The Hill
SPECIAL EDITION • SPECIAL EDITION • SPECIAL EDITION Chapel Hill Political Review
October/November 2008 October/November 2008
http://studentorgs.unc.edu/thehill http://studentorgs.unc.edu/thehill
Reviewing Russia’s recent moves
•What “change” really means
Volume VIII, Issue II Volume VIII, Issue II
Economic crisis explained
Election issue •A look at local politics
•North Carolina’s new role in politics
From the Editor
The Hill Staff
To our readers: It is The Hill’s mission and greatest honor to present this, our election issue. Our dedicated staff is proud to provide you with nonpartisan information regarding one of the most important elections in our nation’s history. On Nov. 4, we will elect either the first Af rican-American president, or the first female vice president. We will choose the man who will lead the U.S. in its ever growing and changing role in the international community. Perhaps most importantly, we will choose the man who may become the Franklin D. Roosevelt of our generation. We at The Hill hope that our election issue will inspire you to delve into this great debate and search the facts and the issues. Though the nonstop media attention given to this election may have exhausted you as an information seeker, you are charged with the responsibility of a voting citizen in the United States of America. Search the facts and the candidates’ records, get beyond the campaign
EDITOR Juliann Neher
rhetoric, read between the lines. Do not stop after you have closed the cover on this issue—seek more information. Do not allow yourself to settle among the throng of the nation’s apathetic citizens. Those who refuse to vote are wasting one of the greatest privileges and rights in this world, and those who make uninformed choices are abusing it. Your vote, especially in this election, could change not only the face of Washington, but the course of history. Your vote matters. Thank you for picking up this copy of The Hill. We hope this issue is helpful and encouraging to you as a voting citizen. As always, the content of this issue spans a broad range of topics, all of which we hope you find equally helpful and informative. But as the only nonpartisan political review at UNC, we at The Hill know it is perhaps our most important duty to present you with an honest, nonpartisan conversation on issues before you step into the voting booth. Thanks for reading.
ASSOCIATE EDITORS Melissa Brzycki Caroline Guerra Will Schultz Alex Smith
Juliann Neher is a junior majoring in journalism and political science.
HEAD OF DESIGN Samantha Deal
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 e-mail - 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
The Hill
http://studentorgs.edu/thehill/
Chapel Hill Political Review Our Mission: The Hill is a medium for analysis of state, national and international 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
WRITERS John D’Allessandro John Derrick Drew Dimmery Caroline Guerra Harrison Jobe Ryan Kane Krishna Kollu Jillian Mueller Brittany Murphy Siddarth Nagaraj Michael Parker Edmund Polkis Will Schultz Yash Shah Alex Smith Casey Steen Clayton Thomas COLUMNISTS Ryan Collins Elizabeth Held Ismaail Qaiyim
GRAPHIC DESIGN Bitsy Kopp HEAD OF ART Diane Esson ART Megan Shank HEAD OF WEB Ryan Kane HEAD OF CIRCULATION Andre Durham TREASURER Kendall Law FACULTY ADVISER Ferrel Guillory The publication was paid for, at least in part, by Student Activities Fees at a cost of approximately $.50 per copy.
Contents
October/November 2008
Volume VIII, Issue II
Features 6
Financial crisis An explanation of the history and future of the economy
8
Bobby Jindal The up-and-coming Republican
Cover 12
Swing state North Carolina shows off its new moves in national politics
16
Change? Why one campaign promise may go unfulfilled
17
Down the ballot A quick and easy guide to state and local races and more . . .
International 18
The Russian re-emergence Is the Cold War really a thing of the past?
Left/Right 20
Education What elected officals should do v. what empowered consumers could do
In Every Issue
v Notes from The Hill v The Last Word: Where foreign policy fails October/November 2008 3
Notes from The Hill
Book review
Notes from
The Hill
Thomas Friedman’s global evaluation
We are in a new age, writes Thomas Friedman in his new work, “Hot, Flat, and Crowded: Why We Need a Green Revolution—and How It Can Renew America.” It is not the year 2008 A.D., but instead it is year 8 of the E.C.E, the Energy Climate Era. In this age, the world’s dependency on what Friedman calls the fuels from Hell like coal, natural gas, and oil are no longer viable options for providing energy. Fuels from Hell are those fuels that come from beneath the earth’s surface, release toxic carbon emissions and are exhaustible. Friedman argues that because the world today is hot, flat, and crowded, a new energy system must be innovated within the next 50 years in order to alleviate and eliminate the global climate crisis. In his previous book, “The World is Flat,” Friedman argues that globalization has lead to a flattening of today’s world, meaning that technological innovations have led to increased prosperity worldwide. This has allowed more and more people to enjoy a middle class lifestyle. The title of this latest book is Friedman’s assessment of the world today: “hot” refers to global warming increasing global temperatures, “crowded” refers to the world’s constantly growing population and “flat” refers to the disastrous environmental effects caused by the ever-increasing middle class’s demands for cheap and dirty energy.
4 The Hill
According to Friedman, America’s and the rest of the world’s dependence on fuels from Hell has five devastating consequences for the world today.
harming our planet and possibly preventing future breakthroughs in a variety of fields, including biology and natural medicine.
1. Increased global demand for cheap energy has driven up prices of not only oil and gas, but also food.
Though global climate change is indeed an imposing challenge, Friedman points out what he sees as a silver lining in this crisis: it provides an opportunity for America to once again lead the global community. Friedman warns that America must not waste this opportunity. Green technology, which includes existing clean technologies like wind and solar power as well as undiscovered technologies that have yet to be invented, will be the next boom, and if America misses out on it nations like China or India will fill the leadership void. Overall, Friedman does a great job of describing what he perceives as the climate crisis facing the world today. He pulls together many sources on the subject, creating a comprehensive illustration of his views on the disastrous consequences of global warming and what he thinks will happen in the future. Friedman’s book is a must-read for anyone interested in learning more about why many scholars feel global warming must be checked and why the world should end its dependence on fossil fuels.
2. Petro-dictatorships such as Venezuela and Saudi Arabia are now flush with cash because of the ever-rising cost of oil. Their new wealth is a threat to American national security, as it allows these regimes to stay firmly in power and aggressively advocate their anti-American views. 3. Increasing carbon emissions since the Industrial Revolution have caused unprecedented climate change, which could lead to disastrous flooding or other terrible ecological consequences. 4. Energy poverty has emerged in the poorer world because of the developed world’s ever increasing energy demands, which prevents poorer nations from accessing the resources required to enter and enjoy a middle class lifestyle. 5. The world’s biodiversity is disappearing on a huge scale,
Michael Parker is a junior majoring in political science and history.
Notes from The Hill Update
Zardari steps in
Nine months after his wife’s assassination, Asif Ali Zardari, the widower of former Pakistani Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto, has been elected president of Pakistan. Zardari’s victory follows the triumph of his Pakistan Peoples Party in parliamentary elections earlier this year. It also comes in the wake of the resignation of former president Pervez Musharraf last month. Zardari faces the difficult task of balancing the demands of his country’s electorate with the agenda of the U.S. government, which seeks more assistance from the Pakistani government in the fight against Taliban and Al Qaeda forces active in the tribal regions of Northwest Pakistan. Many Pakistanis resent the Ameri-
can government’s support of the unpopular Musharraf over the last few years and consider recent U.S. military raids on extremists inside Pakistan to be a violation of territorial sovereignty. However, the U.S. remains Pakistan’s biggest aid donor in the midst of an economic crisis and is using that leverage to press for further cooperation in targeting militants within Pakistan. Zardari must also address U.S. concerns that Taliban supporters have infiltrated his country’s Inter-Services, a claim that continues to be a major source of tension between the two countries. Additionally, Zardari must confront problems within Pakistan’s political sphere. Many Pakistanis doubt his honesty, recalling that the
man once dubbed “Mr. 10 Percent” has been repeatedly charged with corruption and spent eight years in prison. Their reservations will not be quelled by the breakup of the coalition which the PPP and its chief rival, the Pakistan Muslim League, formed in opposition to Musharraf ’s government. Now that both the president and the prime minister, Yousaf Raza Gilani, are PPP members, many expect Zardari to consolidate political power as he encourages further U.S. aid in return for increased cooperation in pursuing Al Qaeda and the Taliban. Siddarth Nagaraj is a first year majoring in political science.
Hill-O-Meter By Will Schultz
3 Charlie Rangel
You know things are dire when a congressman files an ethics complaint against himself. Sorry, Charlie, but you can’t stay two steps ahead of the IRS forever.
4 Henry Paulson
Captain on board the Titanic. Pilot of the Hindenburg. Manager at Chernobyl. Get the picture? The Treasury Secretary might not be responsible for the market meltdown, but that’s not likely to console him.
1 John McCain and Barak Obama
The Hill’s fearless prediction: one of these men is going to be the 44th president of the United States.
2 Tzipi Livni
Livni was Israel’s first female foreign minister since Golda Meir. Can she follow Meir’s example as PM? The Knesset has spoken, and it says “ken”; that’s “yes,” for those of you who don’t speak Hebrew.
Who’s on top of the heap right now? Who has fallen far? We track the up-and-comers and the down-and-outs. October/November 2008 5
Economy
Money management An explanation of the economic crisis “A national debt, if it is not excessive, will be to us a national blessing,” Alexander Hamilton once famously said. He would never have dreamed of the U.S. Treasury becoming one of the largest investment banks in the nation by purchasing $700 billion of financial firms’ bad debt with borrowed money. Throughout the decade, banks and other financial institutions have been selling mortgages through complex financial arrangements to people who were at a high risk of not paying those mortgages. These banks then passed on the risk to investment banks and other higherend institutions through even more complex arrangements, including mortgage securities.
Unfortunately, after an era of heavy speculation, many people began to foreclose on their homes, resulting in a downward spiral where not only the banks and mortgage companies but especially the secondary investment institutions experienced heavy losses. For several months in 2008, several large investment and insurance firms such as Bear Sterns and Lehman Brothers struggled to cope with these losses until they were bought out or went bankrupt. These firms’ bad mortgage-related debt kept them from raising and investing capital, thus restricting the total amount of capital and the ease with which capital can be converted in the financial markets. The real trouble started when the twin private mortgage companies,
the Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae) and the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (Freddie Mac), institutions thought to be “too big to fail” since they were chartered by the government, were bought by the Federal Reserve after imminent failure. This set off a chain reaction of insecurity in the market—the stocks of financial firms plunged— causing some long-standing firms to fail or seek buyout offers from larger banks. After attempting to prop up individual firms like AIG, Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke and Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson concluded that the only way to effectively preserve the health of the financial market was to purchase
Tracking the bear market: a timeline of the recent economic downtrun
Note: This chart does not represent the actual numerical data for this period.
6 The Hill
Economy the bad mortgage-related securities, thereby freeing banks to make loans vital to our economy.
consequences. Otherwise, the U.S. economy may experience the worst of all worlds, including reduced growth from a massive U.S. government budget deficit.
fellow Republicans behind the bill, damaged his standing in a recent CNN poll. Meanwhile, Sen. Barack Obama backed the plan, but during the presidential debate on Sept. 26 he called for a “21st century” regulatory framework for finance. Right now, it is unclear what he really means.
As The Economist pointed out in a Sept. 25 article, governments rarely spend so much capital to prevent The bailout is a huge gamble. If financial failure. successful, its payoffs may only be Often, the bank an aversion to a short-term ecofailures occur before Specifics aside, politicians will no nomic disaster with negative longthe government steps doubt work to redefine the auterm consequences. in, as was the case thority given to the Fed and U.S. during the Great Treasury. The Fed’s decision to Depression and salvage AIG instead of Lehman in Japan in the early 1990’s. Thus The financial crisis has become the Bros. reflected not only enormous there is a lot of uncertainty in how most important issue of the Nopower, but a rather arbitrary benchmarkets will react in the short and vember election. Already, the gravity mark to measure the importance of long terms to a bailout. Short-term of the situation has led to a flurry individual financial firms. economic ailments, namely the lack of different policy solutions, some of vital short-term credit for busiof which clash along ideological Ultimately, the contours of the nesses, should soon be resolved with lines. Sen. Hillary Clinton called political debate on finance during the bailout. Otherwise, the economy for a temporary ban on foreclothis election and the years after will will experience huge layoffs, high sures. The fissure in the Republican follow the age-old issue of regulainterest rates and a deep recession. Party between moderates and fiscal tion. There are good arguments to conservatives became apparent as be made for deregulation; as BrookThe long-term economic consethe bailout bill was debated in the ings fellow Eswar Prasad points out quences are potentially grim as well. House. House Republicans initially in a recent commentary, it was the There is a chance that many of the stalled and rejected the bill, offering quasi-public nature of Freddie Mac $700 billion mortgage-related secu- their own insurance plan to back and Fannie Mae that gave these rities held by the government will failing mortgages. They feared that institutions the freedom to take on lose significant value. A loss on this such an enormous purchase of bad profligate investments and bad acmassive investment would result in securities would be an intrusion counting practices. a larger government deficit, which on America’s free market system, would lead to a huge decline in the On the other hand, value of the dollar. Of course, if the it can be said that The Fed’s decision to salvage AIG mortgage securities rise in value, unchecked financial instead of Lehman Bros. reflected the government can make a profit, innovation exacernot only enormous power, but a thereby reducing the deficit. A bated the housing rather arbitrary benchmark to potential result of the bailout is that bubble, as some measure the importance of indiin the future, financial firms may complicated mortvidual financial firms. expect the government to bail them gage instruments are out after taking dramatic risks. That unregulated by the would likely lead to more reckless Securities and Exbehavior by financial firms and a especially since the U.S. Treasury change Commission. Whatever the general erosion of confidence in the would gain significant control of the case with regulation, politicians will U.S. economic system. participating financial firms’ shares. have to make sure that the national One casualty of the crisis may be blessing, our ballooning deficit, does The bailout is a huge gamble. If suc- Sen. John McCain’s presidential bid. not become a national curse. cessful, its payoffs may only be an McCain’s shifting stance during the aversion to a short-term economic week before the House rejected the Alex Smith is a junior majoring in disaster with negative long-term first bill, plus his failure to rally his economics.
October/November 2008 7
Domestic
Rising star Republican As Fall Break ended last year, a small group of UNC students gathered at the Louis Armstrong New Orleans International Airport. Politically speaking, it had been an interesting break for everyone there. Just the night before, a young and ambitious Republican named Bobby Jindal had beaten eleven other candidates to win Louisiana’s gubernatorial election. Moreover, Mr. Piyush “Bobby” Jindal had become the first IndianAmerican governor—a “first” most people did not expect from a state that had not elected a non-white governor of any sort since Reconstruction. It had been an exciting race, and a nasty one at times, but the election had been off the radar for most UNC students. Many in Chapel Hill still do not know who Jindal is. That will most likely change. Though the nation may never know exactly who was on Republican presidential candidate John McCain’s “short list” of vice-presidential candidates, Jindal was declared a potential running mate by sources as varied as the New York Times and Fox News. Prominent Republican Newt Gingrich called Jindal “far and away the best candidate” for the position, and many thought choosing Jindal—nicknamed the “Republican Obama”—would be a strategic move against the real Obama. Analysts pointed to his youth and, most importantly, his highly impressive résumé that includes serving as U.S. Representative and assistant secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Despite all the media attention, Jindal was not chosen. This opportunity to be catapulted into the national political scene passed by as the
8 The Hill
country turned its attention to another governor, Alaska’s Sarah Palin. Did Jindal miss his chance at moving up from state politics? It seems doubtful. According to political science professor Dr. James C. Garand from Louisiana State University, we should not be asking “‘if ’ but ‘when’ he will move to the national stage.” One test of Jindal’s political sustainability was Hurricane Gustav, which hit the coast of Louisiana in early September. Whether or not it was fair to former Gov. Kathleen Blanco, Jindal’s management of this hurricane was compared to Blanco’s criticized management of Hurricane Katrina. The consensus seems to be that Jindal managed Louisiana rather nicely. The two main crises that developed during the evacuation were pointed out by Jindal himself, and after only a few days the secretary, deputy secretary and undersecretary of Louisiana’s Department of Social Services had been pressured or forced to resign. Though some have continued to place the blame on Jindal for the serious problems that arose at the evacuation shelters, it seems that the majority of Louisianans felt Jindal took charge of the situation by removing the bureaucrats in his administration who were at fault. “Jindal’s actions prior to and after Hurricane Gustav are likely to in-
crease his popularity considerably,” Garand said. There is no recipe for gaining sustainable national attention, and there might be reasons to believe Jindal will never exceed state-wide significance. Though Jindal’s press conferences during Hurricane Gustav were frequently televised nationally, they never became virulent YouTube material in the manner of several Barack Obama clips. He also has not published a nationally popular book, an advantage which helped Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee enter the national political scene. Yet we must remember that Jindal is only 37 years old. He has plenty of time to reach the national level of politics, and if we can apply one
of his Gustav-era quotes about firing bureaucrats to his political career as a whole, “you won’t have to wait long.” Caroline Guerra is a sophomore majoring in political science and international studies.
International
At a glance
Profile of the Czech Republic The Czech Republic’s current political proclivities may be best understood by an examination of its modern history. Czechoslovakia has had a mixed relationship with the West—cooperation in the formation of the state after World War I, yet it was betrayed in the Munich Agreement By the 1960’s, a reform government under Alexander Dubcek took control of the national Communist Party apparatus. Fearing the effects of his “Socialism with a Human Face,” members of the Warsaw Pact invaded Czechoslovakia in 1968, ending the period of political liberalization known as the Prague Spring. While Dubcek and his allies were defeated, these reforms were a sign of things to come. A Soviet spokesperson, when asked the difference between Dubcek’s reforms and Gorbachev’s simply said, “nineteen years.” The Velvet Revolution’s principle actors, who would oust the Communists in late 1989, began their
Population: 10,220,911 (3.3% of US) Area: 78,866 sq km (about the size of South Carolina) GDP (PPP): $248.9 billion (1.8% of US) GDP per capita (PPP): $24,200 (US: $45,800) Military Expenditures: 1.46% GDP (US: 4.06% GDP)
activism on a basis of human rights. Through their nonviolent revolt, dramatic changes resulted. In June 1990, completely free elections were held in Czechoslovakia with 95 percent participation. By 1992, it became clear that Czech and Slovak priorities were different, leading to an official split on Jan. 1, 1993. The Czech Republic pursued integration with the West based on a synthesis of morality and politics expressed by dissident writer-turned President, Vaclav Havel. It became a member of NATO in 1999 and the EU in 2004 (although it will not adopt the Euro until at least 2012). It has consistently been the best performing post-Communist economy, and will hold the rotating EU presidency for six months beginning Jan. 1, 2009. In 2007, the U.S. approved the Czech Republic’s entry to the Visa Waiver Program, allowing visafree travel to the U.S. for limited periods.
A stalwart ally with the U.S., the Czech Republic currently maintains a troop presence in Afghanistan as part of the International Security Assistance Force. The primary issue in U.S.-Czech relations is the divisive missile defense system. While fully negotiated and signed, the plan to house a radar system in the Czech Republic (the interceptor missiles themselves will be in Poland) faces tough opposition in parliament where it still requires a vote. The governing coalition can not guarantee passage without opposition votes. Many opponents call for a referendum, and polls show most Czechs oppose the system. This issue will be an important one for the government. The Greens, currently part of the governing coalition but divided on missile defense and European integration, are trying to figure out who they are, according to Jan Rovny, a doctoral candidate in political science at UNC who hails from the Czech Republic. In any case, a missile defense deal will probably not be finalized for several months. Russia, which is against the proposal, has maintained that such facilities “could be designated as targets for [their] ICBMs.” Given the history, geographic positioning and recently prominent role of the Czech Republic, it seems much of the stability between Europe and Russia depends on this small nation. Drew Dimmery is a junior majoring in political science.
October/November 2008 9
International
Cuba’s other prison
A personalized look at the opinions of Cuba’s youth The acrimony over the U.S. terrorist detention facility and naval base in Guantanamo is a premier emblem to tenuous U.S.-Cuban relations. On both sides, foreign policy formulation seems paralyzed by old Cold War sentiments while the views of the general constituency, particularly youth, remain marginally represented. At the same time, the scope of media coverage on U.S.-Cuban affairs generally excludes personal stories, instead focusing on the politics of the conflict. However, these personal stories can provide grounds for cooperation in the future. From the Grassroots Throughout Cuban history, youth movements have developed in response to the generational disconnect between the ‘living room’ politics of older bureaucrats and the real issues on the ground. The current communist regime embarked on a process of ‘socialization’ in which the Cuban youth would be transformed into Che Guevara’s selfless “new communist man”. However, a new counterculture youth has been developing because of unfulfilled political and economic aspirations. Although the Castro regime utilizes censorship tactics, the state has been unable to monopolize the political expectations of youth. Contact with the outside world, specifically through exiled family members who have taken asylum in democratic nations, has contributed to alternative political viewpoints. Cuban Youth for Democracy (CYD), which works to secure the academic
10 The Hill
autonomy of universities in order to foster liberal democratic platforms, exemplifies the mobilizing effect of such communication.
parture meeting that we would get a warmer greeting in Havana than the people going to London, and it has been true.
Youth have also reacted against the shortcomings of the state education system. Their frustration has been accentuated by the failure of the economy to lead to the material well-being of the people. In beat with the work of the CYD, there is rising curiosity about the viability of capitalist institutions. In particular, youth are interested in the possibility of free economic mobility which is severely limited under the state’s command economy.
However, this sense of amiability is punctured by several key stances of U.S. foreign policy. The U.S. rarely offers visas anymore, even on the grounds of political asylum, and the frequency of deportation has also increased significantly. Furthermore, the U.S. embargo is seen by Cuban youth as a violation of free trade practices which would revitalize the economy and provide the opportunities for which they are looking. They also feel alienated by lingering, hostile attitudes toward Cuba, for instance, that the nation was part of the “axis of evil,” according to John Bolton, U.S. ambassador to the UN.
The issues that this new youth counterculture have propagated suggest that the U.S. may be a model of the reforms which Cuban youth are seeking, however their perception of the U.S. still remains frayed. U.S. Image amongst Cuban Youth At an ideological level, the interests of disillusioned Cuban youth and those of the U.S. are aligned. Alex Merritt, a junior at UNC who studied abroad in Cuba last semester, narrated the opinion of two students at the University of Havana: They described Cuba as an open prison … the two years of obligatory military service as two years of their lives lost. They complained how poor they are; the pay is very low. For instance, my sailboat pilot in Varadero was really an agricultural engineer … instead he works off the tips … Cubans love Americans. We were told on our pre-de-
The Rabbit Hole As U.S. foreign policy deviates from the issues of Cuban youth, the image of the U.S. becomes an image of ambivalence. If the U.S. were to open itself to political refugees, trade, and cultural exchange, it would empower Cuban youth to realize political and economic reforms. At the same time, it would undermine the legitimacy of the communist state amongst the Cuban people. Perhaps such a policy of effectively fostering democracy may be a welcome sight to those concerned with the U.S. image abroad, but for now the interests of the Cuban youth remain underground. Yash Shah is a sophomore majoring in economics and political science.
International
North Korea after Kim Reports of North Korean leader Kim Jong-Il’s recent health problems have complicated an already thorny situation on the Korean peninsula, as members of the international community scramble to get a sense for what a post-Kim North Korea might look like. For the time being, there is no consensus, with experts pointing to several individuals and groups likely to wield some kind of influence after Kim’s death. But even the most informed Korean experts can only guess at the internal workings of what is probably the world’s most isolated and reclusive state. The issue of denuclearization overshadows all considerations of successors, with some attention given to the possibility of reunification. The prospect of Kim’s imminent death or incapacitation was raised in mid-2008, when a Japanese professor and Korean expert claimed in a best-selling book that Kim died in 2003 and that a stand-in had begun impersonating him at public appearances. Overwhelming political repression and limitations on foreign entry into the country forces North Korean analysts to read between the lines of the regime’s formulaic public statements and pore over photos and videos of highly staged official events. Even the most minor details can point to major changes in policy or rule. Further stoking speculation of Kim’s demise or illness was his absence from the Olympic torch ceremony in the capital Pyongyang in April. Though Kim was seen intermittently in public in the following months, his absence from a military parade celebrating the nation’s 60thanniversary on Sept. 9 was seen as crucial in the intelligence community, signaling serious health issues.
It seems that, for now, Kim’s health has stabilized after surgery by Chinese doctors. The most likely scenario, as described by high-ranking Japanese and South Korean sources, is that Kim had a stroke several weeks ago and now is afflicted by some level of paralysis. While Kim may not be on his deathbed, the gravity of his health problems has made the question of succession an issue of geopolitical importance. Kim inherited power from his father Kim Il-sung in 1994; consequently, Kim Jong-Il’s children feature prominently in lineups of potential successors. Kim is reported to have many children, but only two are considered serious contenders. As the two were born to different wives of Kim, rumors of a power struggle between them have existed for years. The eldest, Kim Jong-nam, was considered the favorite until a bizarre incident in 2001. Jong-nam was arrested and deported after trying to enter Japan with his son and two women (neither of whom was his wife) on a forged Dominican Republic passport. The episode was extremely embarrassing for Kim Jong-Il, who was reported to be furious with his son’s reckless behavior. The other son, Kim Jong-chul, is a safer candidate, but is probably too young at 26 to assume power alone.
his reputed excellent health, administrative skills and long-standing dynastic connections. In an email to The Hill, Elijah Munyi, a researcher at the Korea Institute for Development Strategy in Seoul, described Sung-taek as “the most likely politician to take over”. However, Munyi noted that transition to another one-man rule is ultimately unlikely in the post-Kim Korea, and that the most plausible scenario is rule by a number of army generals with a member of the Kim family functioning more as a figurehead than an autocrat. The army has taken a notoriously hard-line stance on North Korea’s nuclear program and is likely to slow down, if not reverse, the process of denuclearization. As for the prospects of reunification, Munyi said they remain slim if the North remains politically stable. One future trend he said to look out for was “patent competition” between China and South Korea over influence on the peninsula. As for Kim himself, he has given no clues to succession policy in light of recent developments, reflecting the secrecy that has characterized his state’s regime for the past 60 years. Clayton Thomas is a sophomore majoring in political science and history.
One other individual is seen as a likely successor—Kim’s b r o t h e r - i n - l a w, Chang Sung-taek, the husband of Kim’s only sister. Only a few years younger than Kim, Chang’s greatest assets are
October/November 2008 11
Cover
A changing state
North Carolina as a major player in the presidential election
North Carolina is a changing state. The tobacco fields and barbeque are still around, but in the new economy North Carolinians are increasingly likely to work in sectors such as information technology, finance and education. These growing industries, in turn, have attracted many new residents with new political leanings. Public Policy Polling, a public opinion polling firm based in Raleigh, has reported that “newer North Carolina residents support the Democratic candidate more by a margin of anywhere from 11-15 points in the races for President, Governor, and Senate.” With one of the fastest growth rates in the nation at 12 percent between 2000 and 2007, according to the N.C. Office of State Budget and Management, these demographic changes have the potential to permanently alter the state’s political landscape. With the Republicans’ margin of victory at nearly 13 percent for both of North Carolina’s most recent presidential elections, understanding the concept of North Carolina
12 The Hill
as a swing state necessitates a look further back. While the state has not voted for a Democrat since Jimmy Carter in 1976, the margin of victory has been close—under 5 percent—three times since then, including a nail-bitingly thin margin of 0.79 percent between Carter and Ronald Reagan in 1980. More the anomaly than the rule, the landslides of the 2000 and 2004 elections could give way to a more competitive future for North Carolina’s presidential elections. But for a generation of North Carolinians, this is the first time in memory that the state has mattered in a presidential election. It matters in the sense that while it is not widely deemed one of the 10 states considered an unpredictable “tossup,” pre-election polling has placed it within reasonable reach of either party, earning it the title of “battleground state.” This means more trips by candidates, more money spent, more attention lavished, and more talking about issues that matter to North Carolinians.
Democratic candidate Barack Obama has logged more time in North Carolina than his predecessors, and much of his competitiveness in the state can be attributed to his campaign’s efforts during the heated primary season. Massive voter registration efforts brought about a major turnout for the candidate, and Obama himself showed up to scrimmage the UNC men’s basketball team and hold a rally at the Dean Smith Center. According to UNC political science professor Jim Stimson, these efforts have had a major impact. “The extraordinary ability of the Obama campaign to mobilize blacks and young people in the North Carolina primary…seems to me to be the game changer from 2004,” he told The Hill. While the youth vote and the black vote have historically been among the least reliable voting groups, Stimson said, “it is safe to predict record turnout because we know that voting for the first time is much harder than continuing to vote once the habit is started. So there is every reason to
Cover expect the people mobilized from the primary campaign to turn out in record numbers.” Chief McCain campaign strategist Steve Schmidt declares North Carolina to be solid McCain territory and sees the shift in resources towards the state as merely a transitional period putting off an inevitable focus on battleground states. “It’s just one more state where the Obama campaign has allowed its hubris to dictate spending decisions,” Schmidt told the Associated Press in September. “John McCain will win North Carolina and soon you will see the Obama camp withdraw from North Carolina like you have seen them withdraw from other states.”
Newport News, Virginia, described the changes in the electorate. “The Washington D.C. suburbs have grown really rapidly in the last decade,” said Kidd. “People from other parts of the country and other parts of the world are coming to Northern Virginia to live and work, and that’s brought a diversity to
up playing a deciding role in the 2008 election. “When the Obama team starts calculating how to put together 270 electoral votes, North Carolina may begin to look like an unnecessary luxury,” said Stimson. But with the state budget office predicting an increase of 4 million residents by 2030, North Carolina
Virginia’s population that is unlike the traditional Virginia population.”
will need to get comfortable playing a permanent and decisive role in presidential elections.
Still, the combination of demographic change and the increase in voter registration and turnout associated with Obama may have already had an impact on other races. After early speculation that heavy-hitter Governor Mike Easley would seek the US Senate seat, lesser-known Democratic candidate Kay Hagan has performed better than expected against Republican candidate and incumbent Elizabeth Dole. “The Obama campaign has brought a level of excitement to this campaign” and energized the party statewide, said Colleen Flanagan, Hagan communications director, in an interview with The Hill. A look at Virginia, one of the most contested swing states in the 2008 race, provides insight into North Carolina’s future. No Democratic candidate for president has won in Virginia since Lyndon Johnson in 1964, but Virginia’s demographic changes have made the state a dead heat in 2008. In an interview with National Public Radio, political science professor Quentin Kidd of
Given that North Carolina has been solid Republican ground for years now, and given the various Electoral College strategies open to the two candidates, the state may not end
Ryan Kane is a senior majoring in political science.
October/November 2008 13
Cover
Just the ticket After months of speculation, presidential candidates Sen. Obama and Sen. McCain announced their vice presidential running mates. Shortly before their conventions, Obama revealed his selection of Sen. Joe Biden, the senior U.S. Senator from Delaware, and McCain his selection of Alaskan Gov. Sarah Palin. These choices seem to be polar opposites, but both were chosen for similar reasons: to balance each candidate’s perceived short-comings. Biden is a long-time U.S. Senator with extensive foreign policy experience. He remedies Obama’s perceived inexperience and lack of foreign policy expertise. Palin is a newcomer to national politics and has injected youth and vigor into the Republican campaign. Initially, there was palpable outrage by many Democrats that Obama did not select Sen. Hillary Clinton as his running mate. Fearing party disunity, the Democratic National Committee staged the convention to emphasize Clinton and her support of Obama’s campaign. Conversely, the announcement of Palin resulted in a period of intense excitement for the Republican Party, an element that had been lacking for most of the campaign. Palin also energized the Republican base of conservative voters with her strong stance against abortion and conservative positions on other social issues. Some strategists viewed Palin’s selection as a ploy to lure disaffected Clinton supporters, and Palin even mentioned Clinton prominently in her initial speech after being selected—an act that
14 The Hill
would have been met with indignation only a few months ago. It is not yet clear how many Clinton supporters will move to support Palin. Indeed, the selection of Palin was met with outright shock by Republicans, Democrats and the media. Very few knew who Palin was, and even right wing pundits stumbled to spin her selection to the media. Likewise, the media scrambled to uncover information about Palin and her positions. Obama’s campaign also seemed unsure of its strategy after Palin was selected. Biden has avoided any serious gaffes on the campaign trail, but Palin has not been so lucky. She has taped two interviews, which have been widely criticized by both the left and the right. Palin has also been unusually shielded by the McCain campaign, and many media outlets have begun expressing frustration at their lack of access to the candidate. Many of her policy positions are unknown, and her lack of experience has become a serious consideration because of McCain’s age. Although Palin’s selection was initially seen a game-changer for McCain, his choice may end up backfiring. Palin’s initial popularity has decreased substantially in the polls following her brief interactions with the media through several high profile interviews. Although the vice presidential debate was highly anticipated, it was certainly not a game-changer for either campaign. Both Biden and Palin largely held their own with no major gaffes. There was a general consensus that there was no
The other half Barack Obama:
-Columbia University graduate -Community organizer in Chicago, Ill. -Civil rights lawyer -Professor, University of Chicago -Illinois state senator -U.S. senator from Illinois, elected 2004 Strengths: In addition to his oratory skills, Obama has a diversified portfolio of legislation in the Senate that focus on both domestic and foreign issues. The bills he has proposed show that there is some walk in all the talk with this senator. Weaknesses: Obama does not bring as much experience to the table as John McCain, especially in foreign policy.
John McCain:
-Attended U.S. Naval Academy -POW 1967-1973 -Retired decorated captain of U.S. Navy -Served two terms in U.S. House of Representatives for Arizona -U.S. senator from Arizona, elected1986 Strengths: McCain’s record clearly displays his leadership ability, his commitment to the military and his ability to cross party lines. Weaknesses: McCain will have to prove that his experience as a Senator from Arizona makes him capable of making decisions to benefit every American. Brittany Murphy
clear winner, but Palin far exceeded expectations in post-debate polls. The coming weeks will reveal what impact, if any, this debate will have on the campaigns. Regardless of who wins the White House, America will have made history by electing either the first black president or the first female vice-president. Harrison Jobe is a sophomore majoring in political science.
Cover
Red to blue
District races may demonstrate changing national trends Congressional races have gone by the wayside as media networks are plastered with headlines about the presidential election. A unique trend is underway in which Democrats are contesting seats in districts that would otherwise be expected to vote decisively for Sen. John McCain. Those who desire a preview of the direction of national policy should consider the effect of this trend on the traditional labels of red and blue states. The contest between Democrat Larry Kissell and Republican incumbent Robin Hayes for a seat in the House of Representatives for North Carolina’s 8th District serves as a case study to illustrate this national dynamic. In 2006, Kissell challenged Hayes, a four-term incumbent, in a race which was considered a forgone conclusion. On May 3, 2006, the day after Kissell won the primary, the Charlotte Observer reported that his total campaign assets were $45,000, while Hayes had at least $1 million cash on hand. More importantly, though, the district’s voter profile leaned Republican with a Cook PVI rating of R +7, which suggests that Republican candidates perform 7 percent better in the district’s elections than the national average. The trajectory of the race, however, changed dramatically as the Kissell campaign began hosting events such as one where gas was sold at the price it was when Hayes first took office. Kissell’s campaign sought to represent Hayes’ ties to big oil. The race became a toss-up and Hayes won the election by a
margin of 329 votes out of more than 121,000 cast. This year, Kissell is again challenging Hayes for the House seat, and while the ongoing race appears to be in a similar dead heat, the question remains whether it is Democratic campaign strategy or a national repudiation of the Republican Party that is making it possible for a traditionally red district to potentially go blue. Looking at the special elections in 2008 for vacated House seats provides some clues. Earlier in 2008, special elections were held in Mississippi’s 1st District, Louisiana’s 1stand 6thDistrict, and Illinois’ 14thDistrict—all strong Republican districts that Bush won easily in 2000 and 2004. Democrats won three out of the four races. In response to the loss in Mississippi, Tom Cole, the National Republican Congressional Committee Chairperson, admitted that “voters remain pessimistic about the direction of the country and the Republican party in general.” The primary channel for this sort of anti-Bush pessimism is for voters to replace Republican incumbents with moderate or socially conservative Democrats. The other side to the story is that anti-Bush pessimism is a consequence of effective campaign strategy. UNC political science professor James Stimson explains
that the special elections cannot be interpreted to represent national anti-Bush or anti-GOP trends because Democratic candidates in each district had to activate these undercurrents in order to convert them into electoral advantages. Furthermore, Stuart Rothenberg of the Rothenberg Political Report argues that moderate voters differentiate between party candidates at the national level. Therefore it is possible for them to vote consistently Democratic in presidential elections and Republican for local contests. Therefore, Rothenenberg suggests that Democratic challengers in House races must communicate a link between Republican incumbents and the Bush administration. The use of grassroots tactics by the Kissell campaign to translate dissatisfaction towards Republicans at the national level into local contests demonstrates how the political map can change in this general election. Given these stakes, cases such as the 2006 Hayes-Kissell race should be a stark reminder that each vote is crucial, especially in a battleground state such as North Carolina. Yash Shah is a sophomore majoring in economics and political science.
October/November 2008 15
Cover
Change: an empty promise? As the promise of change has been delivered repeatedly by both John McCain and Barack Obama, a closer look at this so-called change through the lens of foreign policy may reveal a promise of more of the same on both sides. As UNC public policy professor Daniel Gitterman explained, both candidates are advised by groups of men who have helped to create presidential foreign policy doctrines of the past and whose resumes contain tremendous amounts of Washington experience. While change may be promised by both presidential candidates, foreign policy may be excluded from this promise of reform. Four of McCain’s six foreign policy advisors, Robert Kagan, Randy
Scheunemann, Fredrick Kagan and Richard Armitage, subscribe to the same neoconservative ideology as that of President Bush and Vice President Cheney, along with many prominent Bush administration members. The Bush Doctrine, a foreign policy that has triumphed unilateralism and led the U.S. into a highly controversial war in Iraq,
16 The Hill
is essentially a materialization of neoconservative manifestos. The Project for a New American Century (PNAC), the most influential neoconservative think tank, cofounded by Robert Kagan, issued two of these manifestos: the 1997 “Statement of Principles” and more importantly, the 2000 “Rebuilding America’s Defenses”, a project in which Fred and Robert Kagan participated. Both Scheunemann and Armitage are involved in PNAC projects, including the “Committee for the Liberation of Iraq” as well as a 1997 letter to President Bill Clinton calling for a pre-emptive strike on Saddam Hussein’s Iraq. Lehman, one of McCain’s foreign policy advisors who is not a self-described neoconservative, has participated in several PNAC projects and is a member of the organization. The only non-PNAC affiliate is Jack Keane, a former Vice Chief of Staff of the U.S. Army. According to the The National Journal, Keane “was one of the key architects behind revamping the strategy in Iraq and launching a 22,000-troop surge last year.” Showing his neoconservative lean though, Keane “has warned against using too few forces” in Iraq and Afghanistan. While McCain has made it clear that most of the Bush administration staffers will not be offered job extensions, in a possible McCain administration, the basic worldview of those who
will hold the reins to U.S. foreign policy would remain unchanged. Obama represents a change from the Bush Doctrine, and that is a statement that not even McCain would dispute. However, the Obama campaign has stated that they want to “fundamentally change the way Washington works.” This may prove to be difficult due to the amount of foreign policy advisors who are well versed in the “way Washington works.” One of Obama’s main advisors is Anthony Lake, President Clinton’s National Security Advisor from 1993 to 1997. During Lake’s tenure in the Clinton Administration he became one of the most influential thinkers and helped to build President Clinton into a foreign policy president as well as successfully end the Bosnian Conflict in 1996. Lake is also a professor at Georgetown University, making him a Washington “insider” and member of a group from which Obama attempts to stay separate. Obama’s staff is also full of former Clinton staffers, including Susan Rice, who served as assistant secretary for African affairs in the State Department; Richard Danzig, former Navy secretary; and F. Whitten Peters, former secretary of the Air Force. Two of Obama’s main foreign policy advisors did not serve in the Clinton Administration, although Denis McDonough served as a chief advisor to former Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle. Only one advisor out of Obama’s foreign policy staff is a true “outsider”—as well as an Obamacan—Major General Jonathan Gration. This group of former Clinton staffers minus one and a Vice Presidential nominee of Joe Biden, who has been in Wash-
John D’Allessandro is a senior majoring in international studies.
US Senate
In the context of foreign policy, it is important to understand that change is not necessarily a good thing. Most of the conservative foreign policy elite believe that George W. Bush achieved great successes in his two terms as president. With McCain and his staff likely to come forth with a McCain Doctrine that is similar to the Bush Doctrine, much of this group will be extremely pleased and relieved if McCain is elected president. On the other hand, Clinton’s success in foreign policy since the second half of his first term is something that most Democrats and many Republicans see as one of Clinton’s greatest accomplishments. Any comparable feat by a potential Obama administration would be welcomed by all Democrats, a group that has been extremely vociferous in their disapproval of the neoconservative grand strategy. When it comes down to it, McCain and Obama’s message of change doesn’t carry over into the world of foreign policy.
Kay Hagan (D) -B.A. in American Studies from Florida State University -Law degree from Wake Forest University -Worked for Bank of America -Elected to the State Senate in 1998; she remains the incumbent in that seat -Supports reinvesting in N.C. agriculture, expanding access to health care coverage and fixing No Child Left Behind.
4th District
ington for over 30 years, cannot be called a group of “mavericks” who, if Obama wins in November, will ride into Washington on horseback ready to change the “way it works” on Jan.21st. On the contrary, this group (Obama included) shares the same tenets of the Carter Doctrine and the hard-to-define Clinton Doctrine, a realist-based approach to international relations.
David Price (D) -Earned a B.A. in history and mathematics at UNC -Doctorate in political science from Yale -Former political science professor at Duke University -4th District Representative 1987-1994, 1996-current -Supports stimulating tax cuts, continuing the fight on terrorism and providing social services to illegal immigrants.
B.J. Lawson (R) -A “Ron Paul Republican” -Wants to decrease the size of federal government and give more power to states -Wants to repeal NCLB and eventually eliminate the Federal Department of Education -Favors an isolationism and wants an immediate withdrawal of troops from the Middle East -Does not support amnesty or social services for illegal immigrants
Governor
International
Elizabeth Dole (R) -In politics since 1969 -First female secretary of transportation -Second female president of the American Red Cross -Plans to increase teacher pay and invest in the community college system -Plans to invest in pulic transportation -Wants to drill in Alaska as a temporary solution to energy crisis
Beverly Perdue (D) -Doctorate in education at the University of Kentucky -Former school teacher and a long-term care consultant -Elected to the N.C House of Representatives in 1986 -Five-term U.S. Senator -First lieutenant governor of N.C., served two terms -Plans to conserve water, protect military jobs, and install an elaborate plan to reform education.
Pat McCrory (R) -Seven-term mayor of Charlotte -Plans to revamp transportation -Plans to fund alternative energy and energy conservation research -Supports suspending the N.C. gas tax and decreasing all state taxes -Wants to improve job related training in-state and create incentives for companies to create jobs in N.C. -Wants stricter immigration policy
Edmund Poliks, Jillian Mueller
October/November 2008 17
International
Russia’s re-emergence What will come from Russia’s recent moves? “We are not afraid of anything, the prospect of another Cold War included.” That was the response by the new Russian President Dmitri Medvedev to Western criticism over Russian recognition of South Ossetia and Abkhazia. Such rhetoric is both heated and striking. Just over five years ago, foreign analyst Bobo Lo wrote that Vladimir Putin “has realized that there is no mileage in standover tactics.” Looking to Putin’s relaxed response to the United States withdrawing from the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, Lo suggested that, unlike his predecessor, Boris Yeltsin, who often reached “for the sky and [missed] by a mile,” Putin “aims low and achieves.” By extending the conflict in South Ossetia to Georgia proper and recognizing the independences of South Ossetia and Abkhazia, exacerbating suspicions and inflaming Western anger, Russia seems to have lost sight of the disciplined approach that enabled it to rise under Putin’s reign. At first glance, Moscow’s response to the Georgian assault on South Ossetia seems disproportionate and astray of the 21st-century Russian policies that have stressed for stronger economic ties and greater integration with Europe. Can Moscow take such a risk? Strenghtened by sales of oil and natural gas, Russia now has greater leverage over Europe than it did eight years ago. The French and German governments, big importers of Rus-
18 The Hill
sian gas, have assigned greater blame to Georgia than have the U.K. and U.S. Lacking consensus, neither the EU nor NATO can effectively reprimand Russia. As for unilateral action from across the Atlantic, UNC political science professor Graeme Robertson says that the U.S. barely
ertson says that Russian leadership may have felt compelled to attack Georgia. Unlike Georgian President MikhailSaakashvili’s previously successful takeovers of separatist enclaves such as Ajaria, South Ossetia had Russian troops. The alternative for Russia could possibly have been a national humiliation akin to one Yeltsin presided over in 1999, when Russian rhetoric against NATO humanitarian intervention in Kosovo was shamelessly lacking in substance. Having come to power when Russia was in a state of feeble self-identity, Putin seemingly tried to recognize Russian limitations, pursue a policy of broader, economic objectives, and stray from the tit-for-tat policy of his predecessors. As a result, in his early years of office, Putin sometimes, though not always, acquiesced to the West. For example, when NATO expanded further into Eastern Europe in 2004, Moscow stayed relatively silent.
has any leverage over Russia. In light of the Georgian crisis, was the previously restrained nature of Russian policies just a facade for a later reassertion of world power? UNC geography professor Stephen Birdsall disputes such a deterministic view. He suggests that a multitude of smaller, outside events could have collided over time to influence the present day policy of Russia. As for the Georgian conflict, Rob-
Even though Russia earned the ire of Dick Cheney by curtailing oil supply to Ukraine, Putin was still able to defend his deeds in moralistic, capitalistic language. Even in February, when Moscow expressed disappointment over Kosovo’s independence and cited it as a possible precedent for actions in South Ossetia, the Russians refrained from violence. But something changed. When responding to an initial U.S. missile defense deal signed with Po-
International
PM problems land and the Czech Republic in July, the Russian foreign ministry vaguely threatened to respond with “military-technical means.” Noting that these defense systems do not seriously pose a threat to Russia and its “retaliatory strike capacity,” Lo says Moscow loathes these deals because they reveal the weaknesses in Russia’s ability to counter rival, strategic developments. Even still, Robertson argues that Russia sees the current possibility for a limited missile shield as a down payment for a larger, more threatening one in the future. All the same, Moscow’s threat was met with derision and skepticism while the calls for NATO membership for Georgia and Ukraine were only getting louder. Frustrated at the West for disregarding their self-stated conception of Russia as a “great global actor,” the Russian leadership may have finally decided to showcase Russia on the world stage by waging war with Georgia and thereby asserting its interests. The world may never know whether this move was intentional, a coincidence of sorts—the result of circumstance, or a myth created by those attempting to uncover Putin’s true intentions. Should we be overly worried? Robertson does not think so. “We’ve been playing cards with Russia,” said Robertson. “We have been taking tricks from them on every hand since the end of the Cold War, and finally they won one.” Krishna Kollu is a first year.
in peacekeeping and humanitarian missions. Others, including some in China, are still miffed that Japan never apologized for certain actions during World War II. “Japan’s relationship with China is actually a huge issue, but it seems everybody is trying to be very nice to each other,” said Fletcher. Junichiro Koizumi, the hip, fashionable, Elvis-impersonating prime minister of Japan, finished up his five-year tour in 2006. Since then, prime ministers have come and gone quickly, exhausted by government scandals and economic difficulties. This unstable executive leadership has trickled down to weaken the Japanese government. There is something for everyone among recent Japanese executives. Shinzo Abe, who served from 2006 to 2007, was a young maverick. Yasuo Fukuda, who served from 2007 to 2008, was a weathered veteran. “The main problem is really that in the past two years two Japanese prime ministers have resigned,” said UNC history professor Miles Fletcher. Koizumi kept his post for several years and accomplished some changes, said Fletcher. But he also angered the Chinese, who are sensitive to any expansion of Japan’s military. Since World War II, the armed forces have been constitutionally limited to serving as a domestic defensive service. But some people would like to see the military participate more
The Liberal Democratic Party (LDP), the party that has held power for decades, is trying to pick a successor to lead it to victory, or at least keep it from embarrassment. Abe was expected to revise the constitution to empower the military. But according to Fletcher, he turned out to be “administratively inept.” There were also some scandals amongst Abe’s ministers. Though Abe was likely not involved, he was criticized for his inappropriate response. Fukuda resigned under pressure that he wasn’t tackling challenges such as economic difficulties and the aging nation’s social security system. “The political leadership just seems to be a bit in crisis,” said Fletcher. Taro Aso was chosen as the 92nd prime minister of Japan on Sept. 24, but the effect might be minimal. “I can see the LDP maybe losing a number of seats… But still the LDP would be dominant—I just have trouble imagining that big a change in the next election,” said Fletcher. Will Aso be the leader Japan needs or disappear like the prime ministers before him? John Derrick is a third year in the UNC School of Law.
October/November 2008 19
Opinion
from the Left
Let’s get educated Ryan Collins
Let’s face it: college ain’t cheap. As students at one of the most prestigious public universities in the country, we know that our education comes at a hefty price. For some of us, those costs are only a minor nuisance that will go away in four years, give or take. But for others, tuition haunts their families and will continue to do so years after they graduate from UNC. College costs have risen by 40 percent in the past five years, and now a full 60 percent of all college students leave college with an average debt of $19,000. These numbers are staggering and convey the grim reality of modern times. In a world where higher education is becoming increasingly vital to securing a stable, lucrative job, young adults are faced with the irony of having to pay more to earn more. Unfortunately, the state and federal governments have failed to increase their supportive efforts accordingly. It is time that this trend is reversed. Sen. Barack Obama, Lt. Gov. Beverly Perdue, and state Sen. Kay Hagan have all proposed excellent solutions in their campaigns for president, governor, and U.S. Senate, respectively. These forward-looking initiatives are conducive to the continued growth of North Carolina’s reputable system of higher education and will give even the most disadvantaged Americans the educational opportunities they deserve. At the federal level, Obama has proposed the American Opportunity Tax Credit, a fully refundable $4,000 dollar tax credit equivalent to two-thirds of the average cost of tuition at a public university. The credit would give back to the community, as recipients would be required to perform 100 hours of public service per year. Furthermore, Obama will take significant steps toward simplifying the application for federal aid by eliminating the convoluted FAFSA and simply using family tax reports to determine eligibility. Finally, once students actually receive financial assistance, the Obama platform
20 The Hill
will improve its effectiveness by increasing the value of the grossly underfunded Pell Grant, which has failed to keep pace with rising tuition costs. As U.S. Senator, Hagan will support the consolidation and expansion of tax credits at the state level, providing greater financial opportunity for students of increasingly burdened middle class families to attend college. In addition, she will work to extend programs similar to North Carolina’s Learn and Earn—which allows students to earn a two-year degree while in high school at no expense—to students nationally. Perhaps most notsble to college kids, Hagan aims to control tuition costs by encouraging institutions to establish multi-year tuition and fee rates so students will be able to assess their affordability over an entire college tenure. Lastly, as governor of a state with such a strong system of universities, Perdue will lead an initiative to reduce high school dropout rates and assist at-risk students in attending college. Perdue will expand existing programs and create new ones to ensure that a lack of income will never stand in the way of an individual’s educational ambitions. I know that all you skeptics are thinking: how are we going to pay for all this? Higher taxes? Even more national debt? No. Unlike many of their Republican counterparts, the Democratic candidates in this election are explaining how they will pay for these programs. At any rate, I think we all agree that if we can spend billions a month on a failing war in Iraq, then we can at least find a few more dollars lying around Capitol Hill to educate our own citizens. This is the land of opportunity isn’t it? It’s time our elected leaders started showing it. Ryan Collins is a sophomore majoring in political science and economics.
Opinion
from the right
Education’s answer: consumer empowerment Elizabeth Held
The broke college student is the butt of countless jokes. Yet, however humorous the caricature is, the realities of financial pressures facing higher education students are sobering. In 2009, not only will a new president be in office, but potentially a new North Carolina senator and a new governor. Many issues are at the forefront of these campaigns, but education, and especially higher education, has not been significantly discussed. This poses a problem for college students, for whom the issue is most applicable and has the greatest ramifications. Changing policies and approaches to financial aid, holding institutions accountable and making information available to families will be significant to the futures of students at UNC and across the nation. The 2007-2008 UNC-Chapel Hill undergraduate tuition was $2,670 per semester for full-time students from North Carolina and $10,494 per semester for non-residents. For the 2008-2009 year, tuition increased 1.1 percent for NC residents—just under the maximum increase of 1.2 percent approved by the UNC system’s Board of Governors in February 2008. Non-resident students will feel the burden of a 6.2 percent tuition increase this year that approaches the tuition increase cap of 6.5 percent. These statistics illuminate the fact that institutions will seek to increase their budget through tuition increases, if allowed, instead of committing to a fiscal budget. Democratic candidates’ general willingness to increase taxes to provide more funding for education means a heavier tax burden on the average citizen. Each educational community will have unique problems to overcome and should be given incentives to seek creative solutions. Such incentives to wisely generate, save and spend money are undercut, however, when the pressure of limited funds is removed by increased federal funding. The problem is evident: students and parents are struggling to pay for the education that is needed to compete in the national and international marketplace
of ideas and careers. Therefore, the solution is found in returning power to parents and students to make wise decisions. One way to do this is by making institutions’ financial reports accessible. Allowing and simplifying parents’ and students’ access to the budgets of colleges and universities will be the most powerful check for tuition and fee increases. Democratic and Republican candidates alike also recognize the need for simplifying the financial aid process. In an attempt to simplify financial aid, Barack Obama proposed reducing the process to merely checking a box on one’s tax form instead of completing a separate application for financial aid. While this plan is oversimplified and leaves applicants with little information about their financial aid options, it does cut down on the paperwork and exemplifies how politicians across the boards are striving for improvements. Without creating additional tax benefits, streamlining existing benefits and consolidating financial aid programs will help families understand and take advantage of the options for paying for college. Although Obama’s American Opportunity Tax Credit appears to be innovative, it necessitates increased government to enforce its requirement of 100 community service hours and could actually stifle individual community efforts for service. The government will no doubt have to determine what service is eligible to go towards the 100 hours, thereby inadvertently preventing some students from taking advantage of the opportunity. Whoever is elected must be opened-minded and resourceful in seeking solutions to the problem of paying for education for students beyond high school. Action must be taken. Involving those who will be most affected, parents and students, while limiting the involvement of the federal government, promises the most ready solutions and beneficial results. Elizabeth Held is a sophomore majoring in English.
October/November 2008 21
The Last Word
Where foreign policy fails
Why neither presidential candidate’s international approach is perfect In a world defined by the tragedy diplomacy, diplomatic, diplomat, or Along with this lack of middleof Sept. 11 and the lingering effects cooperation,” notes UNC political ground in the framework of policy of the Cold War, the United States science professor Tim McKeown. descriptions, the general discourse struggles to adopt an effective policy In fact, his official webpage lacks a about the implications of Amerifor addressing the problems brought “foreign policy” tab, and instead con- can action abroad lacks attention to about by these two events. Political tains a national security link. McK- the past mistakes of prior adminisunrest, reactionary trations. The entire Iranian system upheaval and an evolved from an anti-Western IslaThe general discourse about the expanded front in mist movement which was initially implications of American action the War on Terror fueled by resentment of the Iranian abroad lacks attention to the past are almost guaranshah. The mistakes of prior administrations. teed as this nation Taliban in attempts to make Afghanistrides toward stan stems more viable foreign policy practices eown maintains that McCain’s plan from the abroad. is largely based on American mili- days of tary might, and the improvement AmericanThe upcoming election is the mech- of such through modernization and suppor ted anism through which this drive to- increased defense spending. guerillas ward effective foreign policy direcwithin Aftives has manifested itself most. John Senator Obama’s plan for foreign g h a n i s t a n By Ismaail Qaiyim McCain and Barack Obama have policy, in comparison, focuses heav- in hopes of both expressed the need for a foreign ily on policy-making, thus “making d e f e a t i n g policy that addresses the impending government more open and transpar- the Soviet Union. Both situations threat of a nuclear Iran, the war in ent,” said McKeown. He is focused gave credence to the most radical Iraq and the resurgence of the Taliand extreme forms ban in Afghanistan. However, this of Islamic fundaThe media and political discussion debate over policy sounds less like a mentalism and Paelevates Ahmadinejad to the status discourse about American interacshtun nationalism. of some mortal American enemy tions abroad and more like blistering As the candidates with the strength to match. This is a attacks designed to make the other debate over issues fallacy and a policy reminiscent of candidate seem inept in the eyes of of experience, and Reagan’s equating the Soviet Union the public. The truth is that neither leadership abilwith an “Evil Empire.” candidate has an effective strategy ity, the discussion for dealing with the dire constraints of what should of diplomacy and overarching threats be done to adcreated by a mix of current politics on reforming intelligence agencies dress such concerns lacks attention and past mistakes. and working with Congress in this to cycles of potential threats in areas regard. In short, each candidate has of the world that are sustained and, Both candidates have expressed a distinguished plan for security and in many cases, created by past policy their views on how the president foreign policy, and each plan is com- decisions. should manage global concerns. posed of distinct elements not found Senator McCain’s description of his in the other. An ideal policy within the Middle plan “lacks any mention of the words East and other zones hostile toward
22 The Hill
The Last Word
Americans should involve aspects of both McCain’s and Obama’s platforms. As Obama has suggested, the heads of intelligence agencies should be based on the Federal Reserve model of fixed-term appointments regardless of changing administrations, thus removed from partisan politics. In line with McCain’s plan, the military should be sustained and modernized, as the U.S. will more than likely have to establish a prolonged military presence in Afghanistan. However, as McKeown maintains, a major claim to legitimacy in Afghanistan can only come from those who have traditionally held influence and sustained security. Several groups that meet this criterion have
The Last Word on
The Hill
links with elements of the Taliban, and in terms of future reconciliation within Afghanistan this is a difficult realty. The fact that Iran is a powerhouse in the Middle East— due largely to the defeat of Saddam Hussein—must be taken into account when trying to decide if negotiation with the Iranians is feasible. The ideal policy would entail some outreach to the Iranians, but would also restrict certain elements that would otherwise make the Iranians influential. A good example of this would be to limit American media coverage of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s anti-American remarks. The media and political discussion of these comments elevates Ahmadinejad to the status of some mortal American enemy with the
strength to match. This is a fallacy and a policy reminiscent of Reagan’s equating the Soviet Union with an “Evil Empire.” Despite the traditional mechanics of campaigning and party politics, this country needs a comprehensive discourse between candidates that addresses all of these concerns in a practical manner and within their proper historical contexts. Indictments of inexperience or accusations of lack of judgment will not make the looming deficiencies of past mistakes or conception of a dynamic all-encompassing policy any more tangible. Ismaail Qaiyim is a first year.
Want to have the last word? Send your guest column (750800 words, please) to thehillpr@unc.edu, or sound off on our discussion board at http://studentorgs.unc.edu/thehill. October/November 2008 23
Like to blog? Want to copy edit?
WORK FOR THE HILL!
email thehillpr@unc.edu