The Hill
Two Middle Eastern nations inching toward stability Chapel Hill Political Review November 2007
http://studentorgs.unc.edu/thehill
Volume VII, Issue I
Can I see some ID?
Plus: Card-carrying abroad and tips for the international traveler
Find your DREAM candidate Quiz p. 22
From the Editor To our readers: Ch-ch-changes. Our first issue of the fall 2007 semester is all about change. We’ve made some changes to our format, introducing a new section called Notes from The Hill. In this section, you’ll find shorter, snappier pieces about the politicians, legislation, court cases, books, movies and more making political news. We’ve also made some changes to our staff, welcoming an unprecedented crop of first-year students to our team. Then there’s our revamped Web site for you to check out. Our cover story explores another big change. This one affects that little something you keep in your wallet just in case—your driver’s license. Congress’s REAL ID Act established a new set of national standards for identification cards in an effort to reduce terrorism and illegal immigration. We
highlight how these new rules have become the most recent battleground in the debate between national security and personal privacy. While the 2008 U.S. presidential election dominates most American media, we turn our attention to Pakistan’s recent election and the big changes in store for that country. We also check in with Turkey, a nation slowly inching toward economic health and long-term stability. Flip to the back for our always feisty debate between columnists from the left and the right, plus a handy quiz to match you with the 2008 presidential hopeful who most closely shares your political beliefs. As always, we invite you to be a part of all these changes— drop us a line or join the staff. Thanks for reading. Enjoy! Leah Szarek is a senior majoring in journalism and political science.
Send us your comments We’re proud to share our work with you, and we invite you to share your thoughts with us. Send us a letter or email - no more than 250 words, please. Include your name, year and major.
thehillpr@unc.edu 208 Frank Porter Graham Student Union UNC-CH Campus Box 5210 Chapel Hill, NC 27599-5210 http://studentorgs.edu/thehill/
The Hill
Chapel Hill Political Review Our Mission: The Hill is a medium for analysis of state, national and internationl politics. This publication is meant to serve as the middle ground (and a battleground) for political thought on campus where people can present their beliefs and test their ideas. A high premium is placed on having a publication that is not affiliated with any party or organization, but rather is openly nonpartisan on the whole. Hence, the purpose of The Hill is to provide the university community with a presentation of both neutral and balanced analysis of political ideas, events and trends. This means that, on the one hand, the publication will feature articles that are politically moderate in-depth analyses of politics and political ideas. These articles might be analytical, descriptive claims that draw conclusions about the political landscape. On the other, The Hill will feature various articles that take political stances on issues.
2 The Hill
The Hill Staff EDITOR Leah Szarek WRITERS Louis Altobelli MJ Curtiss Hunter Gray Ellis Allison Greenspan Caroline Guerra Ryan Kane James Knable Ryan Morgan Jordan O’Donnell Michael Parker Will Schultz Clayton Thomas COLUMNISTS Josh McCrain Matt Tucker ASSOCIATE EDITORS Juliann Neher Sam Perkins Alex Smith COPY EDITORS Beatrice Allen Samantha Guss Nicole Watts HEAD OF DESIGN Shaina Ayers ART & DESIGN Jessica Lin Taryn Mahoney Rachel Moltz Juliann Neher ADVERTISING Juliann Neher Megs Eichorn Alex Huffman TREASURER Hunter Gray Ellis FACULTY ADVISER Ferrel Guillory The publication was paid for, at least in part, by Student Activities Fees at a cost of approcximately $.50 per copy.
Contents November 2007 Volume VII, Issue I
Features 16
A nation on the brink Pakistan’s contentious recent elections legitimize a controversial dictator
18
Back on track Turkey’s future brightens with economic upswing and continued secularism
Cover
Cover art by Taryn Mahoney
12
Identity Crisis New federal regulations for IDs lead to a battle between national security and personal privacy
13
What’s in your wallet? Carrying an ID card at all times is compulsory in many other countries
14
Passport to paradise New hurdles slow down international travel
Departments 9 10
Econ 101 Rumors swirl about a pending North American Union .edu The battle for better education stirs 5 years after NCLB
Left/Right 20
After Virginia Tech Has the gun control debate changed?
In Every Issue v Notes from The Hill v Interactive Feature: Find your ideal candidate
November 2007 3
Notes from the Hill
Notes from In this edition:
The Hill
The Hague, * the new book about the Duke Lacrosse scandal, * a few of the less hopeful 2008 hopefuls, * North Carolina’s new voter registration laws, * Political doubletalk decoded and * Iran’s tanking approval rating * Not to mention our exclusive ranking of some of this month’s top newsmakers * a groundbreaking case before
Political Agenda
Nov. 16 - 17
Mark your calendars The Roosevelt Institution presents
The Year Ahead Policy Conference: Choosing the Policies That Should Matter in the 2008 Elections Place: Graham Memorial Room 39
Friday, Nov. 16 6:00-6:30 Check-in 6:30-7:30 Keynote Speaker 7:30-8:30 Mingle/Hors d’Oeuvres
Saturday, Nov. 17 9:00-9:30 9:30-9:45 9:45-11:45 11:45-2:00 2:00-4:00 4:00-4:30 4:30-5:30 5:30
Breakfast Opening Remarks Policy Presentations. Lunch on Franklin St. Policy Presentations Recess Debate between the Young Democrats and the College Republicans Closing Remarks
Want your political event included on The Hill’s political agenda? E-mail thehillpr@unc.edu with event details.
4 The Hill
Notes from the Hill Ballot Boxing Well over 200 candidates are currently vying for the United States presidency. Here’s a sampling of the unique politicians forming the back of the pack.—Michael Parker
Jonathon “The Impaler” Sharkey
Party: Vampyres, Witches and Pagans Platform: Sharkey’s key campaign promises are to bring the troops home and fix health care. He earns his moniker, “The Impaler,” through his promises to impale terrorists and certain criminals. Web: http://www.jonathontheimpalerforpresident2008.us/Jonathon.html Don’t miss: His “Impaling List,” which includes George Bush and Paris Hilton.
Ruth Bryant White
Party: Independent Platform: White pledges to secure our borders and retool our education system. She promises a diverse cabinet, with Ty Pennington, Nancy Grace, Tom Tancredo and Joe Scarborough as just a few of her choices. Condoleezza Rice would be her copresident, as White claims that she knows about only domestic policies, while Rice can deal with foreign affairs. Web: http:www.rbwforpres2008.com/index.html Don’t miss: Her synthesizer soundtrack.
Claire Elizabeth Fields Cruise
Party: World peace Platform: Cruise promises to establish permanent world peace, protect homosexual rights and guarantee the Bill of Rights. Building on her platform of peace, she also promises to conquer Mexico as an American territory and close the borders to wealthy foreigners. Web: http://www.myspace.com/clairecruise Don’t miss: The chance to friend her and strive for her top five.
Go Figure
Easy as 1-2-3: N.C. loosens voter registration laws
With 55% of its voting age population making it to the polls in the last presidential election, North Carolina is taking steps to improve voter turnout. Under a newly passed bill, the state’s original requirement that voters register 25 days before
the election to be eligible to vote on Election Day (that’s Nov. 6 this year) still stands. But if you miss that deadline, you can now register at early voting booths up to 3 days before Election Day——and cast your ballot that same day.—James Knable November 2007 5
Notes from the Hill On the Docket
All’s not fair in love and war
A suspected Congolese war criminal faces judgment in historic case before the ICC Several cases involving individuals accused of horrific crimes are making their way through the International Criminal Court. One of these ongoing cases is the trial of suspected war criminal Thomas Lubanga Dyilo, the founder and leader of the Union des patriotes congolais, an armed revolutionary group in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. The group has been accused of torturing more than 100 people between August 2002 and March 2003. And in 2002, the UPC allegedly massacred thousands of Congolese citizens and conscripted children into the militia. Dyilo’s UPC was involved in the Ituri conflict, an ethnic war that erupted in the northeastern province in 1996. The Hema, an ethnic group supported by the UPC, and the Lendu have been disputing land ownership since the colonial days. Abuse of a 1973 land-use law by some Hema intensified the conflict in the ‘90s. The law allows people to buy land that others currently inhabit without notifying them until two years after the purchase, at which point the sale can no longer be contested and the inhabitants are legally forced out. The law has been used to displace many Lendu. A pre-ICC trial determined that there was enough evidence to charge Dyilo with committing war crimes since 2002, including recruiting children under the age of 15 for his militia and forcing more than 30,000 children to fight in a war. The ICC issued a warrant for his arrest on March 17, 2006, and he made his first appearance at The Hague three days later. At a pretrial hearing this September, the ICC considered moving the trial to the Congo. The court believes that the case may have more of an impact on the citizens of the Congo if it is conducted within their borders. A unique feature of this case is the admittance of
6 The Hill
Rachel Moltz
victims’ testimony. In past cases, including Rwanda and Yugoslavia, no victims were permitted to participate. On July 31, 2006, three witnesses were determined to have been victims of these alleged war crimes and their testimony will be heard in court. Dyilo is also the first man to be tried under Section 8 (the war crimes section) of the Rome Statute. Section 8 of the statute, among other things, makes conscription of children under the age of 15 a war crime. The Rome Statute was responsible for the establishment of the ICC. It was signed by 140 countries in 1998 and ratified by the required 60 in 2002. However, the United States has not ratified the Rome Statute and is actively petitioning to prevent its citizens from being tried by this international court. The U.S. Department of State argues that the international system lacks safeguards to prevent politically motivated prosecutions, especially since there is no external check on the prosecutor. Despite these official reservations, the ICC finds support from many human rights activists within the United States. Anna Norris, a member of the UNC student group Students United for Darfur Awareness Now, or SUDAN, highlighted the need to give the child victims of war crimes a voice. “Why should children fight and die for something they don’t really know?” she asked. “They’re not even old enough to get a driver’s license and drive, but they’re old enough to kill and be killed.” The U.S. recently showed a slight weakening of opposition by abstaining rather than voting against a U.N. Security Council measure to charge the ICC with investigating the situation in Sudan’s Darfur region. As the Dyilo case unfolds, the ICC will continue to assert its presence on the international stage.—Allison Greenspan
Notes from the Hill
Iran: Bomb or bust?
Poll Dancing
A September CBS News/ New York Times poll asked a representative sample of U.S. adults: “Which comes closer to your opinion? Iran is a threat to the United States that requires military action now. Iran is a threat that can be contained with diplomacy now. Or, Iran is not a threat to the United States at this time.” Almost 60 percent of the respondents favored diplomacy, about one quarter said Iran is not a threat and less than 10 percent supported military action now.
1
The Hill’s very own, not-so-scientific poll of 20 UNC students found most suspected Iran of pursuing a nuclear weapons program. “I don’t think that Iran would use a nuclear weapon first ... they know that a first strike equals massive retaliation by the U.S,” one student respondent explained. The votes were split evenly on whether the Bush administration would take military action against Iran. “I think that in light of the
Hill-o-Meter
Vladimir Putin
Russia’s president-turned-buff fisherman is on top of the hill. After dissolving the Russian government and appointing a good friend as prime minister, a third term for the man with airbrushed biceps seems possible.
1
2
heated situation between Iran and the U.S. and the rest of the world, a nuclear program is somewhat dangerous, and it’s disconcerting that the Bush administration seems to see diplomacy as a sign of weakness,” another respondent said. Most thought Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s recent performance at Columbia University had little impact on diplomatic relations between the U.S. and Iran. —James Knable and Ryan Morgan
James Knable and Ryan Morgan
Ron Paul
The self-proclaimed “true conservative” who has incredible support on the Web is climbing up the hill. After winning several straw polls, Paul might become the dark horse for president in ‘08.
2
3
3
John Kerry
4
Larry Craig
The Democrats’ ’04 champion is falling off the hill. During a speech, Kerry stood silently as a University of Florida student was Tasered after asking the senator a question. “Don’t tase me, bro!” is the student’s claim to fame. Arrested for propositioning an undercover officer in an airport and still clinging to his seat, this Republican senator is over the hill.
4
Cover art by Taryn Mahoney
November 2007 7
Notes from the Hill Book Review
Until Proven Innocent
With the subtitle “Political Correctness and the Shameful Injustices of the Duke Lacrosse Rape Case,” it’s clear from the outset that this is not intended to be a balanced take. It isn’t that the book is biased; it’s that the authors cannot find a shred of evidence to support the other side. “Until Proven Innocent” is an exhaustive summary of the facts and factors surrounding the muddled, controversial and highly publicized Duke Lacrosse case. No, none of the lacrosse players had a history of sexual assault. Yes, they did cooperate fully with authorities from the beginning. No, there was no so-called “Wall of Silence” organized by the team to protect the (not) guilty among them. Driven by an engaging narrative, “Until Proven Innocent” is a fascinating study on the perfect storm of race, class and justice that made this story so attractive to the media. Among the most prominent journalists to question the merits of the case from its inception, authors KC Johnson and Stuart Taylor
On the Trail
Doubletalkers
When faced with uncomfortable questions, politicians are often seen scrambling to cover all the bases. UNC political science professor Thomas Carsey points out that although citizens may not always think through politicians’ statements “critically and systematically,” it is evident that voters do not like detecting uncertainty and that they “like flip-flopping even less.” Unfortunately, both can be found in recent comments from the campaign trail, leading UNC students to interpret for themselves what politicians are really saying. After a dose of bad press due to his comment about using force against Pakistan, Sen. Barack Obama was reported by The Guardian to have said, “I think it would be a profound mistake for us to use nuclear weapons in any circumstance … involving civilians.” Student Drew Hackelman adds, “But he would bomb the crap out of their military in a heartbeat if it was necessary.” Amber Beg sees a missing 8 The Hill
Jr. write with the passion of entrenched critics. Neatly woven into the tale of the overall case are a rock-solid timeline of events, an overwhelming array of facts and an unprecedented collection of interviews and quotes. The accuser’s many contradicting stories are laid out in such a fashion as to completely discredit her, exonerating the lacrosse team as effectively as any DNA evidence. A series of chapters outline, in excruciating detail, the offenses of prosecutor Mike Nifong, the Duke faculty and administration, the Durham community and various members of the media. What at first reads like an exposé begins to feel like a tirade, as if the book is the authors’ vendetta against everyone who neglected to believe them. Still, while “Until Proven Innocent” is at times vindictive, the undeniable evidence for innocence presented and the gripping nature of the writing make this a worthy account of one of the most contentious legal dramas in recent history.— Ryan Kane
piece to his statement, as well. “That doesn’t make any sense,” she says. “The huge impact of nuclear weapons would affect civilians, too…” In ABC’s debate, Sen. Mitt Romney was questioned about his earlier statement that Mayor Rudy Giuliani would be a difficult sell for the Republican Party. He answered, “I think Rudy Giuliani is a terrific American and a wonderful mayor. That was very early in the process. I think I’ve got a better view…” Romney was quickly reminded that his comment was made in March, just a few months ago. “He doesn’t have a good memory? Or maybe just selective memory?” asks UNC student Diane Esson. Anqi Li goes on to suspect the senator is “determined to make sure we understand how ambiguous his opinions really are.” With the 2008 election drawing closer, it seems advisable that politicians drop the ambiguity and decide where they stand.—Caroline Guerra
Econ 101
To form a more perfect union Rumors swirl about a Nor th American Union in the works Jessica Lin
W
hile the European Union has been integrating most of the nations of Europe, North American nations remain comparatively detached. Recently, however, reports of a potential “North American Union” have generated interesting ideas and considerable controversy. The Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America, or the SPP, is an initiative led by the White House, Canada and Mexico to improve the collective security and economic well-being of the three nations. The partnership’s Web site boasts of the progress made through various agreements. One such agreement promises to expand the information exchange in order to prevent fraud and smuggling. While the partnership appears to be a beneficial arrangement for all parties, reports have circulated that it is the first step in creating a North American Union without congressional approval. A WorldNetDaily report from
By JORDAN O’DONNELL 2006 says that the SPP was created in a 2005 signed agreement between U.S. President George W. Bush, former Mexican President Vincente Fox and former Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin in Waco, Texas, which the SPP denies. The report also states that the agreement did not go to Congress for review, which led to the creation of an SPP office in the U.S. Department of Commerce. The idea of the union may have come from a 2005 Council on Foreign Relations task force report that suggested how to make the SPP into a North American Union. This entity would involve a common security border, free movement of people, commerce and capital between nations, and most strikingly, a continent-wide court, legislative body, executive commission, military defense command, customs office and development bank. Criticism has been firm against President Bush, alleging a secret initiative to create a
North American Union. One site, stopthenorthamericanunion. com, says it is trying to prevent “illegal alien anarchy.” Much criticism also stems from Bush’s secrecy. Yet the SPP Web site includes a myth vs. facts section that tries to dispel the claims of a union in the making. It says that the Waco agreement is false and that the SPP is simply a forum among the three nations. It also directly denies the union movement, claiming the sole purpose of the agreement is to increase cooperation on trade, terrorism and crime. It denies any goals to change the federal government or currency, as the EU has done to its member nations. It also says Congress is involved in and knowledgeable about the SPP. Should the notion of a North American Union ever be seriously considered, it can expect to be met with stiff opposition. Jordan O’Donnell is a senior majoring in journalism.
November 2007 9
.edu
The battle for better education Five years later, calls for change in No Child Left Behind Jessica Lin
By MJ Curtiss
In the past five years, No Child Left Behind has made its mark on American schools. Dealing out designations like “blue ribbon” and “in need of improvement,” NCLB plays a prominent role in targeting successful –and failing –institutions. In fact, one of the law’s primary goals is to expand accountability by making those distinctions. President Bush signed the act in January 2002 with the promise of increased funding, regular performance evaluations and steps to ensure that only highly qualified teachers could teach. Other objectives included empowering schools with devolved administrative capabilities and guaranteeing that students learned through methods supported by scientific 10 The Hill
research. In 2007, the act faces reauthorization, which puts its efficacy under scrutiny. No matter what side analysts take, they tend to concur: Congress is unlikely to renew NCLB without revisions. PROS AND CONS Certain aspects of NCLB attract praise. The Center on Education Policy reports that test scores for 9-year-olds, 13-yearolds and minorities of all ages rose after the act’s passage, but admits that the data cannot prove a causal relationship. Meanwhile, NCLB succeeds in enforcing accountability with school report cards. Supporters add that programs like Supplemental Educational Services, which offers tu-
toring to troubled students, give parents multiple options to help their children succeed. A popular criticism protests the act’s requirements for reading and math assessments, alleging that schools now “teach to tests” and overlook subjects like art, physical education and science. Critics also argue that, while NCLB helps pinpoint deficient scores, it fails to suggest substantive actions to improve curricula when problems arise. The Joint Organizational Statement on NCLB, a critique endorsed by 135 civic, educational and civil rights advocacy groups in mid-2007, laments that the act provides insufficient funds to schools that need aid. Ultimately, real-life experience in schools offers the best indicator
.edu of NCLB’s effectiveness. However, disparate experiences in those schools makes forming concrete conclusions problematic. MONEY GAPS A CEP study from March 2007 reveals discrepancies in how the government allots education funds. The report predicts that some districts will receive no funding increase whatsoever in the 2007-08 school year, while others will get only a fraction of the funds for which the act calls. Furthermore, changes in census estimates that influence appropriations cause fluctuation in the yearly amounts that states receive for educational purposes. As a result, some states enjoy sufficient funding to demonstrate regular progress. Others exhibit erratic performance due to financial uncertainties. In other words, the act may have created successful programs, but it lacks uniform application.
Do schools now “teach to the tests” at the expense of real learning?
PUBLIC VS. PRIVATE NCLB’s role in education outside the public sphere engenders new complications. The Headmaster of Cary Academy, Don Berger, said that independent schools like his — and there are many in the Triangle — face less regulation under NCLB than
NEW STRATEGY With NCLB under so much scrutiny, a number of contributors have proposed ways to alter the law. The Aspen Institute, NEA and Joint Organizational Statement play key roles in changing American education. The Aspen Institute’s Commission on NCLB, a bipartisan effort, advises expanded funding to help schools in need of improvement. The commission also stresses finding teachers who have the right credentials as well as the practical skills to teach effectively. The NEA echoes those concerns, saying that teachers in charge of multiple subjects need a more flexible qualification process and that the law should expand provisions for helping disabled students. The Joint Organizational Statement suggests that Congress replace arbitrary assessment levels with the real-life achievement standards that high-quality schools demonstrate. Secretary of Education Margaret Spellings stresses increases in high school accountability and accelerated ESL classes. Congress has a lot of work to do as it reconsiders No Child Left Behind. At this point, even the law’s supporters recommend improvements. Whatever shape the act takes in the future, it will differ considerably from its current incarnation.
public schools, adding that while “we do measure annual student growth [at our school], we have a lot more freedom and flexibility” in facilitating those measurements. America’s diverse educational system illustrates discrepancies in the law’s relationship to public and private schools. Some variations arise from schools’ differing needs and functions. But some critics attribute inequalities to MJ Curtiss is a freshman. faults in the act itself.
November 2007 11
Cover
Identity crisis New federal standards for ID cards have states taking sides in the debate over national security versus personal privacy By Hunter Ellis
Taryn Mahoney
The line at your local Division of Motor Vehicles is about to get a little longer. The Real ID Act is Congress’ answer to the growing number of illegal immigrants and the alleged terrorist threat. The Real ID Act is intended to curb terrorism through the creation of a national identification card, but the bill faces ongoing criticism regarding whether it can truly deter terrorism within American borders. After December 31, 2009, a federal agency will no longer accept current driver’s licenses or state identification cards unless the state meets the requirements of the Real ID Act. This means that no one will be able to travel on an airplane, open a bank account, collect Social Security payments or enjoy any other government service until they obtain the new, federally approved driver’s license. The act also waives laws interfering with construction of physical barriers 12 The Hill
at the borders and tightens laws current license holders amounts regarding asylum and deporta- to around $100 per person. tion of immigrants involved in REPERCUSSIONS terrorist activity. The main crux of the act is that the federal government mandates THE FACTS OF THE ACT Starting out as a House resolu- the cards, but the states are in tion that stalled on its way to the charge of issuing the cards and Senate, the act was attached as a maintaining the accompanying rider to the 2005 military spend- databases of card-holder inforing bill by Republican Rep. James mation. The National Governors Sensenbrenner of Wisconsin. The Association, National Conferbill passed 368 to 58 in the House ence of State Legislators and the and unanimously in the Senate. American Association of Motor Signed into law on March 11, Vehicle Administrators issued a 2005 by President Bush, the Real joint report that calculated a cost ID Act was postponed for two of $11 billion to the states over years on March 2, 2007. The pro- five years. NCSL Executive Director visions included in the bill will go into effect in December 2009. The William T. Pound said, “There’s Real ID Act will require all hold- no question that state legislators ers of identification cards or driv- believe driver’s licenses should be er’s licenses—an estimated 240 as secure as possible. The $11 bilmillion people—to update their lion question is ‘Who is going to cards within five years. With a to- pay for it?’” The Department of Homeland tal budget of $23.1 billion, costs associated with reissuing cards to Security’s Web site proposes that
Cover states will be able to pay for Real ID through their own Homeland Security Grant Program. States could appropriate up to 20 percent of their funds for Real ID beginning this year. Congress, not Homeland Security, is allowed to appropriate additional funds to help states meet their goals. States will incur 60 percent of the total cost of the program, or $23.1 billion, to pay for card production and customer services. The Real ID Act states that such cards must be “machine readable,” and the Department of Homeland Security is still de-
The provisions included in the bill will go into effect December 2009. termining if this means the card will contain a magnetic strip, an enhanced bar code or a radio frequency identification chip. The Department of Homeland Security has indicated that it prefers RFID chips – they have already begun embedding such devices in passports.
Experts argue that the benefits of RFID technology could greatly diminish as identity thieves, kidnappers and terrorists potentially scan for a certain RFID frequency, committing “contactless” crimes in the meantime against the victim. The cards would be linked to databases that would contain sensitive information such as Social Security numbers, home addresses and other information. “The basic problem with RFID is surreptitious access to ID. The odds are zero that RFID passport technology won’t be hackable,”
Card-carrying countries
F
or many Americans, carrying an ID is just a driver’s habit, like clicking a seat belt or checking the rearview mirror. But in many other countries, carrying an ID is a daily necessity. Once citizens and permanent residents of Singapore reach the age of 15, they must register for their Identity Cards. ICs are necessary for daily activities, such as obtaining certain discounts at stores and logging on to certain Web sites. Schools frequently use them to identify students online and for exams. ICs are also necessary to register for a mobile phone number. “A lot of places accept alternative IDs like a driver’s license, but people prefer to be safe and carry their national IDs with them at all times,” said UNC alum Su Hui, a native of Singapore. “Also, another reason why it’s a good idea to carry your ID around is because of the illegal immigration problem in Singapore. Local employers have been employing illegal immigrants from the neighboring countries at lower wages, so the police force has been pretty harsh in clamping down on such illegal immigrants. It’s good to have your ID with you at all times to prove that you’re a legal resident in Singapore.” In countries like Singapore, it is mandatory to
possess an ID, but you are not required to have the ID on you at all times (although it is recommended). In similarly designed systems in countries such as Algeria, Belgium, Brazil and Spain, it is compulsory not only to possess, but also to carry ID. “I guess that the main reason for making it compulsory is identification, since in Spain you do not get your driver’s license until the age of 18, you would be walking around, unidentifiable until that age,” said Fred Fontes, a sophomore at UNC whose home country is Spain. Fontes goes on to say that it is possible to get fined if you do not have your ID on you if asked. In these countries, people are not subject to random inspection. But in some countries, including Hungary, police have the legal power to stop people on the streets and ask for ID, but only if they have some proof that the person was involved in or is a witness to a crime. If the person has no proof of identification, he can be detained for a maximum of 24 hours. These measures in foreign countries may influence Congress’s efforts to institute a national identification system and affect the success of the Real ID Act.— Louis Altobelli November 2007 13
Cover Bruce Schneier, chief technical officer of Counterpane Internet Security, told CNNMoney.com last year. The State Department argues that these issues are overblown and that they have been testing the technology’s vulnerability in RFID passports. STATES TAKE SIDES The Real ID Act has not even gone into effect and controversy has already begun to heat up as individual states decide their stance on the act. On January 25, 2007, Maine overwhelmingly passed a resolution that refuses implementation of the program in the state. Since Maine passed the resolution, more than 17 states have passed legislation opposing the Real ID act. In contrast, California, North Carolina, Alabama and North Dakota are making marked progress toward
full compliance with Real ID, Secretary of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff said in a press conference earlier this year. North Carolina’s DMV supports the Real ID Act, according to 2006 testimony before the Joint Legislative Committee on Transportation Oversight. The DMV hopes it will reduce ID theft and ID fraud in the state in accordance with Governor Easley’s Operation Stop Fraud campaign. “North Carolina, in many respects, is ahead of the game already,” Mage Howell, communications officer for the N.C. DMV, said in a phone interview with The Hill. “We are doing these things not necessarily directly as part of the Real ID Act, but North Carolina and the General Assembly have determined that these things need to be done to help us secure the license. We feel
like by the time the Real ID Act and the rules come out we will be ahead of the game.” California’s stance on Real ID is that the identification cards create better data-mining practices that encourage sharing of information between states. This data could be used to red-flag certain individuals that pose a security threat in advance. “We’re certainly not the rabblerousers out there trying to lead a rebellion (referring to Maine’s anti-Real ID stance),” said Denise Blair, assistant deputy director of the California Department of Motor Vehicles, in a press conference last February. California has the highest number of licensed drivers of any state in the country—11 million as of 2005. Blair says that Real ID would free her department up and allow for more services on the DMV Web site such as address changes. She
Passport crackdown
I
f you are flying south (or north) of the border, don’t forget your passport. Prior to Oct. 1, it was possible to travel by air to a bordering U.S. country (Mexico and Canada), Bermuda and the Caribbean islands without a passport. It is still possible to travel to these areas by land or sea sans passport, but birth certificates and photo IDs are no longer acceptable paperwork to re-enter the U.S. by air from any foreign nation. Part of the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative (WHTI), these tougher international air travel restrictions are the Department of Homeland Security’s response to the post-9/11 concerns about terrorism and illegal immigration. “…[T]he notion that requiring a passport from a Canadian protects against terrorism is rather ridiculous as the long border is quite porous,” 14 The Hill
UNC political science professor Virginia Gray told The Hill in an e-mail. “There is no way to protect against someone crossing the border undetected by float plane, shooting river rapids by kayak or just walking across the road.” Beyond the debate over the efficacy of these new rules is the concern about their efficiency. As passport rules have been adjusted and re-adjusted over the past three years, it has become increasingly confusing and complicated to travel abroad. In 2004, it was required that all international travelers carry their passport no matter what their method of travel. This requirement severely inconvenienced travelers, who faced months-long waits for their passport applications to be processed. The Bush administration and Congress accommodated travelers’ concerns by extending the deadlines and cre-
Cover also argues that if the Real ID card program had been in place six years ago, the Sept. 11 hijackers could have been flagged before they even boarded the planes. The argument against Real ID flared on May 8, 2007, when Democratic Sen. Patrick Leahy of Vermont attacked the program as an unnecessary intrusion into Americans’ lives that was enacted by a Republican-controlled Senate two years ago without debate. Leahy heads the Senate Judiciary Committee. In his address, Leahy notes that, “Americans deeply value their privacy. Americans have traditionally recognized the danger of an overreaching government.” Leahy’s comments against Real ID occurred on the last day to file comments with the Department of Homeland Security concerning regulations. One salient issue is that a driver’s home address
and personal information is to be included in a two-dimensional barcode without encryption. This information could be accessed by banks and other businesses without any obstacles. The Real ID Act creates a conundrum among political leaders who find the program to be a bureaucratic nightmare but are looking to earn the vote of those in favor of national security. Each candidate must strike a careful balance between national security and consumer privacy. The future of the Real ID Act could change with the occupant of the Oval Office. 2008 presidential hopefuls such as Mike Gravel, Ron Paul and Hillary Clinton have voiced their opposition to the Real ID Act, but none has made any major statements of their intentions regarding Real ID once they are in office. And
unless voters place more emphasis on Real ID as an issue that directly affects their lives, they can plan on standing in line at the DMV. Hunter Ellis is a junior majoring in journalism and Asian studies.
Can new rules improve security? ating a passport card. This new secure and cheaper passport card, called People Access Security Service, or PASS, will cost only $10 for children and $20 for adults (plus a $25 execution fee). The PASS, part of the WHTI, has not yet been released but is currently open for public comment. Until this new card becomes available, travelers are facing long delays at passport offices nationwide. About six million more passports were issued in the 2007 fiscal year than the year before, according to a USA Today report. The WHTI was originally scheduled to take effect Jan. 23, but such a high volume of passport applications and the resulting backlog led the government to push the deadline to Oct. 1, meanwhile permitting documentation of a pending passport application for
re-entry to the U.S. by air. The final phase of WHTI is on track to take effect in the summer of 2008, when all those traveling to the U.S.—by air, land or sea—must have a passport in hand. Gray said that these tightened restrictions could negatively impact commerce in border areas. “People along the U.S.-Canadian border have been used to living in a very integrated way…this change will be a big shock to the communities along the border,” she said. Passports are quickly becoming an inescapable part of any international trip. For more information on passport requirements, visit http://travel. state.gove/passport. —Louis Altobelli
November 2007 15
International
A nation on the brink Pakistan casts vote for embattled militar y dictator By Will Schultz
E
arly on the morning of July 10, the quiet Pakistani capital city of Islamabad became the scene of a bloody and chaotic firefight. Government security forces stormed into the Lal Masjid, an imposing twoblock complex also known as the Red Mosque. For eight days the mosque had been defended by the radical Islamic cleric Abdur Rashid Ghazi and his followers. A day of intense fighting left more than 100 dead; both government commandos and mosque students were among the casualties. The Red Mosque siege was merely one violent battle in the war raging within Pakistani society. Pakistan is being torn apart by forces from both outside and inside. The nation’s embattled president, Pervez Musharraf, is under attack from Islamic fundamentalists and secular democrats. Radical Islamic terrorism is gaining strength, as al-Qaeda rebuilds itself in the nation’s Northwest Frontier Province. U.S. policy, which leans on Musharraf to purge his nation of terrorism, is 16 The Hill
compounding these problems. The situation became even more unstable in the run-up to Pakistan’s recent election. SECULARISM V. SHARIA Islam is the dominant issue in Pakistan. Despite being the world’s second largest Muslim nation, Pakistan has had a secular government ever since its independence in 1947. This has led to discontent within Pakistan’s sizable community of fundamentalist Muslims. According to a recent poll, 76 percent of Pakistanis believe the implementation of sharia, or Islamic law, should be an important goal of the government. Only 18 percent hold the opposing view. In some areas of Pakistan, vigilantes have taken the initiative to enforce sharia law. Prior to the siege, students from the Red Mosque roamed the streets of Islamabad, intimidating vendors selling music and movies. Popular support for radical Islam has allowed terrorist groups to take root in Paki-
stan. Al-Qaeda found refuge in the nation’s Northwest Frontier Province after being driven out of Afghanistan. Peshawar, the territory’s capital city, became a nexus for al-Qaeda activity, and the Northwest Frontier Province has become a magnet for foreign jihadi groups, including Uzbeks, Tajiks, Chechens and Arabs. Far from being viewed as occupiers, the terrorists are welcomed by the natives: Osama bin Laden enjoys a 70 percent approval rating in the Northwest Frontier Province. U.S. INTERESTS Al-Qaeda’s presence in Pakistan seems inexplicable, as Musharraf is nominally one of America’s closest allies in the War on Terror. George W. Bush has repeatedly praised the Pakistani leader for his staunch support; in 2003, he declared, “thanks to President Musharraf ’s leadership, on the al-Qaeda front we’ve dismantled the chief operators.” However, Musharraf ’s credentials as an anti-terror warrior are questionable. In an interview with
International The Hill, UNC political science professor Andrew Reynolds said Musharraf ’s efforts against alQaeda have been minimal. Pakistan historically backed Afghanistan’s Taliban regime, a notorious sponsor of al-Qaeda. After Afghani terrorist groups relocated to Pakistan, Musharraf allowed them to recuperate in peace. In 2005, he declared a “truce” with Taliban fighters in the tribal region of Waziristan. His neglect towards terrorist organizations has allowed them to recover their lost strength. Musharraf ’s benign policy towards al-Qaeda has failed to win him popularity among Pakistan’s fundamentalists. Musharraf ’s image as Bush’s closest ally in the Muslim world has made his position increasingly perilous. He has been the target of repeated assassination attempts by discontented radicals. The most recent one came in July 2007, when an anti-aircraft missile was fired at his plane during takeoff. Al-Qaeda has declared a fatwa against Musharraf, calling for Pakistan’s Muslims to overthrow their pres-
The nation’s embattled president is under attack from fundamentalists and democrats alike. ident. Musharraf has received the worst of both worlds. His halfhearted, ineffective war with alQaeda has both disappointed the United States and aroused the ire of Pakistan’s Muslims. A VOTE FOR STABILITY The October elections provided a look at Pakistan’s future. Musharraf has never had much
faith in democracy; Reynolds calls him “as not democratic as you can get.” However, Reynolds adds, Musharraf was brought to power by Pakistan’s “significant modern center,” and he can no longer resist their calls for democratic elections. Although his standing was precarious and his approval rating was hovering around 40 percent, Musharraf apparently pulled off a win in the October elections. He shored up his sagging approval rating by reaching out to former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto in an effort to share power. Musharraf is gambling that Bhutto will be able to keep the Pakistan People’s Party in line. The PPP, along with several Islamic-aligned parties, threatened to bolt parliament and deprive Musharraf of the quorum he needs for re-election. Although 160 MPs did resign from the General Assembly in protest, the members of the PPP only abstained from this election, allowing for power-sharing in the near future. Pakistan’s future is bound up in the fate of Musharraf. The worst-case scenario for Pakistan, the United States and the world would be the death or violent deposition of the authoritarian ruler. With Musharraf removed, a Taliban-like regime could seize control of the government, putting Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal in the hands of a terrorist-aligned state. This would provoke India and the U.S. to strike Pakistan preemptively. At the other end of the spectrum, Pakistan’s best-case scenario would be the gradual democratization of the Musharraf government. A successful democracy, lead by the moderate center,
Rachel Moltz
would reduce the appeal of Islamic fundamentalism, breaking the power of al-Qaeda and other jihadi groups. THE YEAR AHEAD The most likely result lies somewhere between the extremes. Throughout its history, Pakistan’s dictatorships, unlike its democratic governments, have been fairly stable. General Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq’s nine-year tenure was only ended by his death, and General Ayub Khan ruled the nation until he voluntarily gave up his power. Musharraf, a student of Khan, will likely follow the same course. He can be expected to continue his authoritarian rule, throwing the occasional bone to democratic elements. This may keep Pakistan stable; whether it will keep the world safe from terrorism is questionable. In any case, it is too soon to say anything definitively. As Reynolds said, “The next twelve months will tell us a lot.” Will Schultz is a sophomore majoring in political science.
November 2007 17
International
Back on track Turkey’s economic resurgence and secular leadership bode well– for now
Rachel Moltz
By Clayton Thomas
After months of serious political and social turbulence, accompanied by a chorus of dire forecasts by observers, it appears that Turkey has reached a level of stability not seen in years. The recent election of former Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul as president has proven to be much less controversial and divisive than predicted. The positive economic track record of the ruling Justice and Development Party, AKP, has ensured that a military coup in Turkey is, as the Journal of Turkish Weekly columnist Barin Kayaoglu said in an e-mail to The Hill, “not only…unlikely, it is very…unfeasible.” military vs. the akp Military coups have played a prominent role in Turkish political history, as the military replaced elected governments four times since 1960 (in 1960, 1971, 1980 and 1997). Every time, and with varying degrees of public support, the generals intervened 18 The Hill
to safeguard the secular nature of the republic created by Mustafa Kemal Ataturk in 1923. It is important to note, however, that in every coup political upheaval was aggravated by poor economic conditions. Under the AKP, however, economic conditions in Turkey have clearly improved. Usually characterized as an ‘Islamist’ party, the AKP is better described as a Muslim version of the religious-based but primarily secular Christian Democrat parties of Western Europe. The AKP, which took power in 2002 under Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, presided over steady economic growth and reined in the hyperinflation that gripped Turkey for years. Despite its economic successes and subsequent overwhelming popularity, the AKP has always been opposed by the military establishment, who view it with distrust. Tensions grew as the 2007 presidential elections approached. Indeed, Newsweek expert Zeyno
Baran rated the probability of a coup in 2007 at 50 percent. Conditions certainly seemed ripe last April, when Turkish political turmoil made headlines around the world. Hundreds of thousands took to the streets in cities across Turkey, protesting the potential candidacy of Erdogan and the AKP in general.Chanting “Turkey is secular and will remain secular,” these crowds, whose numbers exceeded one million in the case of Istanbul’s April 29 protest, were supported by the military. Statements made by military figures were widely interpreted as threats to direct intervention. Erdogan decided not to run, allowing for the candidacy of Abdullah Gul. Meet Mr. Gul Gul also turned out to be controversial. A trained economist and foreign minister under Erdogan, Gul was rejected by many secularists on account of his wife, who wears the Islamic head scarf. The head scarf is currently banned
International in all public buildings, a legacy of Ataturk’s reforms. Turkey’s parliament elects its president, and this election was scheduled for April 27. However, a quorum was not reached, as multiple secularist parties boycotted. Erdogan then called, on May 10, for early general elections. Not surprisingly, the AKP won a resounding victory in the July 22 general elections, gaining even more votes than their impressive 2002 count. Its total share of parliament rose to 341 of 550 seats, which sealed Gul’s election on August 28. Gul has faced difficulties upon taking office on August 29; indeed, his inauguration was boycotted by the military, an unprecedented move and an ominous sign. Furthermore, the issue of the constitutional referendum, to be held October 21, still looms.
This referendum, proposed after the electoral debacle in the spring, seeks to have the president popularly elected, removing parliament from the process. Some opposition parties condemn it as a purely political move on the part of Erdogan to secure the presidency through constitutional revision, rather than through the established legal means.
and his background as an economist and his party’s traditional success in economic affairs bode well for the continuation of Turkey’s economic resurgence. Indeed, Kayaoglu, a self-described “liberal-secular-Muslim Turk,” might seem the kind of citizen to whom a military intervention would appeal. Instead, he is “more than comfortable to see Mr. Gul as heading the ship of the Turkish state.” This support will be crucial to Gul in the months and years ahead, as he steers Turkey through foreign policy troubles and attempts to continue Turkey’s economic success. For now, though, Turks can look with pride on their thriving democracy, an oasis of freedom in a region so sorely lacking in free societies.
Turkish Delight? However, most observers see the plan as an expansion of democratic principles in Turkey, as it puts greater power in the hands of the voters. Despite these issues, and with such broad-based popular support, it is unlikely that Gul will face major challenges from the military. He is an avowed supporter of secularism, as any serious Turkish politician must be, Clayton Thomas is a freshman.
Turkey ready to dine at EU table
One of the greatest points of contention within the European Union is the addition of new members. Turkey’s petition to join the EU has raised much debate, as Muslim Turkey lies on the border of cultural and geographical Europe. Although Turkey applied for EU membership in 1987, it was not recognized as an official candidate until 1999. In recent years, membership negotiations have opened and a screening process was completed. Despite sharing a customs union with the EU, Turkey has not yet been accepted due to controversies surrounding its cultural background and its historical political instability. Some allege that Turkey’s discrimination towards ethnic minorities is a major cause for rejection, claiming such treatment is not the mark of a liberal democracy. Concerns also exist over rising nationalism and Islamic radicalism. In addition, there is an ongoing standoff over Turkey’s continued occupation of the northern third of Cyprus, an EU member. Some, however, support Turkey’s admission into the EU, claiming it would bolster democracy in the
country, strengthen the EU’s economy and send a positive message to the Muslim world. Others cite Turkey’s progress in meeting the benchmarks of EU membership and in improving its commitment to human rights. Public support for Turkey has been on the rise. In June, EU Enlargement Commissioner Olli Rehn said that Europe faces an Islamic backlash from the continued lagging of negotiations. A recent Pew poll showed that Turkish discontent with Europe is increasing. The French government has opposed Turkish admission, claiming that Turkey is technically not part of Europe. French President Nicolas Sarkozy announced that he hopes for discussions among European leaders to continue when they meet in December. But there is support for Turkey at the national level. Portugal, now holding the rotating EU presidency, is an ally. In addition, the United Kingdom gave its blessing to the new Turkish government in early September and announced its full support for Turkey’s EU membership—Jordan O’Donnell November 2007 19
Column From the Right
LegislatioN lessens Threat
T
By Josh McCrain
he centuries-old debate over gun control has a new catalyst. In April, a Virginia Tech student killed 32 and wounded 25 others on campus. Government has a responsibility to regulate firearms, just as it has a responsibility to provide public education and a national defense in order to achieve the ultimate goal of ensuring the safety of citizens. The Republican Party and the National Rifle Association for years have asserted that the Second Amendment protects every American’s right to bear arms. But gun control opponents typically omit the full text of the amendment in their arguments. The amendment reads, “A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” Most conservatives ignore the first segment, focusing on “the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” A well-regulated militia is not three guys with shotguns in a pickup truck or a mentally unstable student. Taking the amendment out of context and ignoring sections of other amendments has never been good policy (i.e. the Alien and Sedition Acts). As a result of this misinterpretation, the U.S. leads the industrialized world in gun-related deaths. Firearms have become the second-most frequent cause of death for Americans ages 15 to 24, according to the Violence Policy Center. In 1997, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported that 86 percent of firearm deaths for children younger than 15 occurred in the U.S. A Harvard study reports that between 1988 and 1997, firearms killed 6,817 children from ages 5 to 14. Such statistics are depressing, but what has been done to attempt to ameliorate this problem? Typically, proper legislation is not passed until a violent, well-publicized crime is committed using firearms. Two examples are the Brady Bill, drafted in response to the failed assassination attempt on former President Reagan,
20 The Hill
and the Assault Weapons Ban, which was a provision of the larger Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act. The latter was passed after the 101 California Street shootings of 1993, where eight people were brutally killed. Though the issue of easy and illegal gun acquisition is important, it is also one of the simplest things to fix. In 1996, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms reported that 44,000 felons had been denied access to handguns due to the Brady Bill. All the law required was that people purchasing a firearm wait five days for a background check to pass before they could walk out of the store with their gun. Relatively simple legislation resulted in huge returns. The issue extends to preventing terrorism, too. The FBI has several reported cases of terrorists using loopholes and lax regulations to purchase weapons. In 2000, the FBI arrested a Hezbollah member in Michigan for purchasing guns from gun shows and then shipping them overseas. The Virginia Tech massacre shooter, Seung-Hui Cho, had a history of mental problems and still was able to buy multiple semi-automatic pistols. With even slightly stricter laws, he may not have been able to obtain a gun, and the shootings may not have happened. A White House official issued the typical party doctrine, saying, “The president believes that there is a right for people to bear arms.” Apparently, this right allows for a mentally unstable individual to purchase multiple firearms without difficulty and justifies the needless deaths of thousands each year.
Column From the Right
Second Amendment rights save lives
F
By Matt Tucker
ive months ago, the nation watched in horror as a lone gunman terrorized the students and faculty of Virginia Tech. How could this loss of life have been prevented, or at the very least, how could it have been stopped sooner? My answer: Either allow students to carry guns on campus or permit professors to keep a gun with them while in the classroom. The official report conducted by a panel appointed by Virginia Gov. Tim Kaine shows that in multiple instances students and faculty had to hide in classrooms and barricade doors to avoid being slaughtered by one crazed individual. If just one of these people had been in possession of a gun at the time, couldn’t that person have killed the maniac before he took more innocent lives? The answer is clear – yes. Yet the public commentary following the events at Virginia Tech has centered on the need for stricter gun control laws. For this, I believe it is worth examining the fundamental basis of gun control and its implications. Gun control has proven ineffective time and time again. Britain banned guns, but has seen a 340 percent increase in gun crime and some brutal knifings. By contrast, Kennesaw, Ga., has seen no murders in the 20 years since an ordinance was passed requiring every home to be armed with a rifle. Conclusion: More guns is better crime prevention than fewer guns. It is extremely naïve to expect criminals to obey laws that declare schools and similar institutions “gun-free zones.” If a man is plan-
ning to kill, five years in prison for illegal firearm possession will not deter him. But the possibility of his own immediate death may do so if he believes that people in the vicinity might also be armed. What is far more disturbing is that most gun control advocates fail to recognize the dangerous precedents set by gun control. The Founding Fathers believed that the right to bear arms was a natural right on par with the freedoms of speech and religion. The first precedent is that our rights are not natural and inalienable but are granted to us by our government – and can therefore be taken from us by the government. This also implies that the regulation of our constitutional rights is permissible; that is, freedom of speech, for example, can be abridged to a certain extent whenever deemed “necessary.” Additionally, gun control challenges the moral definition of a true crime – the act of harming another person or his property through the perpetration of force or fraud. Simply possessing a gun certainly does not fall into this category. Unfortunately, this definition assumes the existence of a victim who has suffered at the hands of a criminal, making it unacceptable to many. But this interpretation forces us as citizens to pay a high price. It erodes the notion of innocent until proven guilty by presuming that possessing a firearm indicates the intent to commit a crime. Undermining this foundation of our criminal justice system would be tragic. Citizens who have taken no immoral actions against others become criminals for trying to prevent anticipated crimes. Do we really want to make a whole new class of criminals out of people who solely yearn to protect themselves? When police across the country are preoccupied with throwing potheads in jail and Tasering college students, are we really supposed to leave our fate in their hands? In the end, the right to bear arms is what will make us secure. November 2007 21
Special Feature
Which Candidate Is Your
One and Only? k
Ru
rac
dy
Ba
Hi lla ry
?
With the presidential election coming up, the candidates are hard at work, wooing and romancing YOU, oh wondrous voter.
Find out your perfect match with our patent-pending presidential perfection questionnaire. You might be surprised by whom you end up with.
But how can you be sure the love will last? Who will stay loyal in the long haul? Will the fire of political desire stay burnin’ all term long?
Keep track of how many A’s, B’s and C’s you get, and follow the instructions at the end to find your most compatible candidate. Ahh, political bliss!
1 2 3 4
—Caroline Guerra, James, Knable, Jessica Lin and Clayton Thomas
Should the U.S. set timetables for withdrawal?
a b c a b c
Yes; in fact, troop decreases should begin immediately.
Yes, timetables are an effective way of demonstrating our intention to leave eventually. No, they aid the terrorists and the U.S. must stay until the job is done.
Are you in favor of another federal minimum wage increase?
Yes, another increase is necessary to keep up with the high cost of living. The recent increase was okay, but another is unnecessary. No, an increase would effectively raise the cost of living.
22 The Hill
a b c
a b c
Will the U.S. be able to accomplish its goals in the war in Iraq? No, any achievment of U.S. goals in Iraq is impossible at this point. Perhaps the U.S. can achieve some goals, but the focus should be on eventual withdrawal. Yes, increased U.S. involvement can secure victory.
Should there be strict legislation against illegal immigration?
No, illegal immigrants should instead be provided a path to legalization. Yes, companies should be punished for hiring illegal immigrants. Yes, increased border security should be funded and laws should be introduced that help identify who is already in the country illegally.
5 6 7 8 9 10
Special Feature
a b c
What should be the federal government’s role in abortion?
The government should protect a woman’s right to have an abortion. Some restrictions (parental notification, etc.) are appropriate for abortion, but abortion procedures should remain legal. Abortion should be illegal in the U.S.
What is the best policy for dealing with America’s dependence on foreign energy?
a b c
We should develop alternative technologies and increase the tax on gasoline.
We should develop alternative technologies., but an increased tax on gasoline is not necessary. We should work on developing resources here at home (ANWAR, clean coal, etc.).
What should be the future of the 2001 tax cuts on income taxes and capital gains?
a b c
They should be repealed.
Some should be kept in place, but taxes on the highest brackets should be raised. They should be made permanent.
To calculate score: a - 1 point b - 3 points c - 5 points
Match your score: Richardson 10 Edwards 16 Obama 22
How do you feel about making health care available through the federal government?
a b c
The government should offer health care to all citizens to ensure adequate coverage for all. The government should provide health care only for the impoverished. All health care should be private.
Should regulations be set to control global warming factors such as carbon emissions?
a b c a b c
Yes, serious regulations should be placed on businesses to ensure a safe environment. Businesses should be given incentives for lowering carbon emissions, but they should not be forced to at this point.
No, it is not the prerogative of the federal government to become involved in this issue.
Which statement best matches your position on education?
Vouchers cause struggling schools to fail completely; NCLB should be reformed, with greater investment in teachers. The government should provide more money to the states to fund education. Vouchers are an excellent way to create equality of opportunity.
Clinton McCain Giuliani Paul
26 38 40 42
Ronmey Thompson
48 50
Points based on candidates’ quotes, voting records, and Web sites.
November 2007 23
health care
Iraq
global warming the economy
Sudan
the environment
globalization
Immigration
poverty
social security
What should the candidates be talking about? Join the Roosevelt Institution Nov. 16 and 17 for a panel about what should be discussed in the 2008 election campaign. Look for policy papers from the panel in the Spring issue of The Hill.