between politicians, Iran is spoken here through her glorious culture, a rich and ancient culture that has been hidden under the heavy dust of politics. I proudly offer this award to the people of my country, the people who respect all cultures and civilizations and despise hostility and resentment.” •
1. 49% of Congress, or 249 current members, are millionaires. 2. Tuition at the University of California was $3,859 in 2001. Today it is $13,218. 3. 2% of Americans think Mitt Romney’s full first name is Mittens. It’s actually Willard; Mitt is his middle name. 4. The average American wants to cut foreign aid from 27% of the federal budget to 13%. In reality, its less than 1%. 5. Despite over a decade of war, two-thirds of Americans still cannot locate Iraq or Afghanistan on a map. And only 58% know who the Taliban are. 6. 26% of Americans do not know who we declared independence from. Some answered France, China, Mexico, and Japan. The correct answer is Great Britain. Research suggests that misinformed people rarely change their minds when presented with the facts -- and often become even more attached to their beliefs.