CPR Summer 2020 (XIX, 2)

EDITOR’S NOTE

COLUMBIA POLITICAL REVIEW The Columbia Political Review is a multi-partisan undergraduate-run publication at Columbia University. The magazine hosts writers and accepts pitches from all over the ideological spectrum; our mission is to provide an open forum for long-form political thought on campus. We cover both international and domestic issues.

EDITORIAL BOARD EDITOR-IN-CHIEF Alex Siegal

PUBLISHER Maria Castillo

MANAGING EDITORS Sophia Houdaigui Ramsay Eyre Rachel Barkin

GRAPHICS EDITOR Peyton Ayers

COPY EDITORS Jasmin Butler Ellie Gaughan Shomik Ghose Aryeh Hajibay-Piranesi Sarah Howard Daniel Kang Timothy Kinnamon Carina Layfield Caroline Mullooly Niharika Rao Emily Ringel Jake Tibbetts Eleanor Yeo

LAYOUT EDITOR Helen Sayegh

DEPUTY LAYOUT EDITOR Olivia Choi

PUBLICITY EDITOR Annabel Kelly

STAFF SENIOR EDITORS Sarah DeSouza Henry Feldman Heather Loepere Katherine Malus Kaili Meier Janine Nassar Raya Tarawneh Ariadne Xenopoulos Ayse Yucesan

GRAPHIC DESIGNERS Julia Ulziisaikhan Peter Phan

STAFF WRITERS Eriife Adelusimo Cameron Adkins Elina Arbo Zachary Becker Denver Grace Blevins Stella Cavedon Sebastian Chaves John David Cobb Devyani Goel Kris Jenvaiyavasjamai Adam Kluge Rachel Krul Chloe Lowell Morgan Margulies Glorimar Marquez Caitlin McCormick Oliver Niu Gustie Owens Brian Perlstein Christian Pichardo Julia Schreder Roshan Setlur Aditya Sharma Ali Soufraki Ian Springer Annie Tan Serena Tsui Diana Valcárcel Soler Charlie Wallace Serena White COVER ART BY: Peyton Ayers

1

H

aving already settled into a routine under social distancing, we’re now transitioning into a long, difficult balancing act: a period where we manage and mitigate calculable risk rather than grapple with uncertainty. We’ve been equipped with a sizable portion of the information we need in order to face down the COVID-19 pandemic. While the data that has been collected is far from refined, it does provide some basic guidance. We know, for example, that frequent large-scale diagnostic testing is the only safe way to proceed with reopening. The rough template for recovery exists; it’s up to policymakers to follow it.

We’re finishing up our online classes on Zoom now. As things stand, uncertainty is still the name of the game for college communities. However, that same guidance that enabled states to construct reopening plans may soon be coming to colleges as well. Researchers have been putting out new studies about the volume and varieties of campus interactions, and Christina Paxson, Brown’s president—notably, also the vice chair of the Association of American Universities—penned an op-ed in the Times that emphatically supported a physical reopening of campuses, albeit with appropriate social distancing restrictions. These signals have been substantial; however, those calls should not immediately translate into optimism for our community in particular: Columbia’s situation is especially uncertain given its unique location in New York City.

There is one Columbia fact of which I am indeed certain, at least: Our student writers have done a great job synthesizing some fantastic articles out of the chaos of this crisis. To name a few, Chloe Lowell insightfully tackles New York City’s policy failures toward its taxi drivers, Roshan Setlur takes a look at how COVID-19 has destabilized democratic transition in Ethiopia, and Oliver Niu and Daniel Kang go head-to-head on universal basic income—our first “face-off” piece in a long time.

In other news, we’ve just wrapped up our high school essay contest, which had record high participation. And, in a CPR first, we’ll be continuing to publish over the summer—our team saw this as an opportunity to help out students who may have had opportunities evaporate because of coronavirus-induced closures and cancellations. Our pitch form is on our website. Stay well and best wishes.

— ALEX SIEGAL, EDITOR-IN-CHIEF

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in this magazine belong to the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the Columbia Political Review, of CIRCA, or of Columbia University.

CONTENT The Columbia Political Review publishes both print and online content. Writers may submit articles as staff writers or on a pitch basis. To submit a pitch or find more information, visit cpreview.org.

03 06

DOMESTIC POLITICS

THE PARSTISAN DIVIDE ON HEALTHCARE IN THE UNITED STATES Rachel Krul BC ’23 HOW NEW YORK CITY HAS FAILED ITS TAXI DRIVERS Chloe Lowell CC ’23

10 17

BIDEN AND THE BLACK VOTE Eriife Adelusimo CC ’22 UNDOCUMENTED IMMIGRANTS CAN GET COVID-19, BUT THEY WON’T GET CARES RELIEF Glorimar Marquez GS ’22

19

DOES ONE CHECK FIT ALL? DEBATING UNIVERSAL BASIC INCOME A SIMPLE SOLUTION TO A COMPLEX PROBLEM Oliver Niu CC ’23 A UBI MIGHT NOT BE THE ANSWER WE’RE

LOOKING FOR Daniel Kang CC ’23

24 27 30

INTERNATIONAL POLITICS

W.H.O. IS IN CHARGE? THE NEGLECT OF LEADERSHIP BY THE WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION Zachary Becker CC ’22

THE ETHIOPIAN GOVERNMENT’S LATEST COMMUNICATIONS SHUTDOWN DERAILS THE COUNTRY’S TRANSITION INTO DEMOCRACY Roshan Setlur CC ’23

ORGANIZATION OF AMERICAN STATES OR MINISTRY OF AMERICAN COLONIES? Christian Pichardo CC ’22

CIRCA

Columbia International Relations Council and Association

2

DOMESTIC POLITICS

COLUMBIA POLITICAL REVIEW // SUMMER 2020

THE PARTISAN DIVIDE ON HEALTHCARE IN THE UNITED STATES DURING COVID-19 Rachel Krul // Barnard College ’23 April 17, 2020

I

n the past few months, the world has grappled with the reality of functioning during a growing pandemic. As the United States anticipated the arrival of COVID-19, Americans watched countries like China and Italy have their healthcare systems overwhelmed by the virus. When COVID-19 eventually reached major U.S. cities, President Trump initially refused to call for a national stay-athome order despite warnings from public health experts. Democrats have criticized Trump’s insouciant response, asserting that he acted insufficiently in mitigating the outbreak.

Many Republicans, however, have defended Trump, often downplaying the severity of the virus. The American response to the pandemic has been decidedly partisan.

On December 31, 2019, authorities in China reported a surge in pneumonia cases due to unknown causes in the city of Wuhan. Days later, a novel coronavirus strain was 3

identified by Chinese researchers. By the end of January, China reported the country’s first death from the virus while cases were being detected worldwide. Subsequently, the U.S. reported its first death on February 28, and by March 11, the World Health Organization declared COVID-19 a pandemic.

The U.S. has a long history of partisan beliefs on healthcare policy.

More recently, the national debate has centered on providing universal healthcare coverage. In 2010, former President Barack Obama signed the Affordable Care Act into law. Often referred to as Obamacare, the law was designed to increase the coverage of Medicare and Medicaid, providing insurance to an estimated 32-50 million uninsured Americans.

Obamacare also mandated insurance companies to provide coverage to all people, including patients with pre-existing conditions. Republican lawmakers greatly opposed Obamacare and a former Republican

congressman went as far as to call the law “the most dangerous piece of legislation ever passed in Congress.”

The law’s individual mandate, requiring all Americans to purchase health insurance or pay a fine, has been deemed by Republican lawmakers to be unconstitutional and an overextension of government power.

When Trump assumed office in 2017, he touted the repeal of Obamacare as a major part of his platform. In July 2017, Republicans introduced a bill meant to replace Obamacare that also would have drastically cut back funding for Medicaid. After the bill failed in the Senate, Republican senators added a provision to the new 2018 tax bill that repealed the most controversial part of Obamacare: the individual mandate. Despite the shortcomings of Obamacare, the idea of ensuring that all people in America have access to healthcare is well-grounded. The Republicans’ repeal of this mandate without a new plan in place demon-

SUMMER 2020 // COLUMBIA POLITICAL REVIEW

DOMESTIC POLITICS DOMESTIC POLITICS

The Coronavirus Task Force. Official White House photo.

strates a greater concern with the optics of opposing an Obama-era policy than with actually providing people with better healthcare options.

The divide between Republicans and Democrats on healthcare has been made abundantly clear during COVID-19. The pandemic has exposed the weaknesses of the U.S. healthcare system, demonstrating the deeper systemic issue that Americans view healthcare coverage as a political debate rather than a human rights one. When healthcare policy is decided along party lines, many Americans are left without affordable options and unable to access the reliable medical care they need. Now, in the midst of a pandemic, more Americans have filed for unemployment in the week of March 29 than at any point in

the last 50 years. Mass unemployment brings an unprecedented loss of health insurance that many people receive through their jobs. The current U.S. recession will worsen when uninsured Americans, battling the virus or other illnesses, struggle to pay their medical bills.

Since the beginning of the pandemic, the U.S. has been woefully underprepared to deal with a healthcare crisis of this extent. The country’s initial strategy was to test, trace, and quarantine people to prevent a future outbreak. First, people were tested to see if they had the coronavirus, and if they did, they, along with any contacts that they had in the past two weeks, were traced and isolated for 14 days. A problem with this strategy emerged right away: the Center

for Disease Control and Prevention had produced a large batch of faulty coronavirus test kits. The kits had broken negative controls due to contamination in their testing reagents.

With no accurate way to carry out testing, government responses were significantly delayed countrywide as doctors struggled to make accurate diagnoses. While governors and mayors attempted to obtain working tests, the number of cases rose, until states like New York and California were dealing with outbreaks beyond control. The lack of reliable testing and information led people to unknowingly continue spreading the virus in public transportation, restaurants, and work offices, causing a massive boom of cases and deaths in population-dense cities. New York 4

DOMESTIC POLITICS

COLUMBIA POLITICAL REVIEW // SUMMER 2020

City began with only 269 confirmed COVID-19 cases on March 15, but

by March 31 had 38,936 confirmed cases. This extreme lack of preparation and incompetence on the part of the C.D.C. is reflective of the failings of the government at large.

The Trump administration has been dismissive of their faults in handling COVID-19, claiming that they are dealing with a “bloat that occurred under the previous administration.”

The President has also disbanded the National Security Council Global Health Security and Biodefense unit: a team responsible for dealing with large disease outbreaks and pandemics. Most recently, Trump has halted all funding to the World Health Organization, blaming them for “severely mismanaging and covering up the spread of coronavirus.”

Compounding the problems with transmission and testing, America does not have the capacity for treatment. The U.S. has fewer hospital beds per capita than most developed countries, as well as nowhere near the number of ventilators necessary to treat severe cases if the peak projections occur. Most projections estimate that about 1 million ventilators will be needed and the U.S. only has about 165,000 ventilators available for use throughout the country.

Doctors and nurses are already dealing with the effects of an unprepared manufacturing supply chain of medical equipment. A shortage of personal protective equipment has forced medical professionals to reuse everything from face shields to N95 masks.

These shortages have forced hospitals to stretch resources even further, as they have had to treat their own staff who have fallen ill from exposure to patients.

5

Instead of taking these issues seriously, Trump has downplayed the severity of COVID-19 on multiple occasions, claiming in late February that the coronavirus was merely “a flu.” He also made comments at one of his political rallies that he believed the virus would “miraculously [go] away” by April. These unsubstantiated claims were accompanied by a lackluster policy response. Trump refused a nationwide shutdown, stating that he believed governors should have the flexibility to decide how to implement social-distancing measures. Due to the absence of a nationwide stay-at-home order, some governors, such as Kim Reynolds of Iowa, did not have any type of stayat-home guidelines in place until the second week of April. Governors who criticized the lack of a national COVID-19 response, such as New York Governor Andrew Cuomo, were often met by derision from Trump.

Trump has repeatedly placed state autonomy over national welfare, proving to be detrimental to the country’s ability to fight the virus.

By calling COVID-19 the “Chinese Virus,” Trump has also fueled the increasing number of disturbing xenophobia cases directed towards Asian-Americans and Asians worldwide. Many Democrats, including presidential candidate Joe Biden, have said that Trump’s use of the phrase “Chinese Virus” serves to deflect blame away from his own mismanagement of the crisis in view of the upcoming 2020 presidential election.

On the bright side, COVID-19 may force Republicans and Democrats to compromise in the coming years, in order to mitigate the negative effects of the pandemic. In some

ways, this shift is already visible. Republican and Democratic senators approved a $2 trillion, bipartisan stimulus bill to address the economic devastation of the virus. Republicans even championed a portion of the bill that would grant eligible Americans with a $1,200 stimulus check directly from the federal government.

Trump, who advocated for the repeal of the Affordable Care Act, has now considered beginning a special enrollment period for eligible Americans to sign up for Obamacare, addressing the growing unemployment insurance deficit. Both Republicans and Democrats must embrace progressive healthcare policies, like universal coverage and increased federal funding for hospitals, to prevent another disaster of similar proportions.

While the healthcare system appears too broken to be fixed, an amazing spirit of perseverance across the country persists. Every night at 7 P.M., the people of New York City come to their apartment windows to cheer for medical workers fighting the pandemic. As people comply with the stay-at-home guidelines, there has been success in flattening the curve.

Joe Biden, now the frontrunner to be the Democratic presidential nominee, has begun advocating for more inclusive Medicare membership in response to the pandemic. These changes bring hope for a future where universal healthcare is asserted as a human right with unwavering bipartisan support. After experiencing the aftermath of COVID-19, it is quite possible that Republicans and Democrats may find themselves more open to comprehensive and lasting healthcare reform.

SUMMER 2020 // COLUMBIA POLITICAL REVIEW

DOMESTIC POLITICS DOMESTIC POLITICS

HOW NEW YORK CITY HAS FAILED ITS TAXI DRIVERS Chloe Lowell // Columbia College ’23 April 21, 2020

I

t is difficult to picture Man- MEDALLIONS, MORTGAGES, AND A MOUN- makes just $34,000 a year. The city hattan without taxis. The TAIN OF DEBT profited immensely from the height city’s yellow cabs have become In order to own and operate a of the market, selling 350 medallions a symbol for everything ur- taxi, drivers need to purchase a me- in 2014 and raking in $359 million. ban—a glance down Broad- dallion: a transferable permit from the A subsequent drop in pricing in the way or around any Times Square gift Taxi and Limousine Commision, the past six years, coinciding with the rise shop reveals just how ingrained they agency that regulates both the medal- of ride-share apps, left many drivers are into the culture of New York City. lion taxi and ride-sharing industries in hundreds of thousands of dollars Yet, in recent years, the taxi in- in the city. In 1937, The New York in debt. Today, a medallion costs bedustry has floundered. In 2018, taxis City government set a fixed number tween $120,000 and $150,000. Yet, made up just 6 percent of the total of these taxi medallions at 13,587, a the average outstanding debt for cab business traveler ground transporta- figure that remained unchanged even drivers who invested in a medallion is tion market, down from 37 percent as New York added millions to its almost $600,000. in 2014. Most peoBanks and looseple point blame at ly regulated private ride-share compalenders were eager to “Through all this, government nies like Uber and write loans for hopeagencies turned a BLIND EYE towards Lyft, which have ful medallion owners. undercut the marWhile taxi drivers’ poor returns on medallion purchases ket with lower pricincomes remained and ignored reports of an es and higher occustagnant through the pancy. medallion price flucinevitable disaster .”

However, the tuations, the lenders woes of thousands became rich. The New of taxi drivers across the city aren’t the population. Historically, the medal- York Times found that a handful of result of market competition alone. lion was seen as a smart investment lenders artificially inflated medallion Decades-long policies such as a cap for working class families and a path prices from 2002 to 2014. Some even on taxi permits have contributed sig- towards the middle class. overpaid for medallions themselves to nificantly to the decline of this iconic But much has changed. At the drive up the price. By using business New York industry and massive debt height of the market in 2014, drivers loans, which are subject to fewer regof its drivers—and city government is would have to pay $1.3 million just ulations, lenders could gain hundreds refusing to take the blame. to enter their occupation. By compar- of millions of dollars before the bubison, the average driver in New York ble burst.

6

DOMESTIC POLITICS

COLUMBIA POLITICAL REVIEW // SUMMER 2020

A line of taxis during rush hour in Times Square. Photo by Felix Morgner.

These predatory loans are difficult to prosecute. While the Taxi and Limousine Commission has significant power over taxi regulations, it is unclear if the predatory lending methods were technically illegal.

Through all this, government agencies turned a blind eye towards poor returns on medallion purchases and ignored reports of an inevitable disaster. Former New York City Mayors Rudolph Guiliani and Michael Bloomberg, eager for more revenue, both instructed the Taxi and Limousine Commission to promote the general sale of medallions. The Commission enticed hopeful taxi drivers with misleading descriptions at public auctions, deeming medallions a “solid investment with steady growth” and driving up the price with bidding wars. At one point, the investment was touted as superior to the stock market. Government agen7

cies simultaneously reduced oversight of the medallion market and exempted it from certain regulations. Current Mayor Bill de Blasio has largely upheld Giuliani and Bloomberg-era policies.

For Bhairavi Desai, the executive director of New York Taxi Workers Alliance, a union representing taxi and ride-share drivers, the predatory lending scheme solidified broader inequities between drivers and lenders. “[T]the rich got richer and the city raked in profit while working-class immigrant drivers of color were swindled and pushed into financial despair,” Desai said in a N.Y.T.W.A. press release last May. Although a federal court ruled unanimously against taxi driver bailouts in Chicago, some New York politicians argue that drastic measures to provide relief are a moral responsibility, considering the government’s role

in the price inflation of medallions.

At a 2019 rally for a taxi driver bailout, City Councilman Mark Levine, a progressive representing Northern Manhattan, urged action in the form of immediate financial relief.

“We are directly responsible for the inflation of medallion mortgages … and therefore we have a moral responsibility to repair the damage that’s been inflicted on these drivers, and their families, and their communities,” He said. Councilman Levine went on to more directly blame city government: “The city itself is culpable. The city itself profited from this bubble. The city itself pumped up this bubble. The city itself was asleep as thousands of drivers entered into a world of financial hell which is ruining their lives and those of their families.”

But more broadly, the city has

SUMMER 2020 // COLUMBIA POLITICAL REVIEW been slow to action. Mayor de Blasio does not support a taxi bailout.

Though legislators have been eager to single out ride-sharing companies for the harm they have done to taxi drivers employed by the city, they neglect the predatory lending that devastated drivers before these companies existed. In 2018, the New York City Council introduced a cap on ride-sharing vehicles, a move which proponents claimed would alleviate the worst of the taxi industry’s woes. Yet, while the rise of Uber and Lyft is certainly a factor, owner-drivers’ crippling debt is even more closely tied to their medallion mortgages than to industry competition. The council has taken few efforts to alleviate crippling medallion debt since the 2018 vote. Despite the ride-share cap, taxi driver’s woes have only increased, suggesting the taxi industry cannot be saved by hindering competitors alone.

THE PERSONAL COST FOR A WORKING CLASS IMMIGRANT COMMUNITY Today, it is painfully apparent that the magnitude of debt held by taxi drivers is more than just an economic issue. A jump in driver suicides became front-page news in 2018, drawing new public attention to a longstanding issue. This statistic, however, was not shocking to drivers. It was a clear consequence of the crippling debt and a collective sense of abandonment by the city government.

In 1980, 38 percent of taxi drivers were immigrants. Today, that figure is over 90 percent. Out of the 4,000 people who bought medallions from 2002 to 2014, many were low-income immigrants who could

not speak English fluently. The Taxi and Limousine Commission assured this vulnerable population of a medallion’s value. Lenders then coerced these optimistic drivers into signing complex contracts and exploitative, interest-only loans. For the drivers, the thousands of dollars it takes to obtain a medallion and pay off loans often comes in the form of life savings and contributions from family overseas.

Both the city and taxi industry have failed to adapt to this dramatic shift in demographics. Although an estimated one-third to one-half of NYC taxi drivers are Muslim, major holidays like Eid al-Adha are not recognized or accounted for by the taxi or ride-sharing industry. Without any coordination amongst drivers, both cab drivers and riders suffer. The city sees significantly fewer operating cabs, overwhelmed drivers, and New Yorkers experience surge pricing among ride-sharing apps.

Moreover, finding the space to perform five daily prayers is nearly impossible for Muslim taxi drivers and often results in parking tickets. Columbia’s own Manhattanville campus contributed to this problem when the University purchased and closed the McDonald’s on 125th and Broadway with plans for redevelopment of the lot. The fast food restaurant provided one of the only free parking lots in Upper Manhattan where drivers could stop and pray. Its closure is not only a major inconvenience for Muslim taxi drivers— the loss translates to longer routes and fewer earnings when the nearest parking lot is farther from customers. City planners raised no objections to Columbia’s expansion.

DOMESTIC POLITICS DOMESTIC POLITICS

“

TODAY, IT IS

PAINFULLY APPARENT

THAT THE MAGNITUDE OF DEBT HELD BY TAXI DRIVERS IS

MORE THAN JUST AN ECONOMIC ISSUE.

” 8

DOMESTIC POLITICS

COLUMBIA POLITICAL REVIEW // SUMMER 2020

WHERE WE GO FROM HERE Taxi workers’ unions have been advocating for progressive solutions to their members’ hardships. They have previously endorsed widespread debt forgiveness, retirement funds for elderly drivers, and capping mortgage payments on medallions at $900 a month to lessen the burden of debt on drivers. Unions have also advocated for regulation of fares for ride-sharing programs as well as taxi cars, which would counter Uber and Lyft’s advantage of dynamic pricing.

Many look to the Taxi and Limousine Commision of New York for new leadership, despite the agency’s role in creating the crisis.

In January, Mayor Bill de Blasio nominated Aloysee Heredia Jarmoszuk for Chair of the Taxi and Limousine Commission. Later that month, a Taxi Medallion Task Force

composed of City Council members, professors, attorneys, and taxi drivers formally delivered their recommendations to address the crisis. The group’s proposals included an investor-driven loan buyback and partial forgiveness program, as well as free legal and financial advice for drivers.

The challenge left to Chairwoman Jarmoszuk is their implementation.

Jarmoszuk’s nomination may provide some hope for the drivers most affected. Unlike other nominees, she explicitly apologized for the Taxi and Limousine Commission’s role in creating the medallion bubble. The new Chairwoman also committed to a support center for drivers by this summer, offering free workforce development, financial education, and mental health resources. Moreover, she promised comprehensive protections for drivers in addition to relief.

The follow through on these promises, navigating the competing interests

of politicians, drivers, unions, and lenders will be a daunting task ahead.

The COVID-19 pandemic presents yet another crisis for drivers in New York City, the current epicenter of the outbreak. Eerily empty streets and airports leave taxis idle for hours.

The government considers taxi services to be essential and relies on cabs to transport COVID-19 patients, yet drivers have not been provided with protective gear. The industry is seeing its lowest profit to date.

Our harrowing new reality only exposes longstanding systemic problems; weeks or months without customers is not an option for drivers already crippled by debt. An effective solution cannot solely focus on stabilizing the medallion market or regulating lenders. Rather, New York must prioritize the quality of life for the thousands of drivers upholding the industry.

> “Our HARROWING NEW REALITY only exposes longstanding systemic problems; weeks or months without customers is not an option for drivers already crippled by debt.”

Taxi workers demonstrate in support of a bailout at the New York State Capitol. Photo by Mia Gindis.

9

SUMMER 2020 // COLUMBIA POLITICAL REVIEW

DOMESTIC POLITICS DOMESTIC POLITICS

Joe Biden speaks at McKinley Elementary School in Des Moines. Photo by Phil Roeder.

BIDEN AND THE BLACK VOTE Eriife Adelusimo // Columbia College ’22 April 15, 2020

V

ice President Joe Biden has proven to have a tight grip on the Black vote in this election cycle, polling at 48 percent of the Black vote nationally.

His closest prior competitor, Senator Bernie Sanders, notched just 20 percent in comparison. To leftist factions within the Democratic party, this was quite the shock. How did a presidential candidate with a well-documented record of supporting anti-Black legislation become the favored candi-

date of Black Americans—especially Southern Black Americans—in an election against a Republican incumbent who has been openly and vividly racist?

Inherent to this question is a coastal elitism that assumes that Southern Black voters are either ignorant to Joe Biden’s previous ideological stances and voting record, choosing to blindly support a candidate because of his association to a president they liked, or simply do not know what is good for them. This line of thinking reveals

a deep-seated flaw in the Democratic Party’s relationship with its Black constituents.

AN ANTI-BLACK PAST From the day he announced his candidacy, Joe Biden was subject to intense scrutiny regarding his previous ideological stances and voting record.

In 1994, he authored The Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act to address the criticism that the left was too soft on crime. Among the provisions enumerated in the bill 10

DOMESTIC POLITICS

COLUMBIA POLITICAL REVIEW // SUMMER 2020

were the allocation of funds for the construction of federal prisons and increased mandatory minimum sentencing. Joe Biden openly supported this legislation on the Senate floor, stating “let me define the liberal wing of the Democratic Party. The liberal wing of the Democratic Party is now for 60 new death penalties. That is what is in this bill. The liberal wing of the Democratic Party has 70 enhanced penalties… The liberal wing of the Democratic Party is for 100,000 cops. The liberal wing of the Democratic Party is for 125,000 new state prison cells. The liberal wing of the Democratic Party ain’t the old wing I knew.” This is liberalism as Joe Biden understands it: policing, incarceration, and death. Bill Clinton signed the bill into law, an act he would later admit was wrong, recognizing the damage it did in amplifying the problem of mass incarceration. The bill is only one part of Joe Biden’s long pro-carceral state history, a history that includes several more bills that would exacerbate the War on Crime and disproportionately incarcerate the country’s Black citizens.

As though this were not enough, one of the biggest criticisms of Joe Biden this election cycle has been his opposition to busing. While verbally supporting integration, Joe Biden voted to oppose busing, the practice of transporting children to more distant school districts in order to counteract segregation. The practice of busing itself has since been condemned for failing to solve the problem of inequities in segregated schools. By simply forcing Black children to go to more well-resourced schools, it ignored the

reality that they would be exposed to overtly racist treatment they would not have been subject to in their local schools. However, the reason for Biden’s opposition to busing at the time had nothing to do with the well-being of Black students: it was a thinly-veiled attempt to appease the white moderate sect of his constituency that objected to Black children

more police officers on the streets was essential to decrease the rates of violent crime across the country, despite evidence that police presence actually makes vulnerable communities more vulnerable. It is only recently, with the 2020 election looming, that Joe Biden has admitted that War on Crime policies were misguided. When pressed

by Senator Kamala Harris about his camaraderie with segregationists and his opposition to busing, Biden did not repent, instead opting to identify himself as a champion of civil rights.

So how did JOe Biden become Since the 1970s, Biden America’s Black Candidate? has been claiming participation in the Civil Rights Movement, notably remarking he had marched for civil rights. This, however, is a bold-faced lie, revealing that decades spent attempting to attending school with their own chil- build a reputation as a Civil Rights dren. activist had no grounds to begin with.

Unlike other candidates who So how did Joe Biden become Black have been repentant of their voting America’s candidate? records and prior ideological stances, take Senator Elizabeth Warren who BARACK AND BIDEN: ALLIES AND FRIENDS openly apologized for erroneously Enter Barack Obama. On Februself-identifying as Native American, ary 9th, 2007, Barack Obama was a Biden has not been as forthcoming 45-year-old Black junior senator from with his admissions of fault. In a Illinois. On February 10th, he was a 2016 interview with CNBC, Biden presidential candidate, up against admitted to feeling no remorse for more than two hundred years of hisauthoring the crime bill, believing tory. Obama was partial to Joe Biden it “restored American cities.” This is from the start. When asked what kind a statement that many Black Amer- of person he was looking to make his icans in communities affected by running mate, aides report Obama violence and drug addiction would saying “I want somebody with gray have agreed with in the 1990s. In in his hair.” As both a comparativehis 2017 memoir Promise Me, Dad, ly young candidate and a Black man, Biden claimed that placing 100,000 Obama’s campaign threatened the

“

11

”

Enter Barack Obama.

SUMMER 2020 // COLUMBIA POLITICAL REVIEW possibility for unprecedented change.

The success of his candidacy would change the course of American history, drafting new rules as to who could be the face of the most preeminent nation on earth and simultaneously creating a new politic of inclusion.

And though many who voted for him bought into this opportunity to be part of history, Obama remained hyper aware of the resistance to this change. With this in mind, Obama needed a running mate that would signify the opposite, one that would serve as a voice of tradition in a campaign of progressiveness. In August of 2007, Obama would settle on Joe Biden over Tim Kaine and Evan Bayh, both of whom are more than a decade younger than Biden.

After two terms together, Biden and Obama were often presented to the American people as the best of friends. They were photographed enjoying one another’s company, hugging one another, sharing a laugh, and even eating ice cream together on White House grounds. What began as a relationship of necessity had blossomed before the public’s eyes into a close friendship. The American people watched as Barack Obama surprised a tearful Joe Biden with the Presidential Medal of Freedom, the highest civilian honor in the nation.

Obama was known to speak at length about his respect for Joe Biden, using the words of William Butler Yeats to compliment him: “Think where man’s glory most begins and ends, and say my glory was I had such friends.”

This mattered to Black America, who began to see Joe Biden as the proto-white ally. He was the guy that helped give us our first Black president and stood beside him for eight years. He was the guy in the pictures

DOMESTIC POLITICS DOMESTIC POLITICS

laughing with the first Black president, the guy who supported him in everything. He was the guy who believed in Barack Obama and believed in Black America. How could we see him as anything but a friend?

hold for one another as people was simply second to their political aspirations both for self and for country. As Grant Addison puts it for the Washington Examiner: “Obama’s legacy is Biden’s hope, but Biden’s candidacy is a threat to Obama’s legacy.”

A COMPLICATED RELATIONSHIP The relationship has become exDespite what the outside world tremely one-sided and understandwas allowed to see, this was not the ably so: Biden still needs Obama, but entire picture. Obama and Biden were not the fast friends “The relationship has become exthat they seemed tremely one-sided and understandto be. Their opably so: Biden still needs Obama, posing styles, a reserved Obama “ and a loquacious Biden, clashed initially. Obama was Obama does not need him. Obama not initially comfortable around is Biden’s campaign. His defining Biden, viewing him as a consistently strategy on the campaign trail has condescending presence. It did not been, though he denies needing any help matters when Biden referred to “crutch,” referring to the successes of Obama in an interview as “the first the Obama Administration, which mainstream African-American who is he often refers to as “our adminisarticulate and bright and clean and a tration.” Given the way his record of nice-looking guy,” a remark Obama support for anti-Black policies has simply had to laugh off. Biden would been weaponized against him, it is later apologize. in his best interest to be remembered Even now, years after their final as the loyal sidekick of the first Black term together has ended, there is evi- president rather than the architect of dence of strain in the relationship. In the the devastation of Black commu2019, Biden’s official Twitter account nities at the hands of his crime bill tweeted an image of a friendship and bolstering of the prison-indusbracelet with beads that read “JOE” trial complex. Given how long it has and “BARACK” along with the cap- been since his policies have been contion “Happy #BestFriendsDay to sidered his own rather than tied to my friend, @BarackObama.” To this a presidential administration, Biden day, the official Barack Obama Twit- also depends on the Obama Adminter account has not replied. In 2016, istration for his political relevance.

Obama allegedly pushed Biden not to run, eventually giving his endorse- BIDEN’S SUCCESS ment to Hillary Clinton. This is not Because this Biden was the one to say that the two are enemies and in our most recent memory, he has spent years in the White House de- proven unmatched in his grip on ceiving the public as to their close- the Black vote. On Super Tuesday, ness. Rather, the admiration they the Black vote was crucial for Biden

but Obama does not need him.

12

DOMESTIC POLITICS

COLUMBIA POLITICAL REVIEW // SUMMER 2020

victories in Virginia, North Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and Alabama. In Virginia alone, exit poll data showed that Biden won more than 71 percent of Black voters in the primary. More than half of Tennessee and North Carolina’s Black voters also voted for Biden. Several theories have been offered to explain why Sanders, despite his more progressive campaign and documented history as a Civil Rights Activist, was not able to emulate Biden’s success with Black voters.

One theory is Biden’s notoriety, a benefit awarded to him by virtue of the office of the Vice President. In South Carolina, the sheer number of candidates worked in his favor because he was among the few candidates that voters were familiar with.

As South Carolina educator Antonio Robinson explained, people simply didn’t know Warren and didn’t know Yang. He describes Joe Biden as a “commodity” compared to the other candidates that remained under the radar. Biden is an establishment candidate, and establishment candidates are usually the preferred candidates of Black voters. Establishment candidates usually have an existing relationship with the Black community, often through the community’s leaders, indicating to Black voters that they care to some extent about the welfare of the country’s Black citizens.

Another possible reason Joe Biden’s success with Black voters comes as a shock to those that are familiar with his voting record is that the Black political agenda is consistently misunderstood. In large part, the Black older voting population is conservative as a means of self-preservation. What is most misunderstood about Black voters is that history re13

quires them to be pragmatic rather than aspirational about their hard fought gains in fear of taking political risks that won’t pay off. American politics for Black America has been a story of waiting: waiting for freedom, waiting for equal rights, waiting for the vote, etc. Black Americans have learned to embrace change that takes time rather than sweeping reforms like those Bernie Sanders promised.

The first slaves arrived in the United States in 1619 via the transatlantic slave trade. Slavery would not end for almost 250 more years. Even once slavery was officially ended, African Americans were subject to predatory sharecropping practices that often resembled slavery in its cruelty. Post-sharecropping era, African Americans found themselves again institutionally victimized by segregation and the violence of Jim Crow.

In the modern day, Black Americans are subject to the oppression of a prison-industrial system that incarcerates them at disproportionately high rates.

Moreover, the Civil Rights Movement represented a time when Black Americans saw those that fought for them be murdered by the state. They watched the assassinations of Fred Hampton and Martin Luther King and the quasi-exile of Assata Shakur.

All of this to say, Black America has been subject to a painstakingly slow journey toward equality, with each step revealing the lengths to which the government would go to impose oppressive restrictions on Black life.

Understandably, post 1970s Black America is not a constituency of risk takers.

With Biden and Sanders, who as a democratic socialist advocated for reforms far more extensive than Biden’s, being the two frontrunners

throughout the race, research supports the theory that Sanders may simply have been too progressive of a candidate for the majority of the country’s Black voters. Sanders centered his campaign on a platform of radical change advocating student debt cancellation, free college, Medicare for all, and social security expansion. At a town hall moderated

by CNN in South Carolina back in February, Sanders was confronted by an audience member about how he would ease the minds of those worried that he was pushing an agenda too far left for the country and too far left to beat Trump. These criticisms have been levelled against Sanders not only by prospective voters but also by former candidate Pete Buttigieg and Biden himself. The Black voting populace is far less radical than media representations may lead one to believe.

In fact, according to research by Dr. Katherine Tate of Brown University, Black voters have become demonstrably less liberal since the 1970s. As Dr. Theodore R. Johnson of the Brennan Center for Justice explains, “most black voters, something on the order of 70 percent, identify as moderate or conservative. Only just over a quarter identify as liberal.”

Additionally, though it may seem hard to believe, Biden’s role in the 1994 crime bill may not be a deal breaker for many older Black voters. In fact, many Black Americans bought into the logic of the War on Crime. Witnessing increased crime in their communities, Black people started to believe the claims that drugs were making people violent and aggressive. They started to recognize the drug users in their communities as the problem the media made them out to be. The media did the work

SUMMER 2020 // COLUMBIA POLITICAL REVIEW of convincing the Black community that it was a scourge unto itself and that the carceral state was the only way to restore their communities. In their eyes, Joe Biden’s crime bill was not a major transgression. The crime bill, despite all its flaws, was presented as a solution to the plague of drug addiction and violence that had infiltrated Black communities of the 1980s and 1990s.

It is worth noting that Biden’s success is not due to Black voters as a whole: his Black base is composed predominantly of older Black voters.

Biden struggled to captivate younger Black voters in the same way he did their parents and grandparents.

Some of these voters interviewed at Texas Southern University stated that they believe the Democratic nominee should be supporting more progressive policies such as student debt cancellation and the Green New Deal, which Biden does not. They attribute

his success to their elders’ more conservative political leanings. Research conducted by Data for Progress also shows that Biden’s support from older Black voters is more secure: when informed of Biden’s voting record, Black millennials were twice as likely to rescind support for him than their older counterparts. The Biden campaign has highlighted a generational gap in values that may reverse the post-1970s trend of decreasing liberalism among Black Americans.

DEMOCRATIC COASTAL ELITISM Liberal criticisms of the Black vote as being under informed or backwards speaks to the Democratic Party’s deep-seated coastal elitist mindset. In the aftermath of Donald Trump’s election in 2016, many of Hillary Clinton’s supporters began to ask one another “how could this happen?” Seeking someone to blame or some sort of explanation for Clin-

DOMESTIC POLITICS DOMESTIC POLITICS

ton’s failure to defeat Trump, many democratic coastal elites turned toward the south and middle America, blaming Hillary’s loss on the ignorance of these regions. Herein lies the problem: those outside of quaint college towns and coastal major cities are made a monolith and forced to shoulder the blame for any shift toward what liberals see as a regressionist, conservative way of thinking.This problem was even highlighted on the debate stage by former presidential candidate Representative Tim Ryan who claimed that the party must work to shift from its reputation as “coastal, elitist, and Ivy League.” But the South is not a monolith, nor can it be solely held responsible for any elitist accusations of backwardness or one candidate’s failure. The South is the most densely Black region of the United States and historically has proven to be key to many progressive victories that Democrats hold near

President Obama and Vice President Biden in the Oval Office. Photo by Pete Souza.

14

DOMESTIC POLITICS

COLUMBIA POLITICAL REVIEW // SUMMER 2020

Anita Hill presents sexual harassment allegations against Supreme Court nominee Clarence Thomas in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee in 1991. Biden, who chaired the meeting during his time as a senator, has been criticized for mishandling Hill’s accusations.

Photo by R. Michael Jenkins.

and dear.

Much of what liberals consider key tenets of their political philosophy find roots or at the very least active support among Black southerners. The Democratic Party lists among its goals: economic fairness, achieving equality, and protecting voting rights. These same goals were key tenets of the Civil Rights Movement, a movement which began in Montgomery, Alabama with the arrest of Rosa Parks. The leaders of the movement were largely Southerners: Parks (Tuskegee, Alabama), Martin Luther King Jr (Atlanta, Georgia), Medgar Evers (Decatur, Mississippi), and Jesse Jackson (Greenville, South Carolina) are among the most recognizable. The movement was integral in pushing legislation to secure the rights Black people have today such 15

as the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Voting Rights Act of 1965, and the Fair Housing Act of 1968, rights and protections their forefathers did not enjoy.

Beyond securing the legal rights of Black Americans, the Civil Rights Movement inspired several other social movements, providing the template for how to fight for equal rights in the US. According to Dr. Ruth Rosen of the University of California-Davis, Black liberation movements have twice been the inspiration for women’s rights movements, with the abolitionist movement inspiring women’s suffrage in the 19th century and the Civil Rights Movement inspiring women’s rights movements of the 20th century. Dr. George Chauncey claims that the same is true of the Civil Rights Movement’s

effect on queer rights movements in the US—by laying the groundwork of oppressed groups depicting themselves as minorities, other marginalized groups were able to fight for rights they were deprived from as minorities as well.

Black Southerners did not just inspire other movements—they were actively part of them. The Student Non-Violent Coordinating Committee (SNCC) formed in North Carolina aimed to give younger African Americans a voice in the Civil Rights Movement. It was also a pillar of the anti-war movement that protested the Vietnam War. Black Southerners were also integral members in the struggle for bodily autonomy. Many Southern women were signees to “We Remember,” a document highlighting Black support for reproductive

SUMMER 2020 // COLUMBIA POLITICAL REVIEW

DOMESTIC POLITICS DOMESTIC POLITICS

justice. Blaming the South is a form the way the party had spent years tak- as most likely to help them hold on to of erasure that aligns Black progres- ing them for granted. rights they fought for centuries to obsivists with the oppressive forces they tain, the candidate that stood beside themselves fought against.

OUR BEST DAYS STILL LIE AHEAD America’s first Black president and Much of the rhetoric that surJoe Biden is not the ideal candi- sent a message that he was the ally of rounds Biden’s Black support from date for Black America. He has not the Black community, the candidate the left has not helped their chanc- demonstrated a concern with issues that has not made them feel stupid, es in swaying Black voters toward that affect Black people the way other and most importantly, the candidate more progressive candidates. Mayor candidates have. In his endorsement they know. He is not a risk.

Bill de Blasio drew ire after stating of Senator Bernie Sanders, Civil To suggest that the Southern in an interview that Biden was only Rights Activist Reverend Jesse Jack- Black vote is based solely on sentidoing well with Black voters because son described the Black community’s mentality the way the white left does, they had not looked at him as a can- need for a radical candidate, stating however, would be a gross misunderdidate past his connection to Barack “with the exception of Native Ameri- standing. Black voters are pragmatic Obama. Many of these black voters cans, African Americans are the peo- and calculating. Like any other group, that he criticized felt as though he ple who are most behind socially and they vote in what they believe to be was calling them stutheir best interest and pid, suggesting they “To suggest that the Southern Black vote is their pragmatic politicould not think for cal mindset has historbased solely on sentimentality the way the themselves and make ically yielded results. I white left does, however, would be a gross informed decisions. will not be the person misundertanding. Black voters are pragmatBlack voters have been to denigrate and bully ic and calculating.” made to feel that way elders who have lived a lot recently. In the through Jim Crow segearlier days of the election cycle, it economically in the United States regation and mass incarceration for was made clear that Tom Steyer’s idea and our needs are not moderate.” The voting for the candidate they feel will of reaching out to Black voters was candidate for Black America should safeguard the rights they fought so valdancing to “Back That A— Up” on be the candidate that understands iantly to gain. However, I do believe stage with a local rapper while de Bla- how systemic wealth inequality has it is time that pragmatism ceases to sio penciled in visits to Black church- harmed Black communities for cen- be the guiding principle of the Black es. The strategy to win the Black vote turies, the candidate that understands vote. It is time for Black America to as shown by Democratic candidates how racial health disparities are only demand candidates that work for us has been to attend a service at a Black compounded by difficulty accessing and work for our vote. We do not church, prove literacy in rap or hip- medical care, and the candidate who need to accept candidates who panhop, eat fried chicken, and maybe advocates the systematic overhaul of der during election cycles and then reference a previous interaction with a society based in the devaluing of abandon our communities until the Reverend Al Sharpton. This behavior Black lives and dehumanization of next, nor must we accept candidates was criticized by Cory Booker on the Black people. that have done harm to our commudebate stage, asserting that Black peoThat is not Joe Biden. He has nities for decades but send messages ple in America are tired of the Demo- helped construct the prison-indus- of allyship and support. Though Joe cratic Party only ever showing up for trial complex, lied about involve- Biden has already become the de facthem or expressing concern for Black ment in the Civil Rights Movement, to nominee for the Democratic parissues when they need something. rubbed elbows with segregationists, ty, there will be other elections and Even Tom Perez, the chairman of the and his campaign has recently been other candidates that push moderate Democratic National Committee, shaken by sexual assault allegations policies while preaching allyship. Our felt it necessary to issue somewhat of against him. Despite this, he is the needs are not moderate; our politics an apology to Black Americans for candidate that many Black voters see should not be either.

16

DOMESTIC POLITICS

COLUMBIA POLITICAL REVIEW // SUMMER 2020

UNDOCUMENTED IMMIGRANTS CAN GET COVID-19, BUT THEY WON’T GET CARES RELIEF Glorimar Marquez // Columbia School of General Studies ’22 April 14, 2020

O

n March 27, President can citizen in need of groceries, med- jobs not be done remotely, but they Donald Trump signed ication, and means of paying rent. are often underpaid in the first place. into law the Corona- Like millions of people in this crisis, This means that this particular comvirus Aid, Relief, and their ability to do so has been thwart- munity’s rainy day fund—if it exists Economic Security ed, especially because many of the at all—is small. While American citi(CARES) Act. In essence, this $2 tril- jobs they hold are in hard-hit indus- zens can rely on unemployment benlion deal offers relief to the healthcare tries such as service, hospitality, and efits in addition to assistance from system and many businesses, as well tourism. There is no data about how the CARES package, undocumented as cash payments to individuals. In a many undocumented cooks, dish- immigrants have no safety net, and time of rampant unemployment and washers, waiters, and janitors have yet their day-to-day needs remain the economic stagnation resulting from lost their jobs thus far. All we have are same. the COVID-19 crisis, these cash pay- anecdotes. Many of my undocumentThe skepticism towards including ments offer solace to this community in an ecoindividuals who, as of nomic relief package is unthis moment, are out of derstandable; undocument“COVID-19 and its crippling work indefinitely and ed immigrants broke the law economic consequences are likely struggling to pay by coming to the United INDIFFERENT to immigration status. “ rent and feed their famStates illegally or overstayilies. In order to qualify ing their visas. However, for the direct payment, COVID-19 and its crippling however, the beneficiary is required ed friends have been out of work for economic consequences are indifferto have a Social Security number. weeks. One of them is a bartender at ent to immigration status. The effect Therefore, for the millions of undoc- a nightclub that was ordered to close of excluding undocumented workers umented workers in America, there in the middle of March. Another is a from the CARES Act will not be limwill be no such relief. babysitter whose job was suspended ited to individuals; the grocery stores, Undocumented immigrants are in an attempt to increase self-isolation pharmacies, and landlords they supno different from the average Ameri- measures. Not only can these hourly port as active participants of the 17

SUMMER 2020 // COLUMBIA POLITICAL REVIEW economy will also be shut out of the trickling benefits of a financial boost.

Arguments against including undocumented immigrants in the CARES Act may stem from the fact that they do not pay taxes or that the I.R.S. does not have the information necessary to send direct deposits as needed. However, since 1996, individuals that do not have a Social Security number have been able to pay taxes using an Individual Tax Identification Number. Since then, the Internal Revenue Service has received billions of dollars in tax revenue from I.T.I.N., the vast majority coming from undocumented immigrants. The I.R.S. reported receiving $13.7 billion in taxes from people filing with an I.T.I.N. in 2015 alone.

Therefore, if taxpaying is the key to government assistance in this unprecedented crisis, plenty of undocumented immigrants have paid their

dues. Moreover, the cash that will be sent to Americans will be assigned according to I.R.S. data. Recipients do not have to sign up for the benefit because the I.R.S. already has their income and bank account information.

It is important to realize that including taxpayers with an I.T.I.N. in the CARES Act would not have required any extra steps or added more strain on the system. As with people with Social Security numbers, the I.R.S. already has the information it needs to achieve these efforts.

The exclusion of undocumented workers from this bill is immoral and out of touch. Regardless of your position on the immigration debate, the reality is that there are millions of undocumented immigrants in this country. They work, pay taxes, support big and small businesses, and— like the rest of the people in the country who have lost their jobs—face an

DOMESTIC POLITICS DOMESTIC POLITICS

uncertain economic future. In the event that this crisis requires a second relief package, lawmakers should bear in mind that excluding undocumented immigrants will not make them disappear. Indeed, such exclusion affects not only these individuals but also the people and businesses around them. This is not the time to make a statement about a vulnerable community, but an opportunity to observe our system’s shortcomings.

Denying undocumented immigrants options to regulate their status, thereby excluding them when they desperately need help, is one such shortcoming. Undocumented immigrants are our employees, patrons, friends, and neighbors and should be treated as such. The first step toward redressing these shortcomings is to ensure undocumented immigrants are included in future relief packages.

> “In the event that this crisis requires a second relief package, lawmakers should bear in mind that EXCLUDING undocumented immigrants WILL NOT MAKE THEM DISAPPEAR.“

The signing of the CARES Act on March 27, 2020. Photo by Shealah Craighead.

18

> With the nation buzzing about new coronavirus stimulus payments—$1200 for every adult American—Daniel Kang and Oliver Niu discuss universal direct payments as a long-term welfare strategy.

DOES ONE CHECK FIT ALL? DEBATING UNIVERSAL BASIC INCOME

Photo by 17 Skidmore.

Gage

SUMMER 2020 // COLUMBIA POLITICAL REVIEW

DOMESTIC POLITICS DOMESTIC POLITICS

A SIMPLE SOLUTION TO A COMPLEX PROBLEM Oliver Niu // Columbia College ’23 April 8, 2020

I

n order to understand why a of impoverished white people out of ing would be bypassed. Economically, universal basic income is nec- poverty, while only doing the same redistributing taxpayer money directessary, we must acknowledge for 35 percent of poor people of col- ly would encourage greater consumpthe problems of our current or. tion when placed in the hands of system. Currently, even as These two barriers result in the low-income people, and a real montaxpayers pour billions into funding inability to access for welfare for etary safety net would incentivize the welfare system, 78 percent of millions of people, an effect that has more small business creation. AddiU.S. workers report living paycheck been magnified over time. In 1979, tionally, a $12,000 U.B.I., although to paycheck, with poverty hovering the Temporary Assistance for Needy definitely not a comfortable amount around 16 percent. on which to live, would Such an extreme lack by definition raise most of economic security for families above the pov“Such a massive increase in disposable millions of Americans erty line. Ultimately, any income would boost trade, tourism, and stems from two issues inform of U.B.I. provides consumption, three factors that have herent to the welfare sysa marked improvement pulled millions of people across the globe tem. First, most welfare to a situation in which a out of poverty throughout history.” is distributed not by the quarter of people living federal government, but in poverty can’t access by states, through federal funding in Families program, targeted at poor any financial assistance from their the form of block grants, which don’t families with children, aided an av- government. place restrictions on how the money erage of 82 out of 100 families with Most criticisms of U.B.I. revolve is spent. Unfortunately, all too often children in poverty. But in 2018, the around the cost of the proposal. state governments don’t view welfare program only helped 22 out of 100 Luckily, empirical studies depict a as a priority, diverting these funds families, a 60 percent drop. The issue less scary outcome than U.B.I.’s critaway from their intended programs. is not limited to TANF. Today, over a ics are willing to admit, regardless Second, even in states with quarter of people living in poverty do of whether the program was fundwell-funded welfare programs, those not have access to a social safety net. ed through debt or taxes. Under a applying for welfare face months or Giving everyone in the United debt-financed U.B.I. plan, a study by even years of navigating through a States a basic income would solve the Roosevelt Institute predicts that mess of bureaucracy. This red tape these problems. Insofar as almost all the U.B.I. would stimulate the econespecially disadvantages non-English U.B.I. proposals are based on the omy to permanently grow by around speakers and minority groups. In- federal government giving direct 13 percent, more than allowing the deed, a recent study found that social payments to every citizen, states that U.S. government to pay off the debt safety net programs lifted 44 percent would otherwise reduce welfare fund- initially incurred. In models in which 20

DOMESTIC POLITICS

COLUMBIA POLITICAL REVIEW // SUMMER 2020

U.B.I. was funded by raising marginal tax rates, the net cost would only be $539 billion, around 3 percent of the current U.S. G.D.P. and only one-sixth of the oft-mentioned $3.4 trillion cost. Additionally, the Roosevelt study concludes that because lower-income families have a higher propensity for consumption, the redistribution of income in their favor would result in the economy growing by 2.62 percent and the labor force expanding by 1.1 million people. resulting in higher future government revenue.

A U.B.I. in America would not only have positive effects domestically; millions of Americans seeing their incomes increase would have a mon-

umental ripple effect on the world economy. For a middle class family of four, a U.B.I. plan that provided $12,000 for each adult and $3,000 for each child would generate an additional $30,000 in income. Such a massive increase in disposable income would boost trade, tourism, and consumption, three factors that have pulled millions of people across the globe out of poverty throughout history.

The poverty reduction and economic stimulus caused by a U.B.I. would also lead to positive outcomes for democratic society. A Sociology Quarterly study finds that the stigma associated with receiving welfare makes recipients feel that they are

not full members of society. This stigma is implicated in voting patterns, as receiving means-tested welfare is correlated with a 62 percent decrease in voter turnout, even after controlling for confounding variables like income, an effect not seen with universal programs. The logic behind this effect is simple. When everyone receives the same basic payment, no one feels like a “burden” on society.

While the implementation of a U.B.I. would represent a radical shift in the way the United States treats poverty, our current solution simply leaves far too many people falling through the cracks, causing irreparable psychological and physical damage to a large portion of our popu-

A UBI MIGHT NOT BE THE ANSWER WE’RE LOOKING FOR Daniel Kang // Columbia College ’23 April 8, 2020

I

n 1967, a massive oil field— North America’s largest at the time—was discovered at Prudhoe Bay in Alaska. Alaska’s state government began raking in hundreds of millions of dollars in revenue, and state lawmakers pledged this money to a “Permanent Fund Dividend” program: a universal payment system where all state citizens would receive monthly checks with no questions asked. Alaska had created the United States’ first universal basic income program.

21

Now, with former presidential candidate Andrew Yang’s signature “Freedom Dividend” proposal making waves and the prospect of direct payments from the federal government to offset the financial impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, U.B.I. is freshly imprinted onto the national consciousness. For many, U.B.I. has started to inspire national hope for a solution to the United States’ welfare woes. But make no mistake: The reality of U.B.I. lies not in its utopian vision but instead in the harmful

trade-offs it makes for those it seeks to protect.

The foremost problem with U.B.I. is its cost. In 2016, political scientists Charles Murray and Andy Stern estimated the cost of a national basic income program to range between $1.8 to $2.8 trillion annually. In comparison, the federal government spent $910 billion on Social Security programs in 2016. Unless Americans stumble upon a G.D.P.-dwarfing reservoir of oil, members of Congress will be hard-pressed to justify a mas-

SUMMER 2020 // COLUMBIA POLITICAL REVIEW

sive uptick in spending without trimming off some fat.

Meanwhile, a Republican-controlled federal government could use U.B.I. appropriations as an excuse to dismantle existing entitlement programs. Dating back to the Clinton Administration’s welfare reforms in the 1990s, Republicans in Congress have been notorious for their attempts to cut benefits and put up barriers for Americans attempting to access social services. In the quest to find money for a U.B.I., it would be all too easy for this same group of lawmakers to attack all the federal entitlement programs upon which millions of Americans depend.

Existing federal entitlement programs are tried and tested, and they produce positive results. For example, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, which supplements household food budgets, brought 3.4 million people out of poverty in 2017. These programs certainly have flaws; some, including SNAP, have been criticized for inadequacies across varied regions. But a recent Stony Brook University study modeled versions of a U.S. economy transitioning from transfer programs to a U.B.I., finding that non-college educated households would experience welfare losses ranging between 7.7 and 10.9 percent. Other studies find similarly bleak outcomes. In a post-U.B.I. America, functioning but flawed aid programs such as SNAP are nonexistent and people are left with decreased purchasing power.

There would likely be another downside to the implementation of a U.B.I. program: new taxes. Such an unprecedented federal spending increase would likely be financed by tax

revenue, including in Andrew Yang’s plan, which proposes financing the program through a new value added tax (V.A.T.). A V.A.T. is a type of con-

DOMESTIC POLITICS DOMESTIC POLITICS

fice. Former Governor Bill Walker slashed the “Permanent Fund Dividend” amount in 2016 from $2,072 to $1,022, while his successor Mike

“Regardless, a UBI program will always be shaped by swinging partisan political dynamics, because welfare and tax policy are political problems, not simply economic ones.” sumption tax applied at each stage of the supply chain, raising the price of the final good for consumers. While low-income households would be the first to benefit from U.B.I. payments, they would also be the first to bear the burden of a V.A.T. since low-income households delegate greater shares of their incomes to consumption than higher income households (which save at higher rates for demographic-related reasons). The effect on purchasing power washes out for the most vulnerable and needy Americans. The majority of U.B.I. plans are also vague when it comes to supporting an increase in consumption tax, income tax, taxes on the middle class, or taxes on the upper class.

Regardless, a U.B.I. program will always be shaped by swinging partisan political dynamics, because welfare and tax policy are political problems, not simply economic ones. Alaska shows how, even after guaranteeing financing, a U.B.I. remains vulnerable to mere shuffles of political of-

Dunleavy increased the dividend to $1,606 in 2019. Appropriations for a federal U.B.I. program would be forever at the whim of a gridlocked and polarized Congress, whose makeup changes every two years—if the program even managed to pass in the first place.

Ultimately, it is easier for advocates of fiscal restraint to slash a universal check within one program than it would be to cripple an entire network of social services. For this reason, a single-program U.B.I. would be significantly less stable than the diverse array of programs used today. Even if U.B.I. payments were to bring some tangible benefits to the average worker, the considerable risks involved in its implementation could leave millions of Americans dependent on a politically unstable and therefore insufficient payment program.

Yet assume these practical challenges have already been solved. Proponents of U.B.I. paint a dreamy fan22

DOMESTIC POLITICS

COLUMBIA POLITICAL REVIEW // SUMMER 2020

tasy in which workers leverage greater bargaining power, receive higher wages without worrying about job security, and lead more dignified lives as a result. However, this notion of greater bargaining power falsely assumes that U.B.I. payments will provide a safety net sturdy enough to meet the needs of those workers who do end up losing their jobs.

A U.B.I. is unlikely to provide sufficient financial support, especially given the failure of some U.B.I. proposals to meet bottom-line rent and food expenses. The cost of living in

the U.S. grows higher every year, and a U.B.I. would need to keep up to provide a functional safety net. The Economic Policy Institute found that the average cost of living in 2015 was $65,000 a year for a family of two parents and two children. A Yangstyle U.B.I. covering $24,000 for the average low-income nuclear family would simply fail to meet this threshold.

There are of course flaws within the patchwork welfare system that exists today. There are shortcomings in expenses coverage. There is often

a crushing level of bureaucratic inefficiency. As a part of reform efforts, minimum eligibility requirements for many social programs should be lowered to improve access. More demographic data should be collected on the local level to better meet region-specific needs. Throwing out existing structures instead of improving them could set the country back by years. Betting on an untested, radical, and deceptively simple program could set progress back by decades, and create a reality much worse than the one we live in now.

Universal Basic INcome By the Numbers $539 billion

Net Cost according to Conservative estimates, around 3 percent of the current U.S. G.D.P.

13 percent

permanent Economic growth Stimulated

by U.B.I. Under a Debt-Financed Plan

$30,000

Additional Income generated for a middle class family of four, based off of a U.B.I. plan that provided $12,000 for each adult and $3,000 for each child

23

$1.8 to $2.8 trillion

Annual Cost According to Generous estimates; In comparison, the federal government spent $910 billion on Social Security programs in 2016

7.7 to 10.9 percent

welfare losses for non-college educated households as a result of transitions from existing Programs to U.B.I.

$65,000

Current annual living costs for a family of Four; Andrew Yang’s proposed $24,000 Fails to Cover This cost

SUMMER 2020 // COLUMBIA POLITICAL REVIEW

DOMESTIC POLITICS INTERNATIONAL POLITICS

W.H.O. IS IN CHARGE? THE NEGLECT OF LEADERSHIP BY THE WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION Zachary Becker // Columbia College ’22 April 27, 2020

T

he World Health Organization cites accountability and transparency as necessary conditions for the efficacy of a coordinated response to global health concerns. But when the W.H.O.’s independence is questioned and W.H.O. administrators are suspected of allegiance to certain state actors, the responsibility of compiling credible data and allocating resources efficiently goes unattended. Skepticism and distrust of the W.H.O.’s handling of the COVID-19 pandemic has forced intelligence agencies to expand the purview of their operations to fill the void of reliable information and accessible supplies.

Distrust in the autonomy of the W.H.O. arose from accusations that the organization was complicit in China’s misinformation campaign that deceived governments into underestimating the severity of the novel coronavirus. From refraining to

declare a “public health emergency of international concern” until after cases of the virus were confirmed outside China to endorsing the infection statistics released by the Chinese government that were widely believed to be inaccurate, the W.H.O. appeared to many as partial to the agenda from Beijing. Further evidence of this bias includes the W.H.O. succumbing to Chinese pressure to exclude Taiwanese delegations from anti-virus conferences. Although Taiwan is not recognized as a United Nations member state, largely due to the objection of China, Taiwan was among the first locales outside of China to which the virus spread. Concern for an escalation of infections in Taiwan would have warranted a conditional invitation from the W.H.O. to participate in the global COVID-19 response for nearly any other state.

In light of bias and misinformation from the W.H.O., countries affected by the COVID-19 pandemic

have been forced to rely on their own intelligence communities for accurate information.

For example, the Central Intelligence Agency expanded its role after the W.H.O. failed to address intelligence that would have exposed China’s efforts to diminish the perceived scale of the virus. In February, the C.I.A. alerted officials of statistics that underreported the number of confirmed cases in China. But international institutions neglected to act on this new information for fears of violating Chinese sovereignty; member states’ participation in these institutions hinges on the distinction between cooperation and sovereignty.

As such, the C.I.A. has had to pursue the task of finding accurate data without the assistance of an international coalition.

Even though the C.I.A. is among the most powerful intelligence agencies in the world, the W.H.O.’s crisis of credibility has been extremely 24

INTERNATIONAL POLITICS

COLUMBIA POLITICAL REVIEW // SUMMER 2020

The World Health Organization’s headquarters in Geneva. Photo by Thorkild Tylleskar.

consequential. Intervention from foreign governments into seemingly non-political matters relating to a global pandemic threatens collaboration and mutual security. Intelligence organizations must revert to clandestine operations when neither global institutions nor diplomatic partners act in good faith: it is speculated that both the C.I.A. and MI6 have begun considering using intelligence agents and clandestine assets to gather reliable information on outbreaks in other countries. Such organizations are also discussing coordination with technology companies to assist in intercepting communications and sur25

veilling sites critical to identifying the scale of another country’s response to the virus that may be veiled by distorted reports.

The distrust of foreign governments created by the W.H.O.’s vacuum of accountability contributes to even greater barriers that obstruct countries’ responses to the coronavirus. Because deception attempts have already been identified by intelligence agencies, countries are more inclined to be skeptical of information reported by other governments that cannot be verified by the W.H.O. and the international community. This is counterproductive to the goal of a collab-

orative response to an international emergency. Countries are scrambling for essential resources like ventilators and personal protective equipment.

Without accurate assessments of infection rates, though, suspicion of malintent leaves countries hesitant to commit scarce resources that sacrificed global health through deceptive reporting. Escalating tensions between Beijing and Washington have already yielded ideological propaganda directed against each other. The threat to an effectively coordinated response is no longer solely sourced in deceit; an existential danger to an unified front against COVID-19 ex-

SUMMER 2020 // COLUMBIA POLITICAL REVIEW ists from intentional affronts to the legitimacy of entire governments.

Espionage is not only employed to acquire an authentic assessment of the infection rate abroad. Espionage is used as a defensive measure to rebuff implications that discredit a government’s approach to mitigating the virus.

Diplomatic fractures following the W.H.O.’s failure to ensure member states were acting in good faith when sharing information related to the COVID-19 pandemic do not just delay relief from the health crisis; suspicion also fuels political delegitimization. While suspicions of Moscow underreporting the extent of coronavirus exposure amongst Russians is concerning, the exploitation of the pandemic in pursuit of election interference is even more dangerous.

There is a historical precedent for this, in that Soviet-era Russia strategically abused the fear and anxiety associated with a crisis in order to seed discord and weaken ideological enemies. The Soviet K.G.B. had already proven effective the tactic of misinformation campaigns during the H.I.V. epidemic. And during the height of the Cold War, the K.G.B. capitalized on anti-Semitism and racial conflicts to cultivate domestic hostilities and distract from foreign adversaries. S.V.R., the Russian intelligence agency equivalent to the K.G.B., is believed to have already begun sowing strife through social media with the intent of influencing voter preference in the November elections. The proximity of the pandemic to the culmination of the election cycle, the emotional uncertainty that stokes conspiracies of biological warfare, and wariness of government transparency present a fertile environment for breeding po-

litical acrimony.

Even when there is no malevolent intent, intelligence organizations have found novel roles typically outside their purview.

Because countries have reason to lack confidence in the W.H.O. to equitably and justly prioritize resource allocation, countries have assumed the responsibility of resource procurement. While most Western countries have delegated the task to health ministries and agencies, Israeli intelligence officers in the Mossad have sought medical supplies to support the country’s Coronavirus response.

In the absence of an impartial centralized body, countries have become more self-reliant and have taken more care of prioritizing their individual interests. The failures of the W.H.O. have impelled intelligence agencies to expand their functions that include advances against misinformation and ineptitude for impartiality.

The United States has already

DOMESTIC POLITICS INTERNATIONAL POLITICS

about the coronavirus and for its misreported data about the spread of the virus. While President Trump’s decision to halt funds serves a punitive purpose, a more effective approach by the United States could both penalize the W.H.O. and reform the W.H.O.’s conduct. Withholding American funding for the W.H.O. whilst providing provisions that must be met prior to reinstating such funding would allow the United States to restore the W.H.O.’s collaborative spirit. The United States National Institutes of Health provides over 70% of W.H.O. funding. The threat of such a large sum being withheld would provide a significant incentive for the W.H.O. to enact objective, fair policy rather than give preference to the interests of China over the shared interests of the international community.

Whether the W.H.O.’s decision to affirm China’s underreporting originated in preference or complacency, the appearance of bias has rendered the W.H.O. incapable of marshaling

“Diplomatic fractures following the W.H.O.’s failure to ensure member states were acting in good faith when sharing information related to the COVID-19 pandemic do not just delay relief from the health crisis; suspicion also fuels political Delegitimization.” begun to separate itself from the international response to COVID-19.

President Trump rescinded American funding for the W.H.O. because the organization failed to hold China accountable for its delayed notification

cooperation. Collectively turning inward to intelligence organizations designed to prioritize national security over international cooperation may worsen the danger of a virus that does not respect national borders—it 26

INTERNATIONAL POLITICS

COLUMBIA POLITICAL REVIEW // SUMMER 2020

THE ETHIOPIAN GOVERNMENT’S LATEST COMMUNICATIONS SHUTDOWN DERAILS THE COUNTRY’S TRANSITION INTO DEMOCRACY Roshan Setlur // Columbia College ’23 April 13, 2020

A

s Ethiopia experiences the shock of the COVID-19 pandemic during a time of civil unrest, an unendurable amount of pressure has been placed on the country’s healthcare system.

Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed has responded to this crisis by declaring a national state of emergency, delaying

on January 7 in the Kellem Welega, West Welega, and the Horo Guduru Welega zones of Oromia, all notably under federal military control. This shutdown has been deemed a violation of international law by blocking the essential exchange of information during the global effort to curtail the spread of COVID-19. The Ethiopian government has infringed upon Article 19 of the 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the U.N.-sponsored treaty that protects the right to freedom of expres“The shutdown is a draconian extension of the sion and access to information. decades-long armed conflict between the Oromo The shutdown is a draconian exLiberation Front and the Ethiopian government.” tension of the decades-long armed conflict between the Oromo Liberation Front and the Ethiopian government, occurring against the backdrop the government’s transition into a de- telephone lines in western Oromia. of the nation’s transition into democmocracy. Ethiopia’s lockdown has not Under the pretense of security con- racy. In order for Ethiopia to become only postponed the national election cerns, the shutdown was put in place fully democratic, the nation must, 27

scheduled for August, but has also exacerbated the long-standing political tension in Oromia, the nation’s largest state.

On March 27, 2020, the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights released a statement highlighting its concerns about the Ethiopian government’s widespread shutdown of internet access and

SUMMER 2020 // COLUMBIA POLITICAL REVIEW as a first step, immediately lift the blockage of telecommunications and the internet in Oromia. Depriving Oromian citizens of a platform that promotes freedom of speech, peaceful assembly, and government accountability, denies them the opportunity of political self-determination. The access to digital knowledge is one of the most important features of a democratic society.

Ethiopia is a multifactional nascent democracy that has experienced deep interethnic conflict and multiple waves of regime change over the past fifty years. In 1974, the Ethiopian Empire, dating back to the year 1270, was overthrown by the Derg, a Soviet-backed, communist military government. The provisional military junta of the Derg, led by Mengistu Haile Mariam, transitioned into the short-lived, socialist People’s Demo-

cratic Republic of Ethiopia until the regime was toppled by the Ethiopian People’s Revolutionary Democratic Front (E.P.R.D.F.) in 1991.

The E.P.R.D.F. consists of four ethnofederalist political parties: the Tigray People’s Liberation Front, the Amhara Democratic Party, the Oromo Democratic Party, and the Southern Ethiopian People’s Democratic Movement. These factions dominated Ethiopian politics from 1991 until 2019 when Prime Minister Ahmed unified all but the Tigray Front into the ruling Prosperity Party.

During Ethiopia’s three-decadeslong transition into democracy, the government has been unceasingly threatened by regional insurrection and has retaliated with political repression. The Oromia region has disproportionately borne the brunt of this tension.

DOMESTIC POLITICS INTERNATIONAL POLITICS

Oromia, one of the nine regional states, is the homeland of the Cushitic Oromo people, Ethiopia’s predominantly Muslim and largest ethnic group. The modern conflict in Oromia has been a resistance to the centuries of cultural and political dominance by the Amhara ethnic group.

The Oromian insurrection began in 1966 when Tadesse Birru, the leader of the Oromian nationalist organization known as the Mecha and Tulama Self-Help Association, publically decried the “destruction” of Oromian culture by the Amhara. Fearing the potential of an Oromian separatist movement, the former Emperor Haile Selassie sentenced Birru to life in prison. Birru’s imprisonment added fuel to the Oromian cause and resulted in the formation of the Oromo Liberation Front (O.L.F.) in 1973.

The armed separatists of the O.L.F.

Oromo Liberation Army rebels in February 2006. Photo by Jonathan Alpeyrie.

28

INTERNATIONAL POLITICS

COLUMBIA POLITICAL REVIEW // SUMMER 2020

have contributed to the ebb and flow of violence in Oromia over the past fifty years.

When Abiy Ahmed, a young reformer from Oromia, became the prime minister of Ethiopia in 2018, he brought hope for the end of the interethnic conflict. He ran on a platform of universal democracy and the rectification of the Oromo people’s marginalization. In 2019, Ahmed was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for ending the decades-long standoff with the neighboring nation Eritrea, disarming the O.L.F.’s armed-wing: the Oromo Liberation Army (O.L.A.), and lifting a ban on dissenting political groups, previously labeled as terrorist organizations.

Despite his reforms, Ahmed is often contended to be an inconsistent supporter of democratic values through his violent repression of political dissent.

The chief of the O.L.F., Dawud

Ibsa, asserts that despite Ahmed’s assurances, there has been large-scale political repression in Oromia. The Ethiopian government denies the Oromia Support Group’s allegations that 64 extra-judicial killings and 1,400 instances of arbitrary detention took place last year. Former members of the O.L.A. have accused Ahmed of retracting his promises to the Oromo people, and the government, in turn, has accused the O.L.A. of violating their commitment to disarmament.

In 2019, the fragile peace between the government and the O.L.A. shattered when the armed separatists completely broke off from the O.L.F. and began killing convoys of the Ethiopian army. Consequently, the government has declared a state of emergency and imposed martial law in the Oromian zones of Welega and Guji.

At a time when accurate information about COVID-19 is a matter of life or death, it is imperative that

Oromo Liberation Army soldiers in prayer. Photo by Jonathan Alpeyrie.

29

the Oromian citizens be granted their right to unfettered access to telecommunication and the internet. Furthermore, access to digital networks is essential for any nation’s transition into democracy; it creates channels for collective political participation and the creation of an educated voter base.

In spite of its tenuous nature, the democratic project in Ethiopia is certainly alive. The postponement of the much-awaited national election, promised to be Ethiopia’s first free and fair, will exacerbate the tense political climate in Oromia. Yet, one comforting prospect from the postponement is that during this interim period, the Ethiopian government can proactively broker peace with the Oromian rebels to establish civil tranquility. For now, the international community should support the Oromian citizens’ right to participate in the democratic process.

SUMMER 2020 // COLUMBIA POLITICAL REVIEW

DOMESTIC POLITICS INTERNATIONAL POLITICS

ORGANIZATION OF AMERICAN STATES OR MINISTRY OF AMERICAN COLONIES? Christian Pichardo // Columbia College ’22 April 20, 2020

The following is excerpted from a twenty-five-page long-form web article, available in full on our website at cpreview.org.

O

n January 17th of this year, Secretary of State and former C.I.A. director Mike Pompeo delivered a speech to the Organization of American States, hailing the 72-year-old intergovernmental body’s “Multilateralism That Works.”

After thanking the organization’s leadership and the United States ambassador to the body, Pompeo took a moment to recognize the O.A.S.’s roots in American political history: “I’m reminded as I stand in front of this beautiful array of people and in this gorgeous place—I’m reminded that it was an American Secretary of State, a man named James Blaine, who first advocated for a closer union of the American states

in the late 19th century. It was his vision that would become this institution, the O.A.S., in 1948.”

Pompeo then proceeded without discussing who James Blaine was or what his vision for “a closer union of the American states” actually entailed. Examining this legacy is vital not only for understanding the purpose of the O.A.S., but also for placing the Organization in the broader context of U.S. foreign policy.

Before serving as Secretary of State under three different presidents, James Blaine was also a member of the United States Senate for five years, Speaker of the House for six years, a three-time presidential candidate, and one of the founders of the modern Republican Party. His views on the world and the role of the United States are captured in a statement he made at the end of the 19th century: “I think there are only three places that are of value enough to be tak-

en… One is Hawaii and the others are Cuba and Porto Rico [sic].

Cuba and Porto Rico are not now imminent and will not be for a generation. Hawaii may come up for decision at an unexpected hour and I hope we shall be prepared to decide it in the affirmative.”

– James Blaine, 1891 The Census Bureau announced the “closing of the frontier” in 1890, and the desire for continued territorial and economic expansion turned the eyes of the U.S. from the West toward the South. James Blaine’s vision for the conquest of these nations, rich in natural resources and cheap labor to exploit, represented the foundation of a new era of occupation and dispossession. * * * * * This is the spirit of the O.A.S. which Mike Pompeo wistfully recalls.

His summary of the O.A.S.’s history 30

INTERNATIONAL POLITICS

COLUMBIA POLITICAL REVIEW // SUMMER 2020

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo (left) and O.A.S. Secretary General Luis Almagro (right). Photo by Freddie Everett.

continues: “But sadly, the O.A.S. drifted in the 1970s and 1980s. Military dictatorships in our hemisphere colluded to prevent concerted action to support freedom. Some Latin American countries were still in the thrall to leftist ideas that produced repression for their own kind at home and stagnation in this building. And even in the early part of this century, with the O.A.S., many nations were more concerned with building consensus with authoritarians than actually solving problems.”

Pompeo’s assertions run contrary to the reality of U.S. foreign policy during this time. The 1970s and 1980s coincided with what some consider to be the darkest years of United States involvement in Latin American 31

affairs. Operation Condor, the Contra War, and the Salvadoran Civil War represent some of the most gruesome examples of the United States-sponsored violence that took place during this time period. Although Pompeo seems to regret the “collusion” of “military dictatorships” as an obstacle to “freedom”, he also seems to forget that the very institution he used to direct, the C.I.A., was instrumental in bringing most of those dictatorships into power and the government which he currently represents eagerly collaborated with these dictatorships as a matter of “regional security”— thwarting dangerous “leftist ideas”, by force if necessary.

of conflict between the United States and the left throughout Latin America. Starting with the election of Hugo Chávez as President of Venezuela in 1998, the left would soon take power through elections in Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay, Bolivia, Ecuador, Chile, Nicaragua, Peru, Haiti, Honduras, and Paraguay, presenting a major threat to the neoliberal “Washington Consensus” that had been established in the 1990s.

In 2002, the Bush administration supported an attempted coup against the democratically-elected government of Hugo Chávez in Venezuela.

The officials implicated were mostly familiar faces. According to The Guardian’s reporting on the coup, “all * * * * * of [them] owe their careers to servThe Pink Tide of the 2000s ing in the dirty wars under President would usher in yet another period Reagan.” Elliot Abrams was implicat-

SUMMER 2020 // COLUMBIA POLITICAL REVIEW ed once more, alongside Otto Reich, who had reported directly to Oliver North while serving under the Reagan administration and had been appointed U.S. ambassador to Venezuela in 1986. Abrams himself was the “crucial figure around the coup” and had been serving as “senior director of the National Security Council for ‘democracy, human rights and international operations’.” U.S. ambassador to the UN John Negroponte was also implicated in the coup. Negroponte, “was Reagan’s ambassador to Honduras from 1981 to 1985 when a U.S.-trained death squad, Battalion 3-16, tortured and murdered scores of activists.” The coup against Chávez would ultimately fail as his supporters in the streets and in the military successfully retook the Presidential Palace, but it set the stage for wider conflict over the future of the hemisphere and contributed to the further radicalization of the Bolivarian left.

As other left-wing governments set out to chart an alternative path for regional integration, free from dependency on the United States and its interests, they also came into conflict with Washington. One such example came in 2005, when a bloc of leftwing Latin American governments including Chavez as well as Presidents Evo Morales of Bolivia, Lula da Silva of Brazil, and Nestor Kirchner of Argentina defeated the Free Trade Area of the Americas, a major trade initiative of the Bush administration which would have created the largest free trade area in the world. Morales called the F.T.A.A. “an agreement to legalize the colonization of the Americas.”

It was not long before another Latin American government fell into Washington’s crosshairs. In 2009,

the government of Manuel Zelaya in Honduras was toppled by the military. According to a report by The Intercept, President Obama initially stated “the coup was not legal” and his administration pledged to “cut off contact with those who have conducted the coup.” However, the administration soon faced immense pressure to support Zelaya’s overthrow: “A retired U.S. military intelligence officer, who helped with the lobbying and the Honduran colonels’

DOMESTIC POLITICS INTERNATIONAL POLITICS

ing of Zelaya was “not a ‘military’ coup.” During the process of negotiating new elections, U.S. officials blocked an O.A.S. resolution calling for Zelaya’s return to the presidency as a precondition and the subsequent election was won by military-backed, right-wing candidate Porfirio Lobo.

Honduras is now governed by right-wing President Juan Orlando Hernández, who took power through elections marked by fraud and political repression in 2013 and again

“hypocrisy is simply part of the game. The underlying goal is decidedly not to secure the self-determination and well-being of the peoples of the Americas; rather, it is to preserve the ongoing domination of the hemisphere by the United States.” trip, told me on condition of anonymity that the coup supporters debated ‘how to manage the U.S.’ One group, he said, decided to ‘start using the true and trusted method and say, “Here is the bogeyman, it’s communism.” And who are their allies? The Republicans.”

A network of former Cold Warriors and Republicans in Congress loudly encouraged Honduras’s de facto regime and criticized the newly elected Obama administration’s handling of the crisis. Zelaya, so his critics alleged, was simply an acolyte of Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez, public enemy No. 1 of the U.S. in the hemisphere.”

The State Department, under the leadership of Hillary Clinton, resumed contact with the regime and ultimately determined that the oust-

in 2017. The O.A.S. itself called for new elections, but they never came.

Despite this, the United States immediately recognized Hernández’s government. Even though much of the aid supplied to Honduras by the United States is supposed to depend on the government’s compliance with human rights, Hernández’s government has continued to receive tens of millions of dollars in support even as U.S.-trained army units have been implicated in the murders of dozens of anti-coup activists and social leaders, including world-renowned Indigenous leader and environmental activist Berta Cáceres.

According to the United Nations Human Rights Council, “impunity is pervasive, including for human rights violations, as shown by the modest progress made in the prosecution 32

INTERNATIONAL POLITICS

COLUMBIA POLITICAL REVIEW // SUMMER 2020

and trial of members of the security forces for the human rights violations committed in the context of the 2017 elections.” President Hernandez’s brother Tony was, “found guilty on counts of ‘Cocaine Importation Conspiracy’ and ‘Possession of Machine Guns and Destructive Devices’,” and his sister Hilda was, “the subject of a major drug trafficking and money laundering investigation by U.S. authorities.”

Fabio Lobo, son of former President Porfirio Lobo, “received a twenty-four-year sentence in U.S. prison following a guilty plea of ‘conspiring to import cocaine into the United States.’” The coup in Honduras, supported by the United States as a result of the same “anti-Communist” drive which led it to support vicious tyrants in the 20th century, transformed a democratic nation with a center-left government into an authoritarian, right-wing narco-state.

This does not appear to be a problem in Secretary Pompeo’s eyes:

referring to the recession of the Pink Tide in recent years through the election of right-wing governments in Brazil, Argentina, Chile, Peru, and Uruguay. This has been compounded

by Venezuela’s economic and political crisis and the coup against Evo Morales’ government in Bolivia. He employs the same Cold War-era strategy of describing left-wing governments, even if they are democratically elected, as “tyrannical” while right-wing governments, which are often themselves deeply authoritarian and guilty of human rights violations, are described as “freedom-minded.”

One of the most well-known representatives of this “wave of freedom” is Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro, winner of the 2018 election after former President Lula da Silva, who left office in 2010 with record-high approval ratings, was barred from running. Bolsonaro has called Brazil’s aforementioned military dictatorship “glorious” and stated that, “the error of the dictatorship was that it tortured

“In the name of upholding democracy,

the will of the public was subverted

and the will of the United States was imposed.

Innocent people would again

pay with their lives...“ “As I said in Santiago last year, in 2019, people of the Americas have brought a new wave of freedom, freedom-minded governments all throughout our hemisphere.

Only—only in Cuba and Nicaragua and Venezuela do we face stains of tyranny on a great canvas of freedom in our hemisphere.”

Secretary Pompeo appears to be 33

but did not kill.” He has also praised the genocide of Indigenous people, telling the Brazilian Congress in 1998, “the Brazilian cavalry was very incompetent. Competent, yes, was the American cavalry that decimated its Indians in the past and nowadays does not have this problem in their country.” Bolsonaro was also recently linked to the individuals accused of

murdering Afro-Brazilian activist and politician Marielle Franco.

Another friend of Pompeo’s is Chilean President Sebastian Piñera.

As protests spread throughout the country in response to austerity measures and social inequality, Piñera’s government forces have been found responsible for “133 acts of torture and mistreatment, 24 cases of sexual violence and isolated cases of psychological torture, including simulated executions, threats of forced disappearance and threats of rape” as well as “thousands of detentions and injuries” as they violently repress demonstrations.

Secretary Pompeo likely knows all of this. The problem is that to him, just like to so many of his predecessors, hypocrisy is simply part of the game. The underlying goal is decidedly not to secure the self-determination and well-being of the peoples of the Americas; rather, it is to preserve the ongoing domination of the hemisphere by the United States. * * * * * Once more, in the name of upholding democracy, the will of the public was subverted and the will of the United States was imposed. Innocent people would again pay with their lives and the social advances made by marginalized groups would once more be rolled back.

Despite harsh opposition from subsequent presidential administrations in the United States and the subservience of the O.A.S. to these administrations, Pink Tide governments were able to make large strides in reducing poverty, economic inequality, and illiteracy while expanding access to education and healthcare: “as Gini scores bear out,

SUMMER 2020 // COLUMBIA POLITICAL REVIEW

DOMESTIC POLITICS INTERNATIONAL POLITICS

U.S. Marines pose with the captured flag of Nicaraguan revolutionary Augusto Sandino, 1935. Photo from the U.S.M.C. Archives.

Pink Tide countries became the most equal countries in the region, with Venezuela and Argentina leading the way. Even Bolivia, which in 2000 shared with Brazil the distinction of being the region’s least equal country, pushed its coefficient from .6 to .47 during Morales’s first five years in office, a drop few societies have ever experienced.” According to the World Bank, more than 70 million Latin Americans escaped poverty between 2003 and 2011. Now that many Pink Tide governments have been ousted and the longest-serving and most radical government of the group, Venezuela’s, is facing an ongoing economic crisis that has devastated the standard of living of its people, it remains unclear how many of these advances will survive the coming years.

name of democracy and freedom, innocent people are murdered and imprisoned. In the name of self-determination and integration, communities are subjugated and fractured. Then, when the victims of these crimes flee from their homes and arrive at our borders or on our shores, our government does not hesitate to smear them as “illegals.” When the people of Latin America elect governments which recognize and denounce the bloody past and present of American foreign policy, our media will denounce them for succumbing to “populism” and “anti-Americanism.” Perhaps now one can see why Simón Bolívar, known throughout the continent as “El Libertador”—The Liberator— once lamented, “the United States appear to be destined by Providence to plague America with misery in the * * * * * name of liberty.” His prescient words, This is the ongoing legacy of the spoken in 1829, carried more truth United States in Latin America. In the than he knew.

But, as Secretary Pompeo reminds us as he concludes his speech, “It’s up to each of you, it’s up to each of us to protect dignity and rights. It’s up to us to conduct diplomacy as brothers—and sisters—of the citizens that we each represent. It’s up to us—it’s up to us to sustain a multilateralism that truly works.”

If we are to believe him, if we are to believe that each of us does have the responsibility to stand up in the name of dignity and rights, to foster friendship and diplomacy across the continent and the world, perhaps we can take a moment to look in the mirror and understand how the United States has impeded these same goals over the past two-and-ahalf centuries. Until then, and until the United States is able to accept a truly independent Latin America, it is likely that the O.A.S. will remain, as Fidel Castro dubbed it in 1962, the Yankee Ministry of Colonies.

34

COLUMBIA POLITICAL REVIEW