The Hill Carolina Political Review Vol. 14 Issue 1 October 2014
Race
to the
The Hill Political Review October 2014
Top
1
The Hill Carolina Political Review
Vol. 14 Issue 1 EDITORS-IN-CHIEF Jon Buchleiter Brian Bartholomew
COLUMNISTS/BLOGGERS Clay Ballard, Derrick Flakoll, Nancy Smith
ONLINE MANAGING EDITOR Nikki Mandell
STAFF WRITERS Randy Adams, Patrick Archer, Kurtis Brown, Parker Bruer, Keenan Conder, Connor Cooke, Brianna Cooper, Marty Davidson, Caroline Fite, Allyesha Hall, Oliver Hamilton, Henry Hays, John Hess, Jamie Huffman, Chase Johnson, Colin Kantor, Chloe Karlovich, Bobby Kawecki, Tess Landon, Andrew Levine, Hank Li, Meghan McGrath, Hinal Patel, David Pingree, Sylvia Roper, Taylor Slate, Zach Williams, Matt Wotus, Javier Zurita
INTERNATIONAL EDITOR Carol Abken NATIONAL EDITOR Richard Zheng STATE & LOCAL EDITOR Caroline Fite ONLINE EDITORS Emily Foster, Matt Wotus DISTRIBUTION MANAGER Clay Ballard
DESIGN STAFF Taylor Slate
TREASURER Tess Landon
ART STAFF David Wright Ngozika Nwoko
DIRECTOR OF PR David Pingree
FACULTY ADVISOR Ferrel Guillory
The Hill - Chapel Hill Political Review 3514E Frank Porter Graham Student Union Chapel Hill, NC 27514 thehillpr@gmail.com This publication was paid for in part by Student Activities Fees at a cost of approximately $2.00 per copy
Cover Art by Ngozika Nwoko
2
From the Editors Welcome to a new year with The Hill - Carolina Political Review. As the only non-partisan political review at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill we strive to provide analysis of political issues and trends at the local, national and international levels. As the U.S. congressional midterm elections enter their final month we have analysis of the ten closest Senate races, a look at a potential Republican majority in the senate as well as coverage of other campaigns and expectations for election day. We hope you enjoy our first issue of the new academic year and as always we welcome your engagement and discussion on our work. Jon Buchleiter & Brian Bartholomew
Send us your comments As part of our mission to promote political discussion on campus we welcome your comments and thoughts. Send us an email at thehillpr@gmail.com - no more than 250 words, please include your name, year and major for students or name and department for professors.
Mission Statement The Hill is the University of North Carolina’s only nonpartisan student political review. Our aim is to provide the university community with a presentation of both neutral and balanced analysis of political ideas, events and trends. We publish both print issues and maintain a website composed of in-depth feature stories, opinion columns, and plenty of accessible content designed to engage the campus in political discussion.
Nonpartisan Explained The Hill is a medium for analysis of current affairs. Its primary mission is to analyze current events, trends, and phenomena happening within North Carolina, across the United States, and around the world. While it reserves some space for opinion and commentary, almost all work for The Hill avoids prescribing public policy solutions or advancing any ideology. Its articles are primarily concerned with explaining and contextualizing current affairs, rather than engaging in public policy debates. However, The Hill also accepts that its writers will bring their own unique experiences and viewpoints to their work, and encourages its writers to write colorful, engaging, and even controversial pieces while protecting the magazine’s reputation as a source of reasoned and well-researched analysis.
October 2014
The Hill Political Review
SOURCE: COL. JOHN BRITT
Table of Contents International
State & Local Follow the Money
6
Responding to Ebola
UNC Sexual Assault Policies
7
ISIS Crisis 16
All Aboard? 8
National
15
US-Israel Relations
17
In the Wake of Wales
18
Perspectives
Change Through Tragedy
9
Theory in Practice
Battle for the Senate
10
Book Review 20
Entrepreneurial Epidemic
12
Terrorism Today
Immigration and the Election
13
Two Cents 23
19 21
Shadow Settlements 14
The Hill Political Review October 2014
3
Around the Nation Election 2014 1) Kansas Pat Roberts (R. Incumbent) vs. Greg Orman (Independent) By far the most interesting story this election cycle, Independent Greg Orman is challenging Republican Senator Pat Roberts, who holds the distinction of being the least popular Senator in the country. Orman is doing a pretty good job of it too, thanks in no small part to the equally unpopular Republican Governor Sam Brownback, who appears to be on his way out in November. Since Democrat Chad Taylor announced his withdrawal from the race, Orman has led in every poll by at least five points.
I
t’s going to be tight, but Democrats look poised to cough up a majority in the Senate for the first time since 2008. After months of back and forth, the NYT’s Upshot, Washington Post, Five-ThirtyEight, Sam Wang at Princeton, the HuffPost Pollster, and Daily Kos polling models are united in their outlook for a red Senate come November 4. Welcome to The Hill’s house take the top ten races to watch.
2) Colorado Mark Udall (D, Incumbent vs. Cory Gardner (R) Despite controlling this race for most if not all of the summer, Democrat Mark Udall has seen his lead fall from nearly 4% in July to a slim 0.5% today. Two-term Republican Rep. Gardner will have to continue trending upwards in the polls to have a shot in liberal Colorado; but, if his success over the past month has been any indication, that remains a distinct possibility. 3) Alaska Mark Begich (D, Incumbent) vs. Daniel Sullivan (R) Like many Democratic incumbents rode the Obama wave in 2008, Mark Begich is fighting to keep his seat in a traditionally red state. He was the first Democrat to win a Senate seat in Alaska since the 70s, so it’s no shocker that Republican Secretary of Natural Resources Dan Sullivan is favored to unseat him. However, Sullivan only holds a 1-2 point lead in a race he should be dominating. About the author: Noah Lieberman, The Hill’s resident election guru, runs his own modeling site and election coverage. Check it out at pollinglab.com for the latest and best analysis of this year’s races.
4
4) Arkansas Mark Pryor (D, Incumbent) vs. Tom Cotton (R) Unlike some of the other Democratic incumbents on this list, Mark Pryor won his first term in the Senate in 2002, showing he can win without a boost from a Presidential race. However, dipping approval ratings and a more than capable opponent in Rep. Tom Cotton have put Pryor on the ropes as the Republican holds the slightest of advantages heading into October. October 2014
The Hill Political Review
Snapshot of Key US Senate Races 5) Iowa Bruce Braley (D) vs. Joni Ernst (R)
6) Michigan Gary Peters (D) vs. Terri Lynn Land (R)
Iowa’s Senate race, arguably the closest in the nation, is an unusual election for the state, seeing as Iowans haven’t had a Senate election without retiring Democratic Senator Tom Harkin or Republican Senator Chuck Grassley on the ticket in 34 years. As such, previous election results don’t mean much in this swing state, where Rep. Braley and State Senator Ernst have been involved in a back-and-forth contest since June.
Incumbent Democratic Senator Carl Levin is retiring after representing Michigan for over 35 years, and Republicans are looking to capitalize. While former MI Secretary of State Terri Lynn Land (R) kept up with Rep. Gary Peters (D) for a few months, her radical views on abortion, same sex marriage, and women’s rights have since turned away many voters. While there is still hope for Land, no poll has shown her leading in the race since July and most polls tell us to expect at least a five point victory for Peters come November. 7) Kentucky Mitch McConnell (R, Incumbent) vs. Alison Lundergan Grimes (D) Another highly unpopular incumbent, Senator Mitch McConnell arguably has the most to lose this November. While a Republican takeover of the Senate would make him Majority Leader, his roughly 35% approval rating has prevented him from pulling away in what should be an easy race. Secretary of State Grimes is trailing by only three percent. 8) North Carolina Kay Hagan (D, Incumbent) vs. Thom Tillis (R) Here in the Tar Heel State, incumbent Senator Kay Hagan faces off against speaker of the NC House Thom Tillis. Neither side has really changed their tactics during the race, with Tillis mostly attacking Hagan’s support of the ACA and Hagan tying her opponent to the unpopular Koch brothers and Governor McCrory. While this race started out neck and neck, the advantage has slowly moved to Hagan, with the most recent polls putting her up by five points or more. 9) Georgia David Perdue (R) vs. Michelle Nunn (D)
10) Louisiana: Mary Landrieu (D, Incumbent) vs. Bill Cassidy (R) Unlike every other state in the union, Louisiana holds a two-part election for their Senate races. Come November, Louisiana will first host a “jungle primary” between more than 15 candidates. Should no candidate reach 50% of the vote (a likely scenario), the top two vote getters will face off in a December run-off. The de-facto Republican nominee, Rep. Cassidy, looks to be leading that eventual one-on-one race. He sits ahead of incumbent Senator Landrieu by about 2.5%, though over 7 percent of voters are still undecided. The Hill Political Review October 2014
While Georgia would normally be a lock for Republicans, the retirement of incumbent Senator Saxby Chambliss has put the seat in play for both parties. Nunn, the daughter of a popular Georgia politician, benefited early from a divided Republican party, as Perdue was involved in a runoff for the nomination until late July. Since then Perdue has had no trouble catching up with and passing Nunn, leading the latter by upwards of four points in recent polls. 5
State
Follow the Money The Role of Dark Money in NC Senate Race
By: Parker Bruer
N
orth Carolina’s Senate race is one to watch. The contest between Sen. Kay Hagan and challenger Thom Tillis has become one of the more contentious midterm elections, drawing millions in outside money in support of both candidates. RealClearPolitics survey average places Hagan’s current lead at just two points ahead of Tillis, well within the margin of error. According to the Center for Responsive Politics, official financial disclosures for both the Hagan and Tillis campaign show that Hagan is spending at levels four times greater than Tillis, but official financial disclosures do not tell the full story in today’s elections. On the surface, it seems as if Hagan is spending more but seeing little return at the polls, with much of her money coming from contributors like EMILY’s List, Lorillard Inc., and the League of Conservation Voters. However, the role of dark money has grown in recent years as campaign disclosure regulations have been weakened. The Hagan-Tillis race is a prime example. Reports show that Tillis has spent around $4 million – his main contributors being Elliot Management, Kleinberg, Kaplan, et al., and CAN Inc. – but unofficially, he has received support from groups like Americans for Prosperity and Crossroads GPS in the form of TV ads costing $10.5 million. After taking these unreported donations into consideration, Hagan and Tillis have received comparable levels of financing. Dark money is still a Repub-
6
THE HILL/DAVID WRIGHT
lican dominated area of campaign finance in the North Carolina races. According to a report published by the Sunlight Foundation, out of all Republican money spent on ad spots for the Charlotte TV station WBTV, 65% had not been reported to the Federal Elections Committee, and only 27% was underwritten by named donors. Conversely, 77% of Democratic money put toward ad spots on WBTV had been disclosed, and 69% was underwritten by named donors. Over the last few years, the Citizens United v. FEC and McCutcheon v. FEC cases in the Supreme Court removed many of the regulations on political contributions. This has made room for dark money to play a greater role in many close elections. In the future, this dark money could have drastic effects on political campaigns, as more and more campaign ads and propaganda will be coming from outside, undisclosed groups rather than politicians themselves. In
North Carolina, voters have already experienced these effects in the form of extremely negative campaign ads that focus more on the personality of the candidate and less on the issues most important to the campaign. Further, candidates may shift their campaign to satisfy the groups funding them instead of their voters. As this election enters its final leg, every dollar spent will be important as candidates vie for votes. TV ads have been pouring in since the beginning of the primary campaign – WBTV in Charlotte alone carried more than 4,000 ad spots2 – and the amount can only go up as the election nears. As candidates compete for extra dollars, outside groups with money to spend will be looking for a good return on their donations. This will lead candidates to change the issues they focus on in order to appeal to the outside groups with money. Issues will be drowned out by personal attacks as this election becomes a complete buyers’ market. October 2014
The Hill Political Review
State
UNC Sexual Assault Policies The University revises its sexual assault policy By: Caroline Fite
U
niversities nationwide have been under scrutiny regarding their sexual assault policies following the U.S. Senate Sexual Violence on Campus survey. UNC-Chapel Hill is one of 55 schools under federal investigation for inadequately handling sexual assault cases under the Title IX Education Amendment. In order to address these allegations, UNC-CH updated its sexual assault policy aiming to provide support for victims and increase awareness for sexual violence. The major changes include outlining resources for reporting, rebuilding the adjudication system, and thoroughly defining what constitutes prohibited contact. Furthermore, the website that provides reporting resources and information regarding the policy was built in a way that is more user-friendly. After UNC-CH revamped its policy, it is more in line with the policies of other schools in the state. For example, Duke’s policy was last updated in 2003 and is very similar to UNC-CH’s current policy. It thoroughly defines what is considered sexual assault, outlines the ways that students can seek help on campus, and offers a gender violence education program. Other colleges in North Carolina have similar programs and resources. While the new policy at UNCCH focuses on helping victims legally and emotionally after an incident of sexual assault, the University also sponsors programs that seek to prevent sexThe Hill Political Review October 2014
ual violence. The One Act program provides skills training for students so that they can recognize interpersonal violence and help prevent it from occurring. Raise the Bar is a program that trains bartenders to intervene when they recognize possible drug-facilitated sexual assault. Christi Hurt, the chair of the Title IX task force at UNC-CH, says, “We are deeply committed to increasing awareness and developing prevention efforts.” Hurt says that the best way to prevent sexual assault is to train bystanders to intervene. She says that in order to stop sexual assault from happening, the campus will need to engage in cultural change. The best way to prevent sexual assault is to educate people about what is acceptable behavior and shift student’s attitude about sexual violence. Hurt hopes to improve upon these prevention efforts in future years. However, we are left to wonder whether these attempts to edu-
cate and raise awareness are actually effective ways to deter sexual assault. According to the CDC study that informed the White House task force, brief programs aimed only at sexual assault education, “have not demonstrated lasting effects on risk factors or behavior. It is unlikely that such programs are sufficient to change behavioral patterns.” According to this study, the only types of prevention efforts with demonstrated successful results are long-term, comprehensive programs. This research suggests that the One Act program, a four-hour training session, may not be sufficient as a catalyst for attitudinal change at UNC-CH. While UNC-CH is headed in the right direction with the revamped sexual assault policy and preventative programming, it is evident that it may be necessary to continually improve upon education and training efforts in order to see lasting results.
“The best way to prevent sexual assault is to educate people and shift student’s attitudes about sexual violence.”
7
State
All Aboard?
SOURCE: IAN SANE
“Acquisition of this railroad by the public sector should be the last resort.” -Gov. McCrory By: Marty Davidson
T
hree rural counties, one in North Carolina and two in South Carolina, may be receiving - a new railway system. Hopes for a new local rail system for Columbus county in North Carolina and Horry and Marion counties in South Carolina improved significantly after NC State House Bill 1086/ S. L. 2014-121 became law without a gubernatorial signature on September 20th. This new bill, otherwise known as the North Carolina and South Carolina Rail Compact Act, es8
tablishes an interstate freight rail compact commission, which has the powers to “promote the overall health, well-being, and economic growth of ” Columbus, Marion, and Horry counties (S.L. 2014-121). This commission will be comprised of four appointed individuals, who are based on the recommendations of the President Pro Tempore of the Senate, the Speaker of the state House of Representatives, the Board of the Directors of the North Carolina Railroad Company, and the Secretary of the North Carolina Department of Commerce. As designated by law, each appointed North Carolinian shall serve two years on the commission, with the exception of the first round of appointed individuals, whose appointments shall be terminated on June 30, 2017. The intent of this new commission is to use available state, federal, and private funding resources to construct a new rail system that will improve the local economic conditions of townships bordering South Carolina in the southeastern portion of the state. This generally rural area of North Carolina has lagged behind much of the state and has suffered from poor economic conditions for quite a while. With a county poverty rate as reported by the 2010 U.S. Census of 24.5%, which was well above the state poverty rate of 16.8%, and a seasonally-unadjusted unemployment rate of 11.1% as of June 13, 2014 as reported by the Bureau of
Labor Statistics, this new commission will hopefully steer Columbus county in a new economic direction characterized by greater growth. Though the authorization of this law is welcome news for those most directly affected by it, there is some ambiguity surrounding how the bill was passed and authorized. When the law came into effect on September 20th, 2014, it passed without the signature of Governor Pat McCrory. McCrory, who just recently released a 25year vision plan for the transportation and infrastructure development of the state, allowed the signature time limit for the law to expire due to political and ideological hesitance over the establishment of the new centralized commission. Instead, he urged for control and development of the railway to be handled through exiting state and local organizations. Though House Bill 1086/ S. L. 2014-121 aligns with his 25 year vision plan for the state, the overarching powers of the newly created interstate commission appeared to conglomerate too much governmental oversight within the hands of four individuals. As of now, plans to create this interstate rail compact are well under way, but plans may derail as South Carolina has yet to approve its version of the NC State bill. In addition, congress may become involved with the legislation process due to the interstate and commerce natures of the rail compact. October 2014
The Hill Political Review
National
Change Through Tragedy? Will the protests in Ferguson translate into electoral change? By: Kurt Brown
T
he fatal shooting of eighteenyear-old Michael Brown by police officer Darren Wilson in Ferguson, Missouri last month ignited vehement protests against police brutality and sparked national conversations concerning racial profiling and the militarization of local police forces. With phrases such as “Hands Up, Don’t Shoot” trending on Twitter and countless communities, schools, and sports teams posing in surrendering positions as a display of solidarity, there is no doubt that the story has captured the nation’s attention. Unfortunately, advocates for institutional change face with an uphill battle in their fight to transform this tragic event into lasting legislation. Although the shooting of Michael Brown happened on August 9th, the massive crowds have already dwindled and shifted their attention to other issues. Protestors clashing with police near the scene of the shooting headlined every major news outlet in the week following the incident; now the 30 members of the community marching through the Ferguson Farmer’s Market merit just an article on the website of the local St. Louis Post-Dispatch. One of the biggest fears of those dedicated activists is that the loss of national attention will translate to a lack of interest and motivation in November. St. Louis council member Antonio French, in a conversation with MSNBC’s Jose Diaz-Balart, emphasized, “The worst possible thing that could happen out of this last few weeks of unrest, is if you look back in a year at Ferguson and nothing has changed.” Change is a very real possibility for Ferguson’s residents, but only if they channel the disobedience into more structured poThe Hill Political Review October 2014
litical outlets. 2010 Census data indicates that Ferguson’s population of 21,000 is 67% Black. The primary reason for the apparent disconnect between the majority of the population and their representatives is abysmal voter turnout rates. Only 12% of registered voters made it to the polls in 2013, illustrating the problem of voter apathy in Ferguson. Shiron Hagens, a volunteer who spoke with the New York Times, summed it up, “The prosecutor — he’s elected. People didn’t know that. The City Council — they’re elected. These are the sorts of people who make decisions about hiring police chiefs. People didn’t know.” Volunteers like Shiron have set up registration tents near the protests and have succeeded in registering citizens with the hopes of seeing them take more active roles in local politics. In addition, the NAACP in St. Louis has run a registration campaign with a powerful motto: “Mike Brown can’t vote, but I can.” While the tragedy is centered on St. Louis County, many are hoping Mike
Brown can facilitate a change in national sentiment. However, even if African-American voter turnout increased significantly, the current configuration of districts across the United States makes widespread political change unlikely. For these reasons, it seems most likely that a surge in African-Americans voting for Democrats could affect the Senate races in three hotly contested states: Louisiana, Georgia, and our very own North Carolina. Georgia Representative John Lewis has been leading the appeal to blacks, “Ferguson has made it crystal clear to the African-American community and others that we’ve got to go to the polls.” The message is simple: protesting raises awareness, but voting initiates real change. If the NAACP and activists like Shiron are successful in their efforts, the powerful emotions surrounding Mike Brown’s death have the potential to have lasting impact on future elections.
“The message is simple: protesting raises awareness, but voting initiates real change.”
9
National
Republicans Race t
By: Bobby Kawecki
I
t is no secret that this year’s Senate race is among the most competitive in recent memory. According to a New York Times simulation, there is an 81% chance that the final result leaves the victorious party with 52 seats or fewer. Various statistical models and polls point to a toss up, but looking a little deeper exposes the unmistakable truth that the Republicans are very likely to come away with control of the US Senate this November. This has ramifications because the House is very unlikely to flip back to the Democrats so we will likely be left with gridlock between Congress and the White House, turning Obama into a lame duck for his final two years in office. It would be the first time he has faced enemies in control of both houses of Congress during his presidency and it would seriously undermine any significant policy initiatives still up his sleeve. Further analysis of historical trends, current statistics, and individual state races reveal a coming Republican surge in the US Senate. On a national scale, the Republicans look primed to snatch the Senate back from Harry Reid after eight long years sitting in the minority. There are many important trends to consider when looking at such a close race and Ezra Klein of Vox crafts a compelling argument for a Republican takeover based on important facts and trends. Perhaps most importantly, the President’s party tends to lose Congressional seats in midterm elections and only gains seats under extreme circumstances (9/11 and the subsequent 2002 midterms are a recent example). There is no definitive explanation why the President’s party tends takes a step back during midterm elections, but the trend indubitably exists. Secondly, Barack Obama is unpopular, giving the Republicans a chance to attack his party and gain the advantage. Even though they occupy separate branches, midterm Congressional elections are often approached by voters as a referendum on the president. These two trends run concurrently and in situations like the present political climate they can exacerbate one another to have disproportionately high effects. This gives Republicans fuel to attack their Democratic (especially incumbent) counterparts with while it provides Democrats a challenge that they must distance themselves from for the sake of self-preservation. For example, earlier this year Kay Hagan welcomed Obama to North Carolina as Air Force One landed only to later assail the administration over its handling of the VA scandal in a stump speech. Thirdly, there are 36 seats up for grabs this election and the Democrats currently hold 21 of them to the Republicans 15. Having more Democratic seats are up for grabs coinciding with Obama’s falling popularity only spells more trouble for the Democrats and more opportunities for the Republicans. Going a step further, there are five seats in which an incumbent is running and is danger of losing. All five are Democrats. This is particularly ominous because incumbent senators and Representatives typically enjoy a significant advantage in reelection efforts so it is disconerting
10
October 2014
The Hill Political Review
to Take the Senate
National
to see the five closest races all belong to one party. If the Republicans are threatening to take the seats they theoretically shouldn’t be close to taking, then they have a much better shot at claiming the seats with less opposition and taking back the chamber’s majority. Part of this has to do with the Democratic surge in Congress following Obama’s wave of popularity leading to his election in 2008. The Democrats made significant gains in the Senate that year and now those Senators are all up for reelection, coincidentally as the wave of Obama’s popularity comes crashing down. The race for Kay Hagan’s Senate seat has drawn considerable interest (and money) into the Old North State for what has been brutal campaign with mud flying in all directions. Tillis has painted Hagan as cozying up to Obama since she has aligned herself closely with the national Democratic agenda and Hagan has pointed out Tillis’ leadership of the comically unpopular state legislature. Perhaps one of the most curious aspects of this race is the amount of time that the candidates are devoting (both over the airwaves and in their face-to-face encounters) to education. Hagan has exposed Tillis’ less-than-stellar record on education funding while he focuses on the 7% raise for teachers passed (very conveniently) just this year. Both Hagan and Tillis’ arguments are focused on poor education policy within the state rather than on a national level (with some exceptions). This entire election cycle has been peculiar in many respects and this particular race is certainly no exception. The North Carolina election will be one of many highly contested, down to the wire elections in this year’s Senate race. Although it is too early to call, the Republican Party is clearly in position to take back the chamber by the slimmest of margins.
The Hill Political Review October 2014
11
National
Entrepreneurial Epidemic Uncertainty about the future of business startups By: Tess Landon
E
ntrepreneur. The word alone connotes a lifestyle just short of days spent doing business calls by the backyard pool. It is a flagship of the United States; one could even argue the country was founded upon the premise of entrepreneurship and without it our society wouldn’t be the business kingpin that it is today, much less a Super Power. However, in a world of quickly changing business conventions, entrepreneurial ventures may be misconstrued as a glamourous alternative to a corporate career. Data collected about start-ups over the past few decades show disheartening realities concerning longevity and financial forecasts. Only 23% of startups birthed in 1994 are still around as of 2013 according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Over the past 20 years, new business ventures, on average, had a 50% chance of celebrating their fifth year anniversary. Scott Shane, a professor and researcher on small business and entrepreneurship, found that of the few businesses who survived a full decade, founders earned 35% less than their would-be projected income working for an existing company. Entrepreneurs are not the only entity affected. The stigma “more is better” is associated with entrepreneurship in regards to the economy, but recent research has uncovered flaws in this approach. Shane reports that the “startup phenomenon” may be stagnating future innovation and it is more efficient for existing businesses to expand internally adding value to their industry from within. The glamour of the “start-up” culture is enticing, especially to the demographic of millennials. Millennials, defined as the “segment of population born between 1980 and 2000” by dictionary.com, are primarily in the beginning stages of their professional journey and have a keen eye for better job opportunities. By 2020, nearly half of America’s workforce will consist of millennials. The London Business School conducted a study of this generation over the past five years and summarized their outlook on employment as “developing and promoting innovation is a top priority for Gen Y, 34% of whom want to be CEOs who take an entrepreneurial approach to company management.” Millennials are bursting with an entrepreneurial spirit but there is a shortage of pre-existing outlets that provide enough latitude for them to utilize their creativity for further innovation, which explains why 90% say they don’t plan on staying with a company past five years. Further explanation may be that millennials rank “flexibility to balance life and work” among their top priorities, and the notion of creating a personally accommodating schedule and work environment is intoxicating. In order to capitalize the talent of the future workforce, incumbent business as a whole needs to adapt to the demands for a different style of operating. Although attracting millennials is a priority for employers, it is not their sole concern. Older workers (ages 55 and up) will comprise a quarter of the workforce by 2022 (BLS). Baby Boomers major criteria for overall job satisfaction are not reciprocated by their younger col-
12
leagues. A senior employee at one of the largest pharma research enterprises worldwide said the modernizations they are making to the workplace and daily operations are successfully attracting young talent, but neglect his discomfort with the changes. This generational clash is triggering a universal struggle for businesses to create a work environment that balances the needs of two drastically different generations. Either way, the business landscape of today is due for some major alterations.
Entrepreneurship by the Numbers
23%
Percentage of startups started in 1994 still in operation
50%
Chance of business ventures celebrating their fifth anniversary
90%
Percentage of Millenials who don’t plan on staying with a company beyond five years October 2014
The Hill Political Review
National
Immigration and the Election The issue of immigration in current Senate races
I
By: John Hess
n 1965, President Lyndon B. Johnson signed the Immigration and Nationality Act, proclaiming “[America] flourished because it was fed from so many sources…we, because of what we are, feel safer and stronger in a world as varied as the people who make it up.” This law formalized the modern immigration process in America and cemented immigration policy’s place as a political battleground. Today’s Republicans, emboldened by prospect of reclaiming a Senate majority, have made the issue a pillar in race platforms across the South, where the issue has the potential to unseat vulnerable Democratic incumbents. Because immigration is so intensely debated in these tossup races, control of the Senate in 2014 may well rest on immigration policy.
Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-LA)
SOURCE: US SENATE DEMOCRATS
The Hill Political Review October 2014
On September 7, President Sen. Mark Pryor (D-AR) Obama announced that he would delay executive action on immigration reform until after the midterm elections, igniting a firestorm among his conservative critics. In the battleground state of Louisiana, Republicans strategists called the move “Christmas in September.” Senator Mary Landrieu, a Democrat from Louisiana, distanced herself from Obama, saying, “We’re all frustrated with our broken immigration system, but the way forward is not unilateral by the president…the House needs to pass or amend the bipartisan Senate bill that would secure our borders and make reforms the SOURCE: OFFICE OF SEN. JAY ROCKEFELLER business community needs to grow our economy.” The senator has made several political calculations to compete with her op- recent CNN/ORC International ponents Republican Rep. Bill Cas- poll had Cotton leading Pryor sidy and Tea Party favorite Rob 49% to 47% with a 4.5% margin of Maness. Both Cassidy and Maness error. A marginal shift in voter promote the hardline approach sentiment or more ad buys could supported by many conservatives easily tip the outcome of the race. in the state. Mounting sentiment According to UNC Public Poliagainst President Obama and im- cy professor and former US State migration reform in Louisiana Department spokesman Dr. Hodmay force Senator Landrieu into ding Carter III, “Immigration will a runoff election in December. be an issue most particularly in Democrats also find them- places where it is already an isselves in dangerous territory in sue.” Focus on immigration, he neighboring Arkansas. Two-term says, will be intensified where Democratic Sen. Mark Pryor fac- immigrants come into the Unites one of the most uphill—and ed States and where they evenexpensive—Senate races in the tually set up permanent resicountry. Pryor ’s Republican op- dence. Elsewhere, he argues, ponent, Rep. Tom Cotton, recently immigration will come into play launched an ad criticizing Pryor ’s through a debate on the strength record on immigration. In the ad, of the American economy. the Cotton campaign criticizes Immigration also looks to play Pryor ’s support of the “Gang of 8” a large role in other southern Senimmigration bill. The ad accuses ate races. Southern Democrats Pryor of “[voting] against a bor- have moved to the right as their der fence three times, and now… Senate seats slip further into ignore[ing] the crisis.” Both can- jeopardy. Immigration will make didates generally display a hard- or break Senate prospects. On line approach to amnesty and November 4, we’ll find out how. reform. Recent polls in the state show a statistical dead heat—a 13
National
Shadow Settlements The changing nature of regulation and corporate settlements
By: David Pingree
B
ank of America’s recent settlement with the federal government for the bank’s role in the 2008 financial crisis seems fitting at first glance; the $16 billion fine amounts to ten percent of the corporation’s stock value and almost wipes out the combined profits earned for the 2012 and 2013 fiscal years. But when one takes a closer look at the settlements that Bank of America and other financial institutions have paid out to the Justice Department six years after the housing bubble burst, one comes away with more questions than answers. In an effort to stabilize financial markets, the federal government bailed out the banks, leading many critics to assert that those responsible for the crash got off. After the economy began to stabilize in 2009, the Justice Department began the complicated task of figuring out how to punish those responsible. A database compiled by Dr. Brandon Garrett, a professor at the University of Virginia Law School, tracked the federal government’s legal action on companies since 2000. The reported contained 2,136 convictions and guilty pleas with an additional 303 companies reaching “deferred” or “non-prosecution” agreements. In addition, Bank of America, JP Morgan Chase, CitiGroup, Goldman Sachs and other banks agreed to pay the federal government close to $50 billion for issuing toxic mortgages to investors. This allowed Attorney General Eric Holder to report earlier this year that criminal prosecutions allowed the Justice Department to collect $5.5 billion in direct payments. However, it must be noted that the
“Because most corporations agree to settle with federal prosecutors instead of going to court no legal precedent is set” 14
vast majority of these prosecutions never went before a grand jury, leaving the majority of findings hidden from the public. Some critics argue that it was unjust, and perhaps immoral, that the Justice Department was unable—or unwilling—to bring criminal charges against individuals on any kind of scale. “Without adequate resources for investigation, regulation and enforcement, the largest companies may continue to pay bigger traffic tickets, but they will remain too big to bring to justice,” Brandon Garrett, author of “Too Big to Jail,” told The New York Times. Critics differ on whether the fines will have a lasting impact on those companies at fault. Some critics argue that the fines punished the wrong people, notably the shareholders, most of whom weren’t at fault. Others argue that fines have a long-term negative impact on corporations, in which the company suffers a greater financial loss than the fine itself. The Economist reported a study conducted through Oxford University that showed that when a corporation harmed investors or its customer base, the corporation’s damaged reputation raised the cost of acquiring capital and generating sales. Ultimately, the corporation’s stock price plummet costs the company more than government fines. There is a general consensus among economic analysts that the government’s punishment financial institutions are not enough to deter more financial irresponsibility. Because most corporations agree to settle with federal prosecutors instead of going to court, no judicial precedent is set by which future cases can be filed. In addition, many argue that it is difficult to deter criminal misconduct when a specific individual has not been criminally indicted for sentenced. “Sums taken for restitution can compensate people hurt by institutional failures,” Mark Pomerantz, a lawyer and retired partner for Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison, told The New York Times in its Room for Debate segment. “But extorting huge fines from financial institutions in the name of ‘accountability’ and ‘deterrence’ is nonsensical when no senior executives have been charged with misconduct. The burden of huge fines falls on innocent shareholders and executives and employees who had nothing to do with the sale of mortgage securities.” Many critics have therefore argued for a return to grand jury trials against corporations and the creation of a stronger financial enforcement agency. In the meantime, record bonuses in the financial industry remain the best gauge for assessing the Obama administration’s success in corporate punishment.
October 2014
The Hill Political Review
International
Responding to the Ebola Outbreak By: Colin Kantor
A
s the deadly Ebola virus continues to spread, the international community has maintained a measured response in helping those affected. This particular outbreak, which has afflicted thousands in Liberia, Sierra Leone, and Guinea, and potentially dozens more in nearby Senegal and Nigeria, has inflicted a staggering casualty rate. With well over 3,000 reported dead and the number of cases continuing to rise beyond the capacity of local health officials, international aid is necessary to help control the outbreak. The world has already pledged millions of dollars in aid, including $110 million in contributions from the United States government and an additional $75 million from USAID. Over 500 personnel from the U.S. Center for Diseases Control (CDC) are working actively on the epidemic both on the ground in Africa and at CDC headquarters in Atlanta. Beyond this, the US military has spent close to $1 billion to support its operations in the region. Regional blocs have also committed aid, with the European Union pledging over $180 million and the African Union (AU) over a million. On an international level, the World Health Organization (WHO) has released numerous announcements warning of the dangers and staggering effects of the outbreak, as well as urging individual nations to provide aid where possible. Medicins sans Frontières (MSF), a global health charity, has committed personnel to the region and been sharply critical of the lack of international support At a September panel on Ebola at UNC-Chapel Hill, Dr. William Fischer, MD, noted that the countries affected by the virus possess “a complete lack of basic healthcare infrastructure” that has severely hampered the efforts of MSF and other organizations to set up proper care centers. The near-total lack of resources available to local doctors means that despite the millions in aid pledged to the relief effort, those on the ground still face a massive infrastructure deficit. While many argue the importance of tackling Ebola at the epicen-
ter of the outbreak, there appears to be limited political will to make this happen. American attention is divided due to security concerns e l s e where in the world. R e gardless of whether or not the international community decides to commit additional resources to the region, all agree that the danger of a destabilized West Africa is a security threat. Dr. Fischer compared the region to a “powder keg,” and numerous officials have expressed concern at the prospect of both political strife and an international Ebola pandemic. However, with the collective knowledge of the international healthcare community behind these struggling countries, the outbreak can be contained and afflicted countries can start to rebuild.
GUINEA
1,074 Cases 648 Deaths 62% Mortality Rate
NIGERIA 20 Cases 8 Deaths 40% Mortality Rate
LIBERIA
SIERRA LEONE
53% Mortality Rate
30% Mortality Rate
3,458 Cases 1,830 Deaths
2,021 Cases 605 Deaths
SOURCE: WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION - 9/23/14 The Hill Political Review October 2014
15
International
Crisis for ISIS?
The Future of the Islamic State By: Patrick Archer
I
n the months since its June 10 takeover of Mosul, Iraq’s second-largest city, the Islamic State (IS or ISIS) has become a daily feature in international politics and world media. From the beheadings of American journalists to the takeover of major Iraqi strongholds, the group has established itself as the preeminent terrorist organization in Iraq and Syria. The Islamic State is a radical Sunni organization that has existed in various forms since 2003. Under its current leader, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the group ignited the support of Iraqi Sunnis and began a prolonged reign of terror against all those who do not adhere to their brutal interpretation of Sunni Islam. Though IS has been operating for over ten years, its recent ascendancy came as a shock to most of the public. IS established itself in northern Syria during the civil war and took the major Iraqi city of Fallujah in December of 2013. The group, whose tactics have been denounced as overly brutal even by al-Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri, holds full or partial control of up to 8 million people in Iraq and Syria, and has displaced millions of Iraqi and Syrian citizens. The goals of the Islamic State remain unclear outside the group. According to Navin Bapat, Associate Professor of Political Science at UNC-Chapel Hill, the jihadis’ stated goals might not align with their actual aims. “The stated goal [of the Islamic State] is to undermine the Middle Eastern state system,” said Bapat. “However, weaker political organizations tend to overstate their goals.” This is a common tactic employed by terrorist organizations in order to gain a better position for negotiations. Startup funding for the IS reportedly came from private investors in nearby Gulf States, including Qatar, Turkey, and Saudi Arabia. However, the group is on its way to becoming self-sustaining as it continues to gain more power and territory and collect funds necessary for a long-term reign. In an interview with NBC News, Luay Al-Khatteeb, an expert on the Islamic State’s oil smuggling, reported that the ji16
“Many experts believe that the orgnization may have already peaked in influence.” hadists control up to five oil fields in Iraq alone, which is “easily getting them about $1.2 million a day.” However, the political sustainability of the Islamic State is less certain than their financial situation. Many experts believe that the organization may have already peaked in influence. Examining terrorist organizations from a historical perspective may provide insight on why this prediction could hold true. According to the Belfer Center at Harvard University, the mean life span of modern terrorist organizations is 14 years. The Islamic State was officially founded as “the Party of Monotheism and Jihad” in 2003, and they are currently in their eleventh year of operation. In recent weeks, IS has begun to face challenges that it has not en-
countered before, including the daunting tasks of toppling two governments and facing both foreign intervention and unrest within the Sunni community. According to Bapat, IS abuse of civilians may also prove counterproductive, as IS relies on citizens for support and cooperation. Bapat also points out that “the vast majority of terrorist organizations do not accomplish their goals.” A number of factors may frustrate the Islamic State’s drive toward its endgame. IS may be powerful, but they have a considerable amount of territory to govern and adversaries on all fronts. Their extreme ideology is not necessarily popular in the regions they govern, and their movement is fractious. Facing these challenges, IS’ success is anything but certain. October 2014
The Hill Political Review
International
Unsettled Allies US-Israeli relations in after the recent Gaza conflict By: Carol Abken
T
he latest slew of violence between Israeli soldiers and Palestinian militants in the Gaza Strip has had little effect on the United States’ stance on Israeli policy in the conflict. Despite record tension between the Obama administration and Prime Minister Netanyahu during Operation Protective Edge and sharp Israeli criticism of Secretary of State John Kerry after his failed attempt to broker a peace deal, public opinion about the conflict also remains unchanged. In June, Hamas kidnapped and murdered three Israeli teens, touching off a cycle of violence that began with the retaliatory murder of a Palestinian teenager in Jerusalem and culminated in renewed rocket fire from Hamas and Israeli air strikes on Gaza. The ensuing Israeli offensive, which grew into a ground operation, claimed the lives of over 2,000 Gaza residents— the majority of whom were civilians. Several dozen Israeli soldiers and five Israeli civilians also lost their lives. Israeli Defense Force air strikes repeat-
edly hit U.N. schools serving as civilian shelters, bringing condemnation from the United Nations. This latest round of conflict concluded in late August with implementation of an Egyptian-brokered ceasefire. The Obama administration’s past criticisms of Netanyahu and accompanying censure of civilian casualties in Gaza run against the norm of unwavering support for the Israeli government. These public expressions of frustration from leading authorities have had little effect on the continued supply of munitions to the Israeli government or American public opinion towards Israel. The Senate passed a resolution during Operation Protective Edge that affirmed its support for Israel to defend itself against attacks from Hamas. Congress’ strong support of Israel is backed by voter sentiment, while the Pentagon’s ability to deal directly with the Israeli government leaves the Obama administration with few levers to influence the situation. American support for Israel has remained historically stable. Historical polling data implies that American reactions to crises are based in preconceived attitudes towards Israelis and Palestinians rather than the specific details of the current conflict. Pew Research finds that 51 percent of Americans sympathize with Israel and just 14 percent sympathize with the Arab nations, with greater support for Israel among Republicans than Democrats. Other factors influencing American support of Israel are age and religious leanings. 60 percent of
Americans 65 and older support Israel, as opposed to only 44 percent of those 30 and under. White evangelicals are more likely to support Israel than any other group in America, with 70 percent sympathizing with Israel. The United States shares key goals and enemies with Israel, and has a strong interest in maintaining stable states in the Middle East. As it seeks backing for the campaign against ISIL, the United States places greater priority on security than the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The Obama administration would rather uphold the status quo in the face of more pressing security threats. Israel’s strong foundation of support in the United States makes periodic conflicts like this summer’s war unlikely to cause a significant break in the relationship between the two countries. That being said, a potential long-term danger to the U.S.-Israeli relationship is American public opinion shifting away from Israel due to increasingly un-democratic practices. Continued Israeli occupation of the West Bank and expansion of settlements could lead to diminished American support for Israel. Another reason to doubt American support for Israel over the long term is rooted in younger generations’ increasing disenchantment with Israel policy in Gaza. Despite these complications, the core of the U.S.-Israeli relationship and military exchange will not shift anytime in the near future, particularly as the President faces down a resurgent ISIS and lingering crisis in Ukraine.
THE HILL/JON BUCHLEITER The Hill Political Review October 2014
17
International
In the Wake of Wales Options for NATO after its summit in Wales By: Zach Williams
T
he current session of Congress is not likely to further address tensions between Ukraine and Russia. Bipartisan support, led by John McCain, exists for arming Ukraine against Russia. However, neither party wants to alienate voters, who are increasingly wary of calls for foreign intervention, ahead of November’s midterm elections. President Obama has justified the new Iraq war by virtue of explicit ISIS threats, threats that Russia dares not pose. Any immediate American decision on Ukraine is likely to come not unilaterally, but in the context of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). In the wake of September’s NATO summit in Wales, the West promises a unified stance against Russian aggression. Russia has annexed Ukraine’s Crimean Peninsula, and is actively arming and supporting rebels in Eastern Ukraine. Anders Rasmussen, NATO’s outgoing Secretary General, argues that this Russian intervention is the alliance’s greatest security threat since the Cold War. President Obama and British Prime Minister David Cameron issued a joint statement in which they vowed to support Ukrainian self-determination by enhancing Ukrainian capabilities. Backing this rhetoric, NATO resolved at the summit to deploy 4,000 troops to Eastern Europe on rotating deployments so as not to violate a prior treaty with Russia. Stricter sanctions remain available to the international community. However, sanctions are politically difficult and unlikely to change Russian policy in the short term. The United States will tighten its sanctions only if Europe follows suit, which is unlikely given that the European Union suffers economically, much more than the US, from penalizing its eastern neighbor. Europe depends on 18
SOURCE: CROWN/ BARRY LLOYD
Russia for one third of its natural gas, and is reluctant to tempt Russian retaliation with stricter sanctions. Western sanctions already in place have hamstrung the Russian economy, but failed to diminish Putin’s power. An independent survey conducted in part by UNC professor Graeme Robertson indicates that Putin’s approval rating increased nearly 30 percent from last October to this July, while the country grew poorer but more aggressive. His hardline foreign policy has so far won him more fans than a healthier economy. Another option for protecting the Ukraine is to admit it into NATO. Russian foreign ministers have condemned this possibility for undermining the chances for a negotiated peace. NATO membership seems at first glance a promising tactic. If Ukraine were a
member, it would take a giant step into the Western Europe’s sphere of influence, undoing Russia’s best efforts to the contrary. However, this move could backfire. By admitting Ukraine to its mutual defense treaty, NATO members risk a long-term military obligation to protect Ukraine’s borders, a cost they seem unwilling to bear. For the time being, NATO might decide to use the threat of Ukraine joining NATO as a bargaining chip. Such a threat could facilitate a cease-fire agreement between Russian-backed rebels and Ukraine. However, it would likely require more autonomy for eastern Ukraine by allowing greater Russian influence in the region. NATO and the European Union have an important judgment to make: is it worth extracting Ukraine from Russia’s orbit?
October 2014
The Hill Political Review
Perspectives
Theory in Practice Putin’s Mind
Derrick Flakoll is a junior majoring in Public Policy and Peace, War, and Defense
T
he long fight over Ukraine’s future seems to be drawing to a close, and Russian President Vladimir Putin stands triumphant. Kiev is no longer pushing back the pro-Russian separatists of Eastern Ukraine; thanks to barely concealed Russian intervention, it has been brought to the table and forced to accept a divided state in return for peace. As long as Donetsk and Luhansk are autonomous and aligned with Russia, Ukraine will be too weak politically to commit to integration into European institutions like the EU or NATO. What is less clear than the outcome of this conflict is the reason for it. Why did Putin respond to Ukraine’s turn to the West with force? More broadly, why does he consider the United States and Europe to be Russia’s strategic rivals? A realist perspective might argue that Putin is doing what all leaders do: acting in his country’s national interest. In international politics other states cannot be trusted to cooperate – there’s no higher authority to force them to keep their word – and so every
state must amass as much power as it can for self-protection. That means ruthlessly guarding a state’s sources of power, including its traditional dominance over its neighbors. Thus, Putin attacked Ukraine to preserve Russia’s historical sphere of influence and the advantages that brings in the global competition for power and security. But this explanation is incomplete. Firstly, war in Ukraine may be against Russia’s interests on the whole. In the long term, the West’s economic backlash toward Russian aggression, in the form of investor flight and sanctions, will force the state to prop up an ailing economy, limiting its ability to finance the very military on which its regional dominance is based. Secondly, even if Putin does believe the US and Europe have been actively trying to weaken Russia by allying with its neighbors, the highly active role Russia has played in the current crisis has predictably caused NATO to refocus on Russia
and gear up for the possibility of a future confrontation – a possibility that was until recently unthinkable. The problem with a realist approach is that it treats states as unitary actors. In any state, several factions compete for power, and whoever holds it does their best to keep it. Rulers and leaders will act to preserve their own power even if it makes their country as a whole worse off. Putin, as an autocrat, fears the spread of democratic norms that would challenge his rule. Europe has previously used the promise of economic and military integration to lock in democracy in former Soviet bloc countries. Putin fears that the spread of democratic norms to Russia’s neighborhood might embolden reformers at home and create a more viable opposition to his rule, just as pro-democracy movements spread throughout the former USSR during the “Color Revolutions” of the early 2000s. In sum, Putin may not be looking out for his country, but for himself.
SOURCE: WORLD ECONOMIC FORUM The Hill Political Review October 2014
19
Perspectives
A Booming, Spiritually Void Country
Age of Ambition: Chasing Fortune, Truth, and Faith in the New China - Evan Osnos By: Henry Li
“I
t was the best of times; it was the worst of times,” Charles Dickens wrote these words over 150 years ago to describe revolutionary France in A Tale of Two Cities, yet this saying is also strikingly applicable to American correspondents dispatched to today’s China. For journalists looking to secure a large readership back home, China is a paradise, feeding them generously with stories of fantastic contradictions. At the same time, reporters face the challenges of navigating an authoritarian state and a foreign culture. Drawing from eight years of fieldwork as The New Yorker’s China correspondent, Evan Osnos paints a portrait of a country defined by rising personal aspirations, spiritual emptiness, and pervasive authoritarianism.
In Age of Ambition, Osnos presents a comprehensive yet intimate recollection of modern China through the eyes of a China Hand who worked, traveled, and lived with his local contacts. In depicting the China’s transformation from a collective society to a nation of enterprising individuals, Osnos excels at relating anecdotes of ordinary people caught up in the contradictions of tradition and modernization, and at the intersection of Chinese and the Western values. Their ambition, or “wild heart” according to a literary translation, is the shared pursuit of individual aspirations. People covet similar things – riches, fame, and even patriotism – and have pursued their goals in various ways, from matchmaking and web-blogging to running English language summer camps. The successful among them become self-help idols and preach their models of success to those lagging behind. Despite their continuing lack of good fortune, disciples continue to believe that their mentors’ success can be emulated through diligent work and perseverance. Together, the two groups make up a contemporary China that is ever growing, ever changing, and never at rest. Osnos sees a spiritual void in this fervor for money and success. Osnos’s China is filled with anxiety and the demand for national self-ex-
amination, largely due to moral dilemmas induced by the money-oriented culture. The population is increasingly indifferent to tragedies happening around them, such as the hit-and-run case of the toddler Little YueYue who, hit by two cars in a row, received no attention from 18 passers-by and eventually died on the way to hospital. Maoism has gradually faded away, leaving behind a China that is highly assertive yet constantly doubtful. The modern Chinese are unfaltering in their search for faith and truth beyond the bust of Chairman Mao on their hundred-yuan bills, yet neither Confucianism nor Christianity satisfies their demands. When it comes to the portrayal of individuals and political issues already known to Western readers, Osnos is less ambitious. He resorts to earlier styles of reporting for The Chicago Tribune and The New Yorker, recounting stories without zeroing in on politically sharp issues. Age of Ambition strikes a delicate balance, providing an accessible introduction to the modern Middle Kingdom for those unfamiliar with it, but offering the depth and nuance to captivate those who follow China closely. Osnos deserves accolade for touching on sensitive matters, a decision that resulted in a richer account but subsequent failure to procure a deal with publishers on the Chinese mainland.
“A country defined by rising personal
aspirations, spiritual emptiness, and pervasive authoritarianism”
20
October 2014
The Hill Political Review
Perspectives
Terrorism Today ISIL’s Image
Clay Ballard is a senior majoring in Peace, War, and Defense and Global Studies
“I
’m back, Obama,” an unidentified man, dressed in black, states to the camera just before beheading American journalist Steven Sotloff. This act of terrorism is one of the most politically charged and powerful weapons in the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant’s (ISIL) arsenal. Since August, ISIL has used these beheadings to jumpstart recruitment and bait the United States into further conflict. With each broadcast, the purpose of the beheadings becomes clearer. ISIL recruitment thrives on international attention. While U.S. analysts initially reported around 10,000 ISIL fighters, their estimates have been revised upwards. On September 12, a CIA spokesman indicated that “ISIL can muster between 20,000 and 31,500 fighters across Iraq and Syria.” These figures include foreign fighters hailing from more
The Hill Political Review October 2014
than 80 different countries. This surge in numbers is the result of ISIL’s recruitment drive, from the declaration of a caliphate and expansion of territory throughout Syria and Iraq to the international broadcast of these beheadings. According to a recent report from the Washington Post, the Islamic State “now controls resources and territory unmatched in history of extremist organizations.” Each territorial gain has followed a pattern of “convert or die” executions followed by the dispersal of graphic imagery via social media. ISIL’s recent beheadings follow a similar pattern in their a “Message to America.” Because of the attention ISIL’s expansions and beheadings draw, ISIL has become the central group for potential jihadists. ISIL’s decapitation of two U.S. journalists and a British aid worker is also an effort to entangle the United States in another conflict. In each video, the perpetrator has called out Obama and American allies directly. Former CIA analyst Lisa Ruth called these actions a blatant attempt to goad the United States into military action. Why does ISIL have any interest in U.S. intervention? In a
2005 Middle East Quarterly article regarding Islamic terrorist beheadings, Timothy Furnish argues that, “The purpose of terrorism is to strike fear into the hearts of opponents in order to win political concession.” ISIL is trying to provoke American intervention believing such action will lead to increased support for ISIL’s cause. ISIL wants to convince mainstream Islam that America is an evil, interventionist power, hostile to Islam. By doing this they can also safely dodge responsibility if and when boots hit the ground. ISIL knows asymmetrical warfare is not a U.S. strength. ISIL witnessed firsthand U.S. military overreach in Afghanistan and Iraq over the past decade. Recent U.S. strategy has been to keep American and allied troops off the ground by using U.S. air power in the form of both manned fighters and drones to support Iraqi troops and Kurdish fighters as they retake ISIL territory. According to Ruth, while ISIL’s actions are sickening, the U.S. will not be so easily provoked into further military action. Despite ISIL’s provocation, the United States has yet to pander to ISIL’s desires – and as more regional allies step up the fight against ISIL, we may not have to.
“ISIL wants to convince mainstream Is-
lam that America is an evil, interventionist power, hostile to Islam”
21
Perspectives
Wisdom and Witlessness Political Campaigning “The hardest thing about any political campaign is how to win without proving that you are unworthy of winning.” - Adlai E. Stevenson “It’s not uncommon for a member of the Senate to have a fundraising breakfast, a fundraising lunch and a fundraising dinner, and then when the Senate breaks for the week to go home, more fundraisers.” - Former Senator Evan Bayh (D-IL) “When I first started campaigning, I was really excited. Two-thirds of the way through, I thought, ‘Why am I doing this?’ Then I got really excited when I realized I was going to win.” - Rep. Kyrsten Sinema (D-AZ) “Every great political campaign rewrites the rules; devising a new way to win is what gives campaigns a comparative advantage against their foes.” - John Podhoretz “Some people eat eggs, I wear them.” - John Major
After an egg splattered on his suit during the campaign
22
October 2014
The Hill Political Review
Perspectives
Two Cents American Tradition of Attack Ads Nancy Smith is a junior majoring in Arabic studies
T
he United States prides itself on a rich heritage of democracy, stretching back to our Founding Fathers and enduring many a trial and tribulation. Our democracy remains entrenched in both the olive branch and fist of war. Our democracy soars on the wings of a giant bald eagle with a machine-gun wielding American presidentof-your-choice, usually to defeat armies of Nazi zombies. As we approach the midterm elections of 2014, it is important to remember all of the traditions that characterize this cheerful time. From hordes of canvassers to desperate cries of political pundits, the autumn season smells of cash and fear as no other season can, and one of the strongest traditions of the seasonlies in ancient art of attack ads. Herald-
ing back to Lyndon Johnson’s “Daisy” and stretching through the greatness of Bush’s “a vote for Michael Dukakis is a vote for Willie Horton” and the Swiftboat Veteran’s Ad “Sellout” in 2004, attack ads require a great deal of skill and a devious nature to pull off with style. But while these ads have received great attention for their roles in presidential elections, it is important to remember the value of attack ads in midterm elections. In fact, if anything, attack ads are more valuable to midterms because the attention-grabbing mechanisms mean someone might actually start to care even the slightest bit. In keeping with American democracy’s highest standards of slander, The Hill recognizes some of 2014’s MVPS. Sen. Dean Heller (R-Nev.) has been hard at work blasting his opponent Rep. Shelley Berkley (D-Nev.) for potential ethics violations, while Rep. Thom Tillis has been raked over the coals for cutting education spending. And, as usual, Americans for Prosperity is hard at work, creating ads criticizing any supporter of the Health Care Act. So I encourage YOU, apathetic midterm voters, to stay watchful for any more ads for the candidates in your area. Remember: attack ads negate the need for factual and balanced information on candidates, so simply side with whichever ad confirms your own paranoid fantasies and vote accordingly. Millions of dollars spent on spots with cheesy actors and overdone graphics? Ah, the sweet smell of democracy.
Editorial Cartoon By: Ngozika Nwoko
The Hill Political Review October 2014
23
The Hill 24
October 2014
The Hill Political Review