The Hill 8.3

The Hill

Chapel Hill Political Review February 2009 March 2009

http://studentorgs.unc.edu/thehill http://studentorgs.unc.edu/thehill

Volume VIII, Issue III Volume VIII, Issue III

Meet Washington’s newcomers

A Just War? Perspective on Israel’s actions

The weight of the world: Obama’s inheritance

Just around the corner: Gentrification in Chapel Hill

From the Editor

The Hill Staff

To our readers: On Nov. 4, 2008, America spoke, and the word was “change.” But as a new day dawned in Washington there were plenty of clouds on the horizon.

The parades and galas quickly gave way to a dire financial situation, shaky international relations and numerous domestic challenges boiling over on the back burner. President Barack Obama stepped into the Oval Office and lifted the weight of the world onto his shoulders.

In this issue, The Hill examines the situation that Obama inherited, and contemplates his first few steps (see our cover section, p. 12). Every policy put in place—every decision—is crucial to America’s success, both at home and abroad. Our writers considered everything from the obvious—the global financial crisis (p. 12) and the future of America’s military (p. 14)—to important situations often forgotten by a sensationalist media (see p. 17).

Our writers-turned-techies investigated how the new president is rewiring

EDITOR Juliann Neher

the position (p. 19) and what NASA is up to (p. 18). We also took a look at the new faces in Washington and what they might mean for the country (p. 6 and p. 10). For lighter reading, check out the Notes from The Hill (p. 4).

Last year was one of the most interesting and dramatic in the history of politics. It was also The Hill’s best year yet, with our largest readership ever. We are immensely grateful to our readers, whether you read every issue or just picked up your first copy. We welcome your input as we continue our dedicated effort to be your source on politics. Let us know what you think about this issue and others by emailing thehill@unc.edu. As for the political scene, the show will go on—the story does not end on Inauguration Day but simply takes a new turn. As always, The Hill is dedicated to providing you with nonpartisan analysis, and we strive to maintain the highest quality of content.

Thanks for reading.

Juliann Neher is a junior majoring in journalism and politcal 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 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 Ryan Collins John Derrick Drew Dimmery Andre Durham Hunter Ellis Caroline Guerra Ryan Kane Krishna Kollu Brittany Murphy Ismaail Qaiyim Will Schultz Yash Shah Alex Smith Clayton Thomas Daniel Thornton Michael Young COLUMNISTS Anqi Li Michael Parker Martha Waters ASSOCIATE EDITORS Melissa Brzycki Caroline Guerra Will Schultz Clayton Thomas HEAD OF DESIGN Samantha Deal 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 March 2009

Volume VIII, Issue III

Features 6

Incoming!

How Washington’s newest members could impact policy

10

Heavy hitters What Obama’s cabinet picks means for policy

Cover 12

Obama and the world What the main man’s lead role has to be

15

Justifying war An examination of the motives effecting the Middle East

16

From piracy, possibilities How new-age swashbuckling might effect international relations and more . . .

Technology 18

The future of space exploration Why NASA might be on the chopping block

Left/Right 20

Big Three bailout An examination of economic policy

In Every Issue v Notes from The Hill v The Last Word: A patriarchal backlash

March 2009 3

Notes from The Hill

Book review

Notes from

The Hill

Medved the mythbuster

Michael Medved’s “The Ten Big Lies About America” is an ambitious book. Medved, a conservative radio host, sets out to single-handedly undo two decades of revisionist history. He is an antiiconoclast, intent on restoring a little bit of America’s lost luster. He comes, not to bury America, but to praise it to high heaven.

The book’s pugnacious subtitle, “Combating Destructive Distortions About Our Nation,” sets the tone from the start. Medved heaps scorn upon what he calls the “America bashers,” who peddle a message of “victimhood, powerlessness, guilt, and decline.” There’s plenty to be proud about in America, Medved writes, and he sets about proving it by debunking the titular ten myths.

There is little rhyme or reason in Medved’s book. He jumps from myth to myth willy-nilly, without any kind of clear organizing principle. One second, he is attacking those who claim that “[t]he founders intended a secular, not a Christian, nation.” Just a few pages later, he is fulminating against the myth that “[t]he power of big business

Update

hurts the country and oppresses the people.”

Then again, the book is not about the big picture. Medved is more concerned with the nitty-gritty details. He marshals an impressive list of facts to counter each and every myth, drawing on sources ranging from Thomas Jefferson to Drew Carey. Every chapter is loaded with facts and figures, all bolstering Medved’s thesis that America is a uniquely great nation.

He begins at the beginning.

The first myth on his hit list is that “America was founded on genocide against Native Americans.” Not true, says Medved. It was smallpox that wiped out the Indians, not bloodthirsty pilgrims. Having absolved America of its original sin, Medved then proceeds to tackle an even bigger challenge: the myth, as he puts it, that “The United States is uniquely guilty for the crime of slavery.”

That chapter showcases the greatest strength of Medved’s book—and its greatest weakness.

On the one hand, Medved persuasively argues that America was hardly the world’s only slave nation.

He cites numbers to show that our nation imported far fewer slaves than did the sugar-growing nations of the Caribbean and South America.

On the other hand, Medved sometimes gets carried away. He interprets any criticism of America as a myth, no matter how valid it might be. Yes, America was certainly far less guilty of slavery than, say, Brazil or Cuba. But does that completely wash away the sin of slavery? No, Medved admits—but only grudgingly.

Criticizing an author for being overly passionate is difficult, however. Medved clearly believes combating these “destructive distortions” is a noble cause. America, he reminds us, is the “last, best hope” for the world. Rehabilitating America’s image is not just a matter of historical bookkeeping. It is a sacred cause. America is indeed the “city on a hill,” and Medved is its self-proclaimed guardian.

Will Schultz is a junior majoring in history.

By the numbers

1 % - rise in retail sales for January, after six months of declines 7.6 % - current unemployment rate 9.7 % - decrease in retail sales in January compared to January 2008 30 years - the last time jobless claims equalled current level $789 billion - current price tag on the economic stimulus package

Source: The New York Times, Feb. 12, 2009

4 The Hill

Notes from The Hill Update

Eurasia’s major players

Peace in the Caucasus remains elusive after last August’s conflict between Russia and Georgia in the breakaway region of South Ossetia.

While the region’s political status remains in limbo, Georgia is a theater for antagonism between Russia and NATO. Georgia’s aspirations for membership in NATO and the EU, tenuous even before the armed conflict, are at the mercy of Russia’s fickle foreign policy. Russia has long championed the independence of South Ossetia for geopolitical reasons, namely to counter the threat of eastward expansion by NATO. The Organization for Security and Co-Operation in Europe, a human rights watchdog group operating in South Ossetia, was dismissed from the region at the beginning of the year after Russia vetoed extending its mandate. The organization has long been a thorn in the side of Russian leaders, who saw the

1 Hillary Clinton

She’s going back to the White House after all. Maybe not the way she intended, but no one doubts Secretary of State Hillary will be a major player in the Obama administration. But will she be a team player?

2 Bob Gates

Congratulations, Bob! Even with a management change, Bush’s secretary of defense managed to keep his job. That’s no small thing in today’s economy.

OSCE’s mission as a political tactic to win media support for Georgia Cold War habits die hard, as Russia still seems to assume privilege among the states of the former Soviet Union. It formally recognizes South Ossetia as an independent, sovereign state, perhaps with the intention of subsuming it in the future. The OSCE veto was a blow to hopes that Russia would comply with the spirit of the ceasefire agreements, and it indicates the inability of NATO and the EU to gain any leverage over Russia.

President Bush’s confidence in Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili was “unthinking and unblinking,” according to James Nixey of the Chatham House’s Russian and Eurasia Program.

President’ Obama’s administration is unlikely to be as consistently loyal. During his campaign , Obama was quick to defend the “territorial

integrity” of Georgia, but acknowledged that both Russia and Georgia were aggressive players. He may be more willing to yield to Russia in exchange for leeway on a planned missile shield, or for help in reestablishing ties with Iran.

Saakashvili has become a lame duck, surrounded by calls for reform and early elections from cabinet members and ex-speaker of parliament Nino Burdzhanadze. As oil revenue slows and pressures Georgia, Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin has every motivation to grab South Ossetia. Perhaps regime change in Georgia will inspire Obama to invest in the country as a stopper on Russian expansion.

Obama’s response will show if the U.S. still holds cards in Eurasia.

Daniel Thornton is a junior majoring in economics and philosophy.

Hill-O-Meter

By Will Schultz

3 Tim Geithner

Whew! That was a close one. Tax problems sank two of Obama’s nominees, but his choice for secretary of the treasury got through unscathed. First on the agenda: fixing the economy. Godspeed, Tim.

4 Bill Richardson

President? Well, that didn’t work out. Vice President? No, Joe Biden got the nod. secretary of commerce? Hmmm… not going to happen either. Boy, is there anything left for Bill Richardson to lose?

Who’s on top of the heap right now? Who has fallen far?

We track the up-and-comers and the down-and-outs.

March 2009 5

Domestic Tom Perriello (D-VA): Perriello pulled off one of the biggest upsets of the election cycle, defeating six-term incumbent Virgil Goode by 727 votes in a district John McCain won by several points. Perriello worked abroad for human-rights groups in Liberia, Darfur, and Kosovo. He is also a strong gun rights advocate.

Mark Udall (D-CO): Five-term congressman Mark Udall won the seat vacated by Republican Wayne Allard, beating his opponent, Bob Schaffer, by over ten points in this formerly red state. Notably, Udall voted against the Iraq war and has since advocated a phased withdrawal of US troops.

New kids in town

Fresh faces in Washington could bring change Coming into the 2008 elections, congressional Republicans knew they faced an uphill climb to take back the House and Senate.

National Republican Senatorial Committee Chairman John Ensign, the Nevada senator in charge of coordinating the GOP’s electoral efforts in the Senate, admitted that it would be a “good day” if Republicans lost 4 seats. But while many were able to forecast heavy Democratic gains, the geographic and ideological makeup of the 111th Congress was harder to predict.

With the election over and the composition of Congress settled, the implications for policy and for Congress’ relationship with the Obama administration have become clearer.

total, swelling their caucus to 59 members. In the House, Democrats netted 21 seats, bringing their total to 257 members out of 435.

The media’s coverage focused on the Senate, where the question was not whether Democrats would expand their majority, but if they would reach the 60-seat mark and win a filibuster-proof majority. It was only after one runoff and two recounts that the incoming class of senators was decided. Democrats unseated 5 incumbents and won 8 seats in

Obama is the central figure in understanding Democratic congressional gains. Without the Obama campaign’s huge voter registration drives and get-out-the-vote efforts, candidates like North Carolina’s Kay Hagan and Minnesota’s Al Franken might not have pulled out their narrow victories. Many candidates used Obama as a means

Where are all these freshmen from? Two regions in particular contributed greatly to the Democratic gains: the Mountain West and the Mid-Atlantic. Half of the Democrats’ Senate victories came from these two regions (in Colorado, New Mexico, Virginia, and North Carolina), as did 12 of their 21 House pickups. These two fastgrowing regions also turned blue in the presidential race; `purple’ states like Colorado and Virginia went decisively for Obama, while deep red states like Montana lightened considerably.

Anh Cao (R-LA): Perhaps the most unexpected face in the 111th Congress, Cao beat nine-term incumbent William Jefferson in a special election. Cao’s seat is now the most Democrat district to be represented by a Republican. Cao’s campaign focused on ethics reform (Jefferson was indicted on 16 counts of corruption) and coastal restoration.

6 The Hill

of stirring up enthusiasm for their campaigns. Even a Republican congressman, Lee Terry of Nebraska, used Obama in print mailings asking “Obama-Terry voter, anyone?” (both he and Obama won in the district). In an email to The Hill, Marty Kady, a deputy editor for Politico, said the freshmen have Obama to thank for their election.

For this reason alone, Obama should find plenty of allies on Capitol Hill. Furthermore, many of the newcomers seem to be ideologically closer to Obama than to their districts. It remains to be seen if they can hold their newly won seats when Obama is not at the top at the ticket. Still, Kady says, “freshmen rarely break away from their party leaders en masse.” Barring some major scandal or crisis, Obama can expect strong support from a Congress whose Democratic majorities are reinforced by members who are ideologically close to Obama and have him to thank for their election.

Clayton Thomas is a sophomore majoring in political science and history.

Walter Minnick (D-ID): Minnick is another freshman from a heavily Republican district. Minnick’s victory over single-term incumbent Bill Sali came as something of a surprise, though Minnick’s values are very much in line with those of his conservative Western district. Minnick is a supporter of natural resource development.

Domestic

Clearing the air

Sustainability seems the simple solution There was a time when energy came cheap and no one knew the damage being inflicted on Mother Nature and her inhabitants.

Today, a more thorough understanding of the effects of energy consumption in the world has proven that there are no easy or perfect solutions to energy issues.

Nuclear power is considered dangerous by many, hydroelectric power dams rivers, and fossil fuels pollute, require importation from unstable nations, involve ripping the tops off mountains in Kentucky and are creating a genre of commercials about “clean coal.”

According to the Sierra Club, clean coal, which uses technology to try and produce cleaner energy, is better than traditional coal processing, but there is no truly “clean” coal.

The good news is that a host of other energy sources are being cultivated—everything from algae to decomposing sewage. And relatively clean energy sources that have already been tapped, like wind, are expanding. In some counties, and soon domestically, wind turbines are actually sited on oceans to limit impact on people.

Market forces are also encouraging people to clean up their acts. Carbon trading sllows the buying and selling of carbon emission reductions. For example, if one company can take a certain amount of carbon out of the air, and a factory down the road needs to reduce some carbon to meet a regulation, then these companies can reach an agreement.

Thousands of parties reaching such agreements make up the Chicago Climate Exchange and various carbon-merchants selling carbon reductions in an effort to reduce global warming.

from the road or eliminating the need for 54 large power plants.”

Such activities include reducing standby power usage, using CFL bulbs, adjusting thermostats and keeping tires inflated.

Working on these issues, as well as other aspects of sustainability, is UNC-Chapel Hill’s Sustainability Office. They are responsible for the installations of waterconserving toilets and stickers by lights switches reminding people to turn off the lights.

“We’ve actually been able to reduce the energy consumption per square foot by about 12 percent since 2003,” said Brian Cain, Research and Outreach Manager for the office.

It may seem complicated. Ultimately, one of the simplest solutions is to simply use less energy, which corresponds with less carbon in the air and reduced need for energy production. Using less energy can be as simple as turning off the lights when a room is vacant.

As Michael Vandenbergh, Jack Barkenbus, and Jonathan Gilligan of Vanderbilt University noted in “Individual Carbon Emissions: The Low-Hanging Fruit,” savings from seven simple things everyone could be doing “are the equivalent of removing 26 million automobiles

But UNC-CH, which is pledging to achieve climate neutrality, also has a commission looking into renewable energy sources such as solar, wind and biomass.

The group is “basically trying to look at every possible technology we know of and asking `Is it possible at Carolina?’” said Dr. Daniel Arneman, a specialist in the Department of Energy Services.

Sustainability can occur through daily, small-scale efforts to reduce one’s impact on the environment.

More information is available at sustainability.unc.edu.

John Derrick is a third year in the UNC School of Law.

March 2009 7

Domestic

How Madoff made off

And what must be done to prevent future schemes What is a sociopath? Most might say a violent yet charming criminal who preys on the weak, but what about a cunning businessman who robs the gullible? What if that same businessman stole $50 billion from individuals and charities via a Ponzi scheme, then joked about his accomplishment to his son? Such was the case with Bernard Madoff. The American Psychiatric Association’s criteria for diagnosing a person with antisocial personality disorder include deceitfulness, disregard for others’ rights and a lack of remorse for having stolen. Some would argue that Madoff showed a lack of respect for his victims’ rights by perpetuating his scheme. Furthermore, the fact that he joked about his achievement could indicate a lack of remorse. Of course, only a mental health professional can make that diagnosis.

Regardless of Madoff ’s psychological health, he defrauded individuals and charities out of billions of dollars and has added fuel to the debate over governmental oversight of economic activity.

A Ponzi scheme is any fraud in which the operator uses money from new clients to pay previous ones. The operator tells his original clients that this payment is a return on their investment. Because this return is always positive, these clients keep reinvesting. Madoff made his scheme believable by demonstrating consistent small gains in lieu of large, suspicious ones. Madoff also limited his clientele, relying on word-of-mouth communication within his social networks. The small number of victims prevented his scheme from suffering too much growth, a problem for most Ponzi schemes. The scheme was aided by the theoretical nature of investing. Madoff did not have to provide checks to each client, but merely needed to indicate that their investments were making money.

Madoff told his clients that their investments were turning a profit despite the downturn in the economy.

While some investors were suspicious, they remained silent, confused

by Madoff ’s convoluted strategy. In an email to The Hill, UNC econom-

ics professor Dr. Michael Salemi explains, “Communications from Madoff about investments were difficult to understand. Many decided to overlook their lack of understanding because the returns kept coming.” Madoff`s victims now face the task of picking up the pieces. Salemi believes that while it’s not the government’s role to “make Madoff ’s victims whole,” it should not ignore them. He emphasizes that the government must strike a balance between scrutinizing the claims of investment plans and requiring investors to keep an eye on their own money.

This is the job of the Securities and Exchange Commission, a regulatory agency dedicated to monitoring, among other things, investment firms. The outgoing SEC chairman, Christopher Cox, admits that his agency made a mistake in not following up on previous cases involving Madoff, including a claim calling into question Madoff ’s confusing investment strategy. What does this mean for incoming Chairwoman Mary Schapiro? She will have the task of cleaning up the mess left behind by the Madoff scandal. This includes instituting new policies for overseeing investment firms, as well as handling possible lawsuits from Madoff ’s victims. Whoever envies her job should have their head examined.

Andre Durham is a senior majoring in psychology.

8 The Hill

Domestic

A contradictory contract Greenbridge fails to meet own goals In the face of an ongoing economic crisis matched with universal calls for more sustainable sources of energy, developments that incorporate both of these premises would be ideal. This ideal stream of development seems to have materialized in the bold new housing that will come to Chapel Hill, properly named Greenbridge Development. These environmentally sustainable units will utilize “Greenbridge Technology,” which means that the energy consumed by basic utilities will be reduced by 50 percent, according to the U.S. Department of Energy. The units will range in price from $300,000 to over one million dollars. The ingenuity of this new wave of housing based on the idea of environmental sustainability is compromised, however, by the way in which the execution of this vision could contrast its own purpose.

The primary recipients of this shortcoming are the residents of the Chapel Hill Northside community. This community existed prior to reconstruction and has a long history with the University of North CarolinaChapel Hill. Many of the current residents of this community have ancestors that literally built the campus. Northside also has an enduring legacy of self-preservation through gardening and other sustainable uses of the environment; however, it has also dealt with ongoing unemployment and past criminal activity.

So what does this all mean for the University, and what is its role? The University is invested in the development of environmentally friendly techniques. The vice chairman of the

Board of Visitors at the UNC-CH Environmental Program, Tim Toben, is also the leading partner of Greenbridge. This direct connection between the University and Greenbridge provides a large basis for contention and mistrust from Northside.

The way in which Greenbridge has established itself in Northside is also controversial and has added to enduring community mistrust. Since Northside has been rezoned as a conservation district, Greenbridge, according to UNC-CH Communications Professor Della Pollock, had to obtain a Special Use Permit by which it could continue to develop on such a massive scale. In order to obtain the permit, Greenbridge gathered letters of support from local community leaders. Reverend Harrison, Pastor Nixon and Delores Bailey of Empowerment Inc., wrote letters of support for what they believed was general community improvement.

This was supposed to have included, according to Pollock, “job training,” “financial literacy classes” and “on site jobs.” Not only did none of these ever come to pass, but this directly violates the social equity that Greenbridge has stated as one of its goals.

Many are concerned about what has been termed, according to Pollock, the “Greenbridge effect.” This specifically means the displacement of an array of independently owned and culturally diverse businesses by the supplemental development provided

for the future residents of Greenbridge. Factors such as questionable realty practices, increasing property taxes, and general increases in the cost of living are contributing to the “Greenbridge effect” which has so vehemently angered many elements of the Northside community.

There have been public relations campaigns on the part of Greenbridge to gain the support of the elders of the Northside community, as well as outspoken community activists. These campaigns have largely been rendered ineffective by the perceptions and questionable policies brought about by Greenbridge development.

A complicated mix of good intentions, decades of mistrust, feelings of resentment and negligence combined to create the unstable mix of people, property and history that characterizes the current status of Northside.

Will the outcome of this endeavor translate into viable progress for all or upward mobility at the expense of others? Only time will tell.

Ismaail Qaiyim is a first year.

March 2009 9

Domestic

Washington’s major players What Obama’s cabinet picks mean for his presidency Two weeks ago, over one million people united at the Capitol for what was all-but-titled a coronation. The tone of press coverage was resoundingly hopeful—a dream realized. However, the historic nature of Barack Obama’s presidency is not the sole reason eyes across the world were so steadily fixed on his inauguration. Over the past eight years, in the U.S. and abroad, the executive branch often seemed reduced to but a single actor- the president.

President Obama’s selection of capable and colorful cabinet members is setting a very different scene. He has planted himself firmly on the shoulders of academic, social and political titans ready to build the bridge between where the country currently is and the America he has promised.

“The leadership challenge is to create a culture that embraces real dialogue … so that all sides of an issue can be explored and ideally a best decision reached,” says Assistant Professor Ricardo S. Morse of the UNC-Chapel Hill School of Government.

The American people have also cast their ballots: a recent WashingtonPost/ABC poll reports 76 percent voter approval of the Obama cabinet policy. Central to that policy will be the secretaries of state, defense and the treasury.

Hillary Clinton, as an experienced moderate, boasts the sort of diplomatic competence necessary to rebuild global ties. Although obvi-

10 The Hill

ously anxious to pursue international items, evidenced by the recent convoy to Zimbabwe, Clinton has been criticized for overlooking some very pertinent local concerns: NAFTA, Columbian drug trade and Venezuelan relations.

Interestingly, Obama’s appointment of Robert Gates, who served as secretary of defense in the second the Bush Administration, received minimal outcry. Contrary to the recent voter mandate for “change,” Gates’ retainment provides a prescription of patience regarding U.S. involvement in the Middle East.

fies strong advocacy for sustainable energy practices. Holding a seat in the Copenhagen Climate Council, a world-wide partnership between the business and scientific communities to reach sustainable energy use, Chu carries with him international support and understanding. However, the nuclear technology renaissance his agenda calls for will be confronted by significant infrastructure, workforce and security challenges.

Working closely with Chu will be Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lisa Jackson. Jackson already pledged a non-partisan, forward-looking approach to runThe wars in Iraq and Afghanistan ning the EPA, confidently asserting are also large strains on the Ameri- that “science must be the backbone can economy, but they certainly are of what the EPA does.” This forenot the only stressful factors. Faced casts a strategy that will turn away with what Obama described as “the from partisan political agendas and worse financial crisis in a century,” candidly confront the global climate the president’s appointment of Tim- challenges of tomorrow. othy Geithner to treasury secretary is surprising. Geithner has already Raymond L. LaHood, Secretary of served in the Treasury under three Transportation, has been tapped to presidents, so this appointment does deliver Obama’s promise to “rebuild not exactly illustrate the progres- America’s roads and bridges.” Alsive economic measures Obama though this is no easy task, as a capromised. However, as the most reer politician, LaHood has shown recent president of the Federal Re- his shoulders broad enough to bear serve Bank of New York, Geithner’s that burden. Six years on the House ground zero experience should prove Transportation and Infrastructure invaluable.

Committee and service as Chief Planner for the Bi-State MetroWhile those items may be press- politan Planning Commission have ing, Obama’s cabinet is just as deftly prepared the seventh-term Illinois designed to wrestle with a much Congressman to revamp and renew broader agenda. A balance between some of this nation’s most heavily national energy needs and global trafficked highways, bridges and airclimate conservation must be struck, ports. and at the helm of Obama’s energy team is Nobel-prize winning physi- With the system of education drascist Steven Chu. His record exempli- tically overburdened and underfund-

Domestic

Blue dog Democrat

New York’s new senator is a rare breed ed, swift action should be expected from Arne Duncan, secretary of education. Like many other cabinet positions, the problems he faces are multi-faceted; a suitable education seems to be the basis for future prosperity and national security. Despite never having worked as an educator himself, as CEO of Chicago Public Schools the past seven years, Duncan promoted progressive, holistic education policies which have been heralded for maximizing the value of the teacher.

Obama’s presidency and his appointments have also revealed the role of race in politics. While managing not to push an explicit diversity agenda, he has put together the most historically diverse cabinet the nation has seen. Notably, he did so while focusing on “the background and the ability of the person,” as Brookings Institute Analyst Charles Jones noted.

The cabinet also represents a consistent blend of Ivy League academics, political moderates and life-long practitioners. Along with Obama, they enjoy broad national support, which certainly makes their ambitious agenda much more credible.

Michael Young is a third year in a joint-degree graduate program, studying public administration and law.

On Dec. 1, 2008, then-Presidentelect Barack Obama named New York Senator Hillary Clinton as his choice for secretary of state.

That was the beginning of a rumorfilled, highly charged debate over who would take Clinton’s seat in the Senate. For weeks following President Obama’s announcement, the presumed favorite was Caroline Kennedy, daughter of President John F. Kennedy. Daily blogosphere comments lampooned the choice, and hardly a day went by without some story appearing about Kennedy’s experience—or lack thereof. In the end, New York Governor David Patterson appointed Representative Kirsten Gillibrand to Clinton’s seat.

Gillibrand grew up in Albany, N.Y. Her parents both had legal backgrounds; her father was a Republican lobbyist, and her mother was an attorney. Gillibrand graduated from Dartmouth College and received her law degree from UCLA. During the Clinton Administration she was special counsel to the secretary of housing and urban development, Andrew Cuomo. Cuomo’s name was floated as another possible replacement for Clinton. Gillibrand practiced law in both the public and private spheres, including a stint representing Phillip Morris.

Gillibrand entered the political arena in 2006 when she defeated Republican incumbent John E. Sweeney to represent New York’s 20th congressional district. Gillibrand has since served on four different committees in the House and easily won her 2008 re-election bid.

She was praised for her constituent

services, but many wonder if she can transfer that goodwill to the entire state. In an e-mail to The Hill, UNC-Chapel Hill professor Ferrel Guillory writes, “What’s critical is that K. Gillibrand has shifted from representing a congressional district to representing an entire state.”

Immigration is a top issue for many New Yorkers. Gillibrand opposes amnesty and non-emergency taxpayer benefits for illegal immigrants. In 2008, she opposed then-Gov. Eliot Spitzer’s attempt to provide illegal immigrants with drivers’ licenses. Gillibrand is unusually conservative on gun control. She has a 100 percent approval rating by the National Rifle Association, a serious black mark for many constituents. Recently, Gillibrand said that she would support gun control “but also protect our hunters’ rights.” She is closer to the Democratic mainstream when it comes to gay marriage. Prior to her appointment, Gillibrand only supported civil unions; but on the morning of her appointment, she switched her stance and gave her full support to gay marriage.

Only time will tell how she will fare in the Senate. If her record is any indication, New Yorkers will find Sen. Gillibrand an ardent advocate for women’s rights and for the rights of those in LGBT communities. She is expected to reexamine her views on immigration and gun control. If she does, it may seem as though Clinton never left.

Brittany Murphy is a sophomore majoring in English.

March 2009 11

Cover

The weight of the world Obama’s role in the global economy

As more Americans face the reality that their country’s economy is no better off than it was eight years ago, change is no longer seen as an object of hope. It is a demand for enlightened leadership. This demand is perhaps rooted in two sources of political frustration: a collapse in economic prosperity and a war which, according to a March 2008 Georgetown University study, has in fact derailed America’s credibility on the international stage.

However, President Obama is presented with the opportunity to lay new groundwork through his response to the international effects of the financial crisis. Within the context of integrated markets, the viability of U.S. economic recovery must be reconciled with the reality

12 The Hill

of global interdependence. At the same time, such interdependence imparts a renewed role for U.S. leadership, particularly in the development of international regulatory institutions to check an increasingly global financial industry.

Anup Shah of Global Issues Magazine writes that “the initial culprit is the spread of mortgage backed securities as products offered by transnational financial institutions” such as AIG and Lehman Brothers. Once the value of these securities collapsed as loan default rates soared, foreign investors involved in mortgage related financial assets and derivatives went broke. According to Congressional Research Service (CRS) Report of November

2008, the Euro area lost $1.12 trillion from these financial products

by October. In response, Shah suggests that the risk aversion strategy of surviving lending institutions fueled a “secondary culprit whose bull’s eye was on developing countries.”

The credit freeze in the Western financial bloc undermined developing and emerging markets because it shut off capital flows. A Jan. 8 article in The Economist reported that growth in emerging markets is projected to fall by 3 percent as export led economies suffer from wavering global demand. The sustainability of these markets, in other words, is threatened as production and employment contract

Cover at an alarming rate. An Oct. 31, 2008 World Bank report warns that emerging markets and poorer countries face humanitarian issues as “the poverty alleviation process staggers.” The report suggests that employment growth, namely from 2002-2007, mobilized rural populations in poorer countries by providing a sustainable means of living. At the same time, public sector projects in infrastructure and clean water movements showed unexpected promise. However, foreign capital shortages now force this process of development, which many poorer nations have benefited from, to contrast in response to the loss in profitability of private sectors.

The indiscriminate spread of subprime mortgage failures in the U.S. to recessions across the world paints a picture of interdependence, especially between developing and developed countries. New York Times columnist Paul Krugman praised the U.K.’s initiative to bailout foreign banks operating within its borders. He argues that although nationalists may liken it to the U.S. supplying rescue funds to Japanese automakers Toyota or Honda, it is inconsequential insofar as these companies are operating plants in the U.S. Therefore, while Obama and Congress look inwards to stimulate domestic economic growth, any path to prosperity will require progress at the international level.

Although international institutions exist, like the International Monetary Fund, which works to rescue emerging markets, they fail to encompass the need for coordination between developed and developing countries. Roger Altman of Foreign Affairs writes that the economic interests of developed and developing nations have long been divergent,

a debate which he suggests came to a climax during international environmental agreements such as the Tokyo Protocol. However, the volatility of capital flows creates a common interest between both groups for stable financial systems, which can sustain reliable global trade levels. Joseph Stiglitz, Chief Economist at the World Bank, argues that such an agency would be particularly useful in fostering

transparency about the quality of credit instruments. He suggests that the dissemination of such information would have deterred foreign investors from engaging in risky subprime mortgage backed assets, thereby insulating the world economy against the effects of the financial crisis. Worldwide recessions tend to foster isolationist economic policies, as collective wisdom may dictate a “country first” strategy.

Stiglitz identifies this pattern as a matter of mistrust manifested in the problem of asymmetric information.

However, the need for international coordination of domestic bailout packages and a common interest in financial regulation provide the opportunity for the U.S. to regain credibility at the global stage.

Although the G-7 and G-20 have issued statements referring to coordinating fiscal policy moves, such as cutting interest rates, there have been no binding agreements. UNCChapel Hill economics professor Richard Froyen suggests that such an outcome is unlikely particularly because financial institutions fear that regulation will place them at a competitive disadvantage. In turn, the Obama administration has the opportunity to restructure global economic relations in a way which fosters cooperation towards building an international regulatory scheme.

At the same time, the administration has a chance to reinvigorate the international effort for poverty alleviation by reshaping its foreign policy to incorporate the interests of poorer nations in sustainable economic development.

The business of transforming change into viable policy solutions may not be realized during Obama’s first term. However, U.S. leadership in an international effort to streamline the regulation of financial activity can be a starting point in restructuring the global image of the U.S. and turning around the economy. As the international economic system appears to deteriorate into a state of mistrust and uncertainty, the story of change has barely begun.

Yash Shah is a sophomore majoring in economics and political science.

March 2009 13

Cover

War 3.0

The latest version of American military January marked the 18th year since The idea is to create a combined the U.S., along with a U.N. coalition information system that allows force of 33 nations, entered Kuwait pilots, colonels and soldiers to see with the objective of expelling Iraqi the same mission-critical informatroops. While the events of Operation. Cebrowski said that “networktion Desert Storm may “Nations make war the same way they seem a generation ago, make their wealth. Computer networks the reality is that the and the efficient flow of information U.S. has returned withwould turn America’s chain saw of a out an exit strategy.

Afghanistan. In a speech given on Dec. 9, 2008 at the American Studies Center in Rome, Petreaus stated, “The only way to [ensure safety] is to live with the people. Once they feel secure they will tell you where the weapons and explosives are.”

Since the Vietnam War the U.S. military has undergone multiple reorganizations in order to improve efficiency while cutting back on spending. The two greatest changes that occurred following this war include the abandonment of the Selective Service System mandatory draft in 1973 and the creation of the Total Force Policy by General Creighton Abrams. The Total Force Policy combined the U.S. Army, the Army Reserve and Army National Guard. The policy was intended to prevent the president from sending one component of the army to war without the support of the others.

“There will be no peace dividend for several years,” said history professor Joseph Glatthaar. “Who knows what the long-term repercussions will be for promoting majors to lieutenant colonels at the rate of 98 percent, or the huge loss of lieutenants and captains?”

war machine into a scalpel.”

The all-volunteer army of the 1980s forced the military to deal with lower conscription rates—through the use of technology. Following the complete success of Operation Desert Storm in 1991 the military began the “digitization” process of every branch of the military. Navy Adm. Arthur Cebrowski and Air Force Capt. John Garstka wrote in the January 1998 issue of naval journal Proceedings, “Nations make war the same way they make their wealth. Computer networks and the efficient flow of information would turn America’s chain saw of a war machine into a scalpel.”

14 The Hill

centric” battles enable fewer civilian casualties, creating a more ethical approach to warfare.

Fighting a technological battle against an enemy that is communicating and operating with the most basic forms of equipment has a major problem—imperceptibility.

Currently, General David Petraeus is serving as commander of the U.S. Central Command. He is in charge of U.S. operations within 20 countries including Operations Iraqi Freedom and Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan. Through conversations with the very people he had once ordered terminated, General Petraeus has slowly gained the support

But the military may be reaching a point of exhaustion.

The battle for “hearts and minds” is echoed in the efforts of Sergeant Joe Colabuno in Iraq whose job it is to appeal to local Arab culture through “talk.” His tools are Photoshop, a loudspeaker and radio broadcasts he mixes in SonicStage to air locally in Iraq. “I find the right people to shape, and they shape the rest,” said Colabuno in a Wired Magazine article entitled “How Technology Almost Lost the War.”

“The only way to [ensure safety] is to live with the people. Once they feel secure they will tell you where the weapons and explosives are.” of Sunni warriors that have grown weary of their Taliban-like ideology.

General Petraeus’ success has already begun to spread to other areas of U.S. operation. This past December, the general recommended doubling the number of troops within

The greatest question that remains is how the U.S. military will be reorganized after the Iraq War. The decisions made

by U.S. leaders leading up to the departure from Iraq will prove the most critical in deciding the future of the military.

Hunter Ellis is a senior majoring in journalism.

Cover

Just war or just a war?

Was Israel dishing out Hammurabi-style justice? Was it fighting a necessary battle to ensure the future security of a Jewish state?

Perhaps Israel merely sought to bloody Hamas’ nose to deter them from further violence. Or was Israel just bullying its weaker neighbor to strengthen its position at the negotiating table? These are all relevant questions when considering the legitimacy of Israel’s military operation in Gaza, according to Just War Doctrine.

Israel’s concerns over Gazan rockets are merited; even absent deaths they are attacks on sovereign Israeli soil.

But a war is only considered “just” if it has both a legitimate cause for conflict and the conduct of the war is appropriately proportionate to the aims sought. Hamas’ rockets have caused about a dozen deaths.

Nonetheless, Israel’s response has been overwhelming, and 1,300 Palestinians have died, including civilians, according to the World Health Organization. Under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, to which Israel is a signatory, the death of civilians is not forbidden. The only necessary justification is that there is an important enough objective to justify the loss of life. Is there such a strategic justification for a response that appears excessive? Opinions are extremely divided.

Dr. Crescenzi, Associate Professor of Political Science at UNCChapel Hill, suggests that the war was intended to weaken and expose Hamas, placing Israel in a stronger position in the upcoming rounds of peace negotiation under President Obama. Any short-term fallout is

likely to be swept under the rug in favor of a more conciliatory tone as the bargaining process is restarted.

An example is provided by the 2006 Lebanese War, in which Hezbollah was able to survive and thrive and now stands to gain legitimacy in upcoming Lebanese elections. In contrast, Hamas now seems weak and ineffective, only managing to fire some rudimentary rockets in response to Israel’s onslaught. It is necessary to note that Hamas’ guiding ideology includes a commitment to the destruction of Israel. As long as they maintain such a hardline stance on Israel’s sovereignty, they cannot constructively engage in a lasting peace process.

In a recent Op-Ed in The New York Times, Muammar al-Qaddafi, the leader of Libya, points out the common heritages of Israeli Jews and Arabs—both have legitimate historical claims to the lands of the former British Mandate of Palestine. Hamas represents, therefore, a strong obstruction to peace in its refusal to recognize Israel’s legitimacy; whether the weakening of this extremist group is a justifiable war aim is still, however, up for debate.

Crescenzi states that if Hamas could be transformed into a more moderate organization, then Israel’s attacks could not be strategically justified but neither Crescenzi nor Israel find that eventuality likely.

In the course of the war, at least half of the Palestinian deaths were non-military. Yet some contend responsibility for the numerous civilian deaths in Gaza is not Israel’s fault. Hamas regularly operates out of locations likely to cause extensive

civilian casualties. It is difficult to conduct a war in which one side intentionally works to ride public opinion, generating media spectacles out of the grisly business of war.

While there is doubt whether Israel waged a just war, Dr. Spinner-Halev, Eminent Professor of Political Ethics at UNC-CH, suggests there is no such doubt over Hamas. Every rocket fired at Israeli civilians is a violation of Just War Doctrine, says Spinner-Halev; the fact that they have not caused large scale death does not change the reality that each rocket was intended to do so.

Southern Israel does not lack for military targets, yet civilian centers such as Sderot were chosen in their stead. Israel’s lopsided capability advantage meant that they were able to choose targets with much greater care. However, in hitting these targets, collateral damage was often unavoidable. Did they undervalue the lives of civilians? Possibly, but it is incredibly difficult to make a conclusive judgment. Proportionality is an easy question on the margin: a warlord killing thousands of innocents to quell an uprising is clearly unacceptable, but what if 20 civilians die in an explosion killing an important military commander?

As Crescenzi says, “There are really no good guys left.” Except, perhaps, “the civilians, the refugees: [they] don’t really want this violence.”

These are the people whom Just War Doctrine seeks to protect: not the weak, but the innocent. And they will only be safe when Israel and its neighbors can compromise.

Drew Dimmery is a junior majoring in international studies.

March 2009 15

Cover

Present-day piracy The days of one-eyed buccaneers and maritime swashbucklers have faded. Yet curious mixtures of political discord, poverty and the lure of riches have often resulted in modern piracy epidemics. One such case occurred in the late 1990s when a financial crisis in Asia drew multitudes to desperate and illegal ends. This emergent instability was brutally potent in encouraging maritime piracy in Indonesia and nearby countries.

The times have changed however; between 2003 and 2008, Indonesia saw a 75 percent decrease in report-

ed piracy. But piracy has not disappeared. In 2008, a remarkable 111 occurrences of piracy in the Gulf of Aden and off the coast of Somalia were reported to the International Maritime Bureau—a 200 percent increase from 2007.

If a financial crisis in Thailand incentivized piracy in Southeast Asia, what explains the exploding levels of piracy near Somalia? The answer is multifaceted.

16 The Hill

Deprived of a stable and operational government for nearly 20 years, the Somali peoples have been tormented by violence, poverty and domestic turmoil for years. The collapse of the fishing industry and a war with neighboring Ethiopia only worsened the economic gloom.

Meanwhile, small arms have proliferated on black markets and can be bought very inexpensively. Partly in response to these circumstances, residents of regions such as Puntland, an incredibly poor, partlyautonomous state in northeast Somalia, have taken to piracy.

In the Gulf of Aden, maritime piracy can pay off. The average ransom for a captured vessel is roughly one million dollars.

Modern technology and improved strategy are crucially responsible for the unprecedented successes for pirates in the last year. Rudimentary tools, such as machetes and pistols, have been substituted with AK-47 rifles, M-16 rifles and rocket propelled grenades. Moreover, pirates have increasingly taken advantage of the range provided by “mother ships,” vessels captured by pirates and then used to launch operations farther from the coast. The 2008 capture of an oil tanker carrying 2 million barrels of oil testifyied to the skills, technology and tactics of modern piracy.

Recent piracy raised insurance prices and made shipping more difficult.

In the Gulf of Aden, shippers may divert around the Cape of Good Hope in South Africa. The resulting loss of time may increase the prices of exports of oil and goods from the Middle East and Asia. While these

consequences are limited, the shortterm effect will be magnified by the current economic crisis.

If the global community wants to preserve free shipping through the gulf, it will have to expend additional resources in tackling the problem of piracy in the Gulf of Aden. As the U.S. moves forward with Combined Task Force 151, the European Union tackles the challenges of piracy with Operation Atlanta. Their efforts are continuing, and are joined by many other nations, including China, a country otherwise notoriously reluctant to intervene in the affairs of other nations. An international presence may offer some promise of deterrence. Still, according to Dr. Joseph Caddell, who teaches the History of Sea Power at UNC-CH, it is extraordinarily difficult to identify and pursue pirates when they are not engaged in the act of piracy itself.

While the short-term options may be limited, the convergence of shared objectives—defeating piracy and protecting international trade— may offer nations unique opportunities to strengthen the mechanisms of engagement. For example, as low-level logistics and concerns, such as fueling, have to be addressed in a gulf increasingly monitored by international forces, a natural opportunity to cooperate with Iran’s navy might arise. However, no such hopes have been manifested.

Ultimately, to adequately deal with piracy in the Gulf of Aden, virtually all experts say that a viable political solution must be found for Somalia.

Krishna Kollu is a first year.

Cover

What trade could do for Columbia Diana Gómez’s father is dead. Or at least he is probably dead.

Trade Agreement, human rights discussions have flourished.

Three years ago, Gómez’s father joined the ranks of innumerable Colombian “desaparecidos,” the disappeared, and presumably murdered, civilians caught in a conflict that has lasted over 40 years. Besides not knowing what has become of their loved ones, the families of the disappeared usually do not know who is responsible for the crime. Behind the disappearance of Gómez’s father could stand a leftist guerilla group like the ELN (National Liberation Army) or the FARC (Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia), from which politician Ingrid Betancourt and fourteen other hostages were rescued last year. Responsibility could also lie with the violent, right-wing paramilitary forces that have often been tied to the Colombian government by watchdog groups such as Amnesty International. There are reasons to believe that the paramilitary groups were responsible for the disappearance of Gómez’s father. In any case, they are now targeting her.

A free trade agreement between the two countries could help solve the human rights crisis in Colombia.

According to the Carnegie Council for Ethics in International Affairs, the stipulations of an agreement relating to transparency and processes of appeal in trade issues would spill over and improve the way in which human rights issues are handled.

The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative argues that a free trade agreement would bring “economic alternatives to violence” and could “strengthen peace” in the region.

According to a letter sent to Ms. Gómez in March 2008, the paramilitary group Águilas Negras views her and the social justice organizations with which she is heavily involved—for example, Boys and Girls for Memory and Against Impunity—as part of the opposing guerilla forces. For this they will be killed “one by one,” according to the letter, to “leave no loose ends.”

Such frightening human rights abuses have been noticed in the U.S. In regards to one issue in particular, the pending U.S.-Colombia Free

Many Democrats in Congress, along with organizations like Human Rights Watch, are skeptical of a free trade agreement’s ability to lower the number of deaths and disappearances in Colombia. They argue that progress should be evident first; the trade agreement should be an incentive for Colombia to improve, not a tool in and of itself for that end. The Human Rights Watch, for instance, recently argued that Congress’ current refusal to ratify the agreement is probably the only reason why Colombia has “taken even the limited steps it has to address the issue.” Free trade benefits for Columbia seem unmerited as the innocent are still being killed and the guilty continue to go unpunished?

Such a question makes one critical assumption that activists like Gómez are quick to point out.

Whether or not the agreement should be used as an impetus or a reward for change depends on the idea that the trade agreement would

bring economic improvements to Colombia. Gómez agrees that a working free trade agreement would bring good jobs and positive change to Colombia and its human rights crisis, an argument along the lines of that of the Carnegie Council. At the same time, she maintains that as long as the U.S. holds certain protections for its own producers, “free trade” is not free, nor is it helpful. Gómez argues that, instead of debating the most beneficial time to implement the U.S.-Colombia Free Trade Agreement, Congress should address and adjust the content of the agreement itself.

According to the official U.S. summary of the U.S.-Colombia Free Trade Agreement, ratification of the agreement would grant U.S. firms access to all types of Colombian markets, from telecommunications to agriculture. The problem in this arrangement is similar to that which has stalled the World Trade Organization’s Doha Round: highly developed countries like the U.S. continue to subsidize and protect their own agricultural production and other domestic industries, while lesser developed countries feel pressure to liberalize trade and do away with similar protections.

This, Gómez argues, should be the focal point of the debates surrounding the U.S.-Colombia Free Trade Agreement. Regardless of good intentions, a trade agreement that harms Colombian producers will not bring the stability and prosperity needed to work towards peace in the region.

Caroline Guerra is a sophomore majoring in political science and international studies.

March 2009 17

Technology

NASA’s fight for funding Just over fifty years ago the United States Congress authorized the creation of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. For the next two decades, NASA played a pivotal role in American defense strategy as it developed space flight and missile technology in the great “Space Race” with the Soviet Union.

Of course, the administration’s most memorable accomplishment involved putting man on the Moon.

Now, a generation after the collapse of communism, NASA is far from the minds of most Americans. While it continues to actively participate in research toward national defense, the agency’s visibility is significantly diminished. Furthermore, many officials have been alarmed in recent

years with NASA’s tendency to exceed its budget. Among those expressing concern is President Barack Obama, whose campaign promise to “go through the federal budget line by line” to cut unnecessary programs appears to have found a victim in NASA’s Constellation Project.

The program, authorized by Congress in 2004, involves completing the International Space Station and retiring the space shuttle. In addi-

18 The Hill

tion, it calls for constructing a new spaceflight system with the intent of sending astronauts back to the moon and, eventually, the planet Mars. In November 2007, Obama released an $18 billion spending package on education, which he would pay for by delaying Constellation five years.

Justifying the suspension, Obama said, “We’re not going to have the engineers and the scientists to continue space exploration if we don’t have kids who are able to read, write and compute.” According to NASA, there is already a four-year gap between the 2010 retirement of the space shuttle and the launching of the Ares I, the next generation space vehicle. A five-year delay would leave the United States without its own space flight capabilities for nearly a decade. After Obama’s election, his transition team raised the cheaper possibility of conducting the planned mission using existing technology, rather than an entirely new system. Mike Griffin, then administrator of NASA, responded that his agency’s job was “to produce technical solutions to achieve space policy goals enunciated from above. If agency management cannot be trusted to do that, they should be replaced.” Obama did just that, naming retired Air Force Gen. Scott Gration as Griffin’s successor in early January.

Not everyone is convinced that Constellation should go forward at all.

Dr. Alex Roland, an expert on space policy at Duke University, views the project as wasteful.

“The Constellation program should not be funded as presently conceived, no matter what one intended to do with the savings,” said Roland, because it “remains trapped in the `Von Braun Paradigm,’ the belief that American space activity should be directed toward a manned mission to Mars. No compelling rationale for sending humans to Mars has yet been established that could possibly justify the cost and risk.”

Still, Griffin’s defense of the agency’s autonomy in technical decisions pitted against Obama’s determination to cut spending precedes a larger debate regarding federal finances.

During a time in American history beset by financial crises, rising unemployment, two foreign wars and burgeoning budget deficits, one wonders whether billions of dollars should continue to be channeled annually toward space exploration.

Historically, NASA has not competed for tax dollars with sensitive areas like education, but with government agencies tightening their belts all across the country, the game is now every agency for itself.

“President Obama seems genuinely committed to increasing science funding,” said Roland, “even though budgets will necessarily be tight for some time to come.” However, Roland said that Constellation should not be a focus in NASA’s immediate future. At any rate, the debate shows that in these hard times even Houston is hurting financially. For now, it seems, the future of space exploration remains uncertain.

Ryan Collins is a sophomore majoring in economics and political science.

Technology

The first tech president By the end of his eight-year term, former President Bill Clinton had sent a total of two emails: the first a test, the second a message to astronaut John Glenn on the space shuttle Discovery. President Barack Obama is likely to have sent more emails than that in the first hour after his inauguration. Renowned for his frequent BlackBerry use and his grassroots, online-based campaigning, Obama has been hailed as the first “tech president.” Technologybased changes at the executive level have the potential for major ramifications not only in the tech sphere, but in everything from healthcare to energy to government itself.

Despite broad adoption by the public, the Internet was not taken seriously as a campaign tool until recent years. Howard Dean became a major player in the 2004 presidential race with the money raised through his online network of donors, and Congressman Ron Paul became an Internet sensation in his bid for the 2008 Republican nomination, at one point raising over four million dollars online in a single day. The latest presidential campaign marked a clear convergence of politics and the Web, with Barack Obama and Republican candidate John McCain trading barbs on YouTube and Facebook, in addition to more traditional media outlets like CNN. With the money he raised online, Obama was able to forego public financing and outspend McCain. At the same time, McCain was able to remain competitive even with limited funds by emphasizing Internet-based spending over traditional media.

Announcing his candidacy for the presidency in early 2007, Obama

proclaimed his desire to be among “the generation that reshapes our economy to compete in the digital age.”

On the official White House web site, Obama speaks of “the immense transformative power of technology and innovation and how they can improve the lives of Americans.” His agenda as president gives weight to this rhetoric.

A major part of his health care plan is the implementation of electronic health care records, making it possible for doctors, nurses, hospitals and patients to stay on the same page and avoid costly miscommunication. The energy gains Obama hopes for depend on scientific and technological innovation in both the development of new energies and the enhancement of existing ones. And in appointing the nation’s first Chief Technology Officer to lead an interagency effort to increase governmental efficiency, Obama has shown he is serious about using technology to better integrate the various elements of government.

For all Obama’s emphasis on change through technology, the White House and each of the myriad government bureaucracies have their own systems and traditions, meaning that any change that occurs may come slowly. Raleigh-based software company Red Hat proposes open source software as the solution to many of the technological and costrelated hurdles faced by the new administration. “Government agencies can experience dramatic cost savings through utilizing open source technologies,” a spokesperson for the company told The Hill. “With the

Obama administration’s promise for an open and transparent government, open source technologies provide an impressive means to accomplish this goal.”

At noon on January 20, 2009-before Obama had even been sworn into office-Whitehouse.gov, the official website of the White House, had been transformed into a sleek, modern site promising accessibility and accountability. Users are able to review all non-emergency legislation before it is signed, and the site features the president’s weekly YouTube video addresses and an official White House blog. If Obama’s plans pan out, the collaborative nature of the Internet and the social networks that he used to such effect during the campaign will now be used as tools to advance the democratic process, keeping voters informed and engaged in America’s affairs. John Glenn would be proud.

Ryan Kane is a senior majoring in political science.

March 2009 19

Opinion

from the Left

Big three are too big to fail Martha Waters One of the most noticeable effects of the global economic crisis has been the hot debate about bailouts in the U.S. Controversial as October’s Wall Street bailout was, the bailout of the automobile industry proved an even harder sell.

Opponents of further aid beyond the original emergency loans have claimed that it is unnecessary and that the automakers’ woes stem from their own bad business practices. What many fail to realize, however, is that continued assistance of the Detroit Big Three is just as important as the bailout of Wall Street, and that without it, America’s prospects for better economic times will be considerably dimmer.

While the consensus seems to have been that the U.S. economy could not survive without a Wall Street bailout, the same could be argued regarding the automobile industry.

According to figures provided by The New York Times, nearly 3 million American jobs are provided by the car companies and their suppliers; the failure of any of the Big Three would prove devastating for many of these workers. Unemployment has become a huge strain on our country’s resources in recent months, both through increased demand for unemployment benefits and from its adverse effects on consumer spending. Can we really afford to put 2 percent of the nation’s workforce at risk? If there were suddenly 3 million more unemployed workers in the United States, the effect on the national economy would be devastating, particularly in states in the Midwest that are at the heart of the automobile industry.

In a recent study conducted by the Center for Automotive Research, it was determined that if the Big Three were to cease operations, it would result in a $398.2 billion loss in personal income over the first three years alone. Our already severely weakened economy cannot afford such a loss in consumer spending power; to support the automotive industry is not only to support these

20 The Hill

3 million workers, but to support the rest of the country’s companies that rely on these workers’ consumption.

Furthermore, the auto industry’s woes cannot be entirely blamed on its production of uncompetitive products, as some would like to claim. While it is clear that automakers need to do serious work to remain a competitive market force, they have also been hurt by the credit crunch. The difficulty of obtaining loans from banks has meant that millions of Americans have been unable to purchase cars.

This crisis has clearly affected carmakers— with people tightening their belts, a new car is not high on their priority list.

If we have bailed out the very banking institutions whose subprime lending has been a large factor in the current economic crisis, how can we refuse to aid a vital industry that is being so painfully affected by that crisis?

Certain institutions, such as Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, have been deemed “too big to fail,” and the American automobile industry is one that should fall into that category. These companies have been key contributors to the prosperity America has enjoyed over the past 60 years; to abandon them in their time of need would do nothing so much as hinder our return to that same prosperity.

President Obama has spoken of the long road of challenges that face the American people today. If any of the Big Three were to fail, the road would lengthen even further. Distasteful as further large-scale government intervention may be to some, continued assistance for this crucial American industry is a key step towards meeting those challenges.

Martha Waters is a sophomore majoring in history.

Opinion

from the right

Incompetence cannot be ignored Michael Parker For the past few months, America’s three largest auto companies-Ford, General Motors and Chryslerhave lobbied Washington for a financial bailout in order to prevent their collapse. The “Big 3” argued that their companies are too big to be allowed to fail, that their collapse would severely wound an already weakened American economy. In December, President Bush gave the automakers a lifeline, issuing an executive order loaning General Motors and Chrysler a combined $17 billion.

For many important reasons, a further bailout of the American auto industry is the wrong approach. Although it would hurt the American economy in the short term, these companies should be allowed to fail, as these poorly managed companies will only encounter more trouble in the future and require further government aid.

Bailing out the American car industry would set a dangerous precedent for other American industries struggling to survive in the current recession.

Instead of trying to pursue innovation and discover new ways to survive and succeed in the current economic climate, struggling industries might instead come to expect and rely on government aid for survival. Only a few weeks after the auto industry received federal loans, the American steel industry has asked for $1 trillion in loans, arguing their collapse would be a terrible blow to the American economy. Even after receiving a $13 billion loan from the government, General Motors has said that its business survival strategy for the new year is to obtain another $4-5 billion in government loans, expecting the newly-elected Democrats to be more sympathetic to their plight.

Ford, Chrysler and General Motors are not, as they have incessantly claimed, too big to fail. In recent years, these poorly run companies have become a burden on the American economy. For the past few years, these companies have fallen behind foreign automakers in both auto innovation and quality. Even General Motors has admitted as much, apologizing in a recent print advertise-

ment to American consumers for producing vehicles below industry standards with lackluster designs and for focusing too much on the production of trucks and SUVs. Until the recent near-demise of the American banking system, America’s carmakers received unwavering support from America’s banks and lenders, despite their lack of innovation and quality. This was a waste of money, as it starved smaller and more innovative firms in America of badly needed capital.

As banks were always willing to lend to the Big 3, America’s automakers were content to avoid the serious restructuring required to compete with foreign automakers including Toyota and Honda. The government bailout is a waste of money for the same reasons, as it diverts badly needed capital to failing auto companies who will only come to depend on future federal bailouts in order to survive.

Every year, Consumer Reports releases two important lists for the auto industry: the ten best and eleven worst cars of the year. This past year, only one American car was among the ten best, while nine out the eleven worst cars were produced by America’s Big 3. This list is further proof that America’s Big 3 automakers are not worth bailing out. Over the past few years, they have continued to produce cars inferior in quality and innovation to foreign competitors and are now in dire straits because of their incompetence. Ford, Chrysler and General Motors are failing for the most part due to the fact they produce cars and trucks inferior in quality to their competitors’.

Government capital should not be wasted on saving companies that have doomed themselves because of mismanagement and poor quality. These companies should be forced to declare bankruptcy and let more efficient and innovative companies take their place.

Michael Parker is a junior majoring in political science and history.

March 2009 21

The Last Word

The fight against feminism Women are struggling against a patriarchal backlash “The meritocracy is inexorably turn- This opinion is delusional. of equal educational qualifications ing into a matriarchy … men are increases as the level of education becoming ever more marginalized, First, women are not achieving increases, there is undeniably room while women are taking over the economic equality through equal for improvement. commanding heights of wealth and education. Equal education means power,” reads the editorial “Lexing- nothing if institutionalized sexism Professor Sherryl Kleinman of the ton: the Triumph UNC-Chapel Hill Department of of Feminism” in Sociology illuminates the structural Women consistently make only 66 manifestation of the wage gap: the the Sept. 11, 2008, cents to every dollar earned by a gendered, hierarchical division of the print issue of The man.

Economist. The labor force. To put it simply, doctors editorial’s author are men and nurses are women, and cites the higher so on. This division correlates directly rates of violent crime rates and be- in the workplace leads to unequal with the relationship between genhavioral drug prescriptions among compensation - and it does. Many der and perceived power. As Kleinmales as symptoms of men’s margin- people tout the statistic that the man explains, alization, juxtaposing this with the “woman’s dollar” has risen from 66 “You’re not accomplishments of women like the cents to 78 cents in the last three de- just born into female heads of MIT, Harvard and cades. However, this is solely based a particular Princeton. In this light, you may be on the incomes of Americans who body that we tempted to conclude that the open- work full-time, year round. Because call male or ing statement is indeed reasonable. more than half of employed women female. You work part-time, a more accurate sta- are born into Some sociologists in the emerging tistic must account for all men and a social and field of masculinity theory associ- women in the labor force, part-time e c o n o m i c ate this sentiment with the “crisis of and full-time. In this more complete category of patriarchy.” This crisis of patriarchy context we see that women consis- either more is mainstream male society’s subcon- tently make only 66 cents to every powerful or scious fear in the face of weakening dollar earned by a man. less powerful

By Anqi Li male monopolization of broad orpeople: men ganizational power. In other words, We must recognize the danger of or women.” men have traditionally wielded so- confusing acknowledgment of the Understanding gender as power alcial and political power. Now that progress we have made with compla- lows us to examine recent political some people have begun to demand cency in the face of further improve- events more critically. a redistribution of that power, society responds by overreacting. Sound Palin may seem The wage gap between men like old news, but paranoid? and women of equal education for people like increases as the level of education the “Lexington” The “Lexington” author would have increases. you believe that women are winning author, she symthe “gender wars” because of higher bolized feminist rates of women receiving undergradtriumph.

This uate degrees and the emergence of ment. With sociologists like Allan misunderstanding of her role as a Sarah Palin as an idiosyncratic “ful- G. Johnson pointing out that the female token (as opposed to an acfillment of the feminist dream.” wage gap between men and women complished female politician) makes

22 The Hill

The Last Word

her worth a second look. Her nomi- This ingenious combination explains providing the basis for false, panicked nation to the Republican presiden- the volatile responses Palin provoked claims of “emerging matriarchy.” Patial ticket represents a rare instance in the recent presidential election. lin’s visibility and these misleading in which her gender as a female in statistics reflect a patriarchal backthe “male” arena of politics worked We can draw one primary, fright- lash against further progress toward to her professional advantage, if only ening conclusion about the signifi- gender equity. for a while. Her gender performance as an attracAnqi Li is a sophomore ma“You’re not just born into a joring in journalism. tive woman and mother, particular body that we call male or who coincidentally enjoyed female. You are born into a social “male” pursuits like huntand economic category of either ing, created an identity that appealed to established more powerful or less powerful mechanisms of masculine people: men or women.” approval. In effect, she completed a gender performance readily identifiable as tradi- cance of Palin’s recent visibility. That tionally female and nonthreatening visibility, like the misleading statisto conventional male dominance, tics on male and female educational while simultaneously advertising qualification, masks the persistence that she could be “one of the guys.” of patriarchal social structures while

The Last Word on

The Hill

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.

March 2009 23

Want to see your ad here?

Reasonable prices, thousands of readers

E-mail thehillpr@unc.edu

Like to blog?

Want to be an editor?

WORK FOR THE HILL!

email thehillpr@unc.edu