Drake Political Review Spring 2022 | Vol. 8 Issue 2 by Drake Political Review

SPRING 2022 | VOLUME 8 | ISSUE 2

IOWA’S TRANS ATHLETE BAN P. 7

ISSUES IN THE GLOBAL SUPPLY CHAIN P. 32

THE FUTURE OF ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATION P. 26

EDITOR-IN-CHIEF JESSICA COMSTOCK ART DIRECTOR AMANDA O’BRIEN ASSISTANT ART DIRECTOR MADISSEN KERMAN PHOTOGRAPHERS ELLA FIELD GRACE LONG HAYDEN WITTROCK MANAGING EDITOR EMILY NELSON COPY EDITOR GRACE LONG STAFF EDITORS FAITH BOURGEACQ JULIA CASH KATHRYN PAGEL HAYDEN WITTROCK WEB EDITOR MADELINE CRAWFORD CONTRIBUTERS CARMON BAKER EMMA BRUSTKERN JULIA CASH LUKE CLAUSEN ERICA COPELAND MADELINE CRAWFORD SOPHIE GLOO NASH LINSLEY GRACE LONG GRANT MORGAN JACK PARKOS MACK SWENSON HAYDEN WITTROCK ADVISOR GREGORY WOLF

LETTER FROM THE EDITOR Over the past few months, I’ve noticed the noise in the political sphere slowly quiet down. Maybe it’s because we reached a boiling point. More likely, it’s because I stopped doomscrolling on my Twitter feed (which I highly recommend to everyone). But when things slow down, you can look past the petty partisan fights and start to see how these huge, lofty issues—ones that are often difficult to wrap our minds around—can affect us all at the personal level. From small business owners attempting to keep up with blocks in the supply chain (32) to Afghan refugees struggling to find a place they can call home in Iowa (11), I hope we at Drake Political Review did some justice in providing a place to share some of these individual stories. Speaking of personal stories, I have my own selfish bit to throw in here. I mean, it is my last editor’s letter…possibly forever! When I first visited Drake as a bright-eyed, curious 17-year-old, I was enamored by the student-led publications. I knew from the moment I stepped foot on campus I wanted to be involved with one, or two, or all of them. Rounding out my college career with the opportunity to serve as Editor-in-Chief for DPR has been a dream, and I’ll forever hold this publication near and dear to my heart. I love this magazine not because I’m a policy wonk who likes to dive into the weeds and history behind the stickiest current debates. It’s because every person who makes Drake Political Review come to life—our writers, designers, photographers, and especially my incredible team of editors—make working on this project just so wonderful. I’m continuously amazed by their talent and dedication to tackling tough topics on top of all their other responsibilities, and I can’t wait to cheer each of them on for whatever comes next. But for now, turn the page, and

LET’S TALK POLITICS.

JESSICA COMSTOCK EDITOR-IN-CHIEF

TABLE OF CONTENTS LOCAL 4

DES MOINES DESERTS

TRAVERSING THE TRANS ATHLETE BAN

IOWA DEMOCRATS PUSH FOR A JOINT RESOLUTION

AFGHAN RESETTLEMENT IN IOWA: DIFFICULTIES AND DEFICIENCIES

NATIONAL 13

CELEBRITIES AS POLITICIANS: WHO WILL BE NEXT?

POLITICS IN FILM

HUMANE REGULATIONS OR HOGWASH?

JOHN DEERE STRIKES: THE INTERSECTION OF WORKERS’ RIGHTS

THE CARBON DIVIDE

PECULIAR PRESIDENTIAL PET PROFILES

THE FUTURE OF ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATION

16 29

INTERNATIONAL 29

LET’S TALK ROYAL POLITICS

ISSUES IN THE GLOBAL SUPPLY CHAIN

REALPOLITIK, UKRAINE AND A NEW RUSSIAN EMPIRE

DRAKE POLITICAL REVIEW

Sweet Tooth Community Fridge is one of the many ways Des Moines community members have worked to combat food insecurity. Photo by Hayden Wittrock

4 | SPRING 2022

LocalLOCAL

Data pulled from DMARC placing food insecure families as blue dots and food deserts as the highlighted red portions.

DES MOINES DESERTS Des Moines, Iowa, maybe surrounded by lush produce fields and farms filled with stock, but there are barren stretches of foodless land in the middle of the metropolitan area. WORDS BY ERICA COPELAND | PHOTOGRAPHY BY HAYDEN WITTROCK AND MADISSEN KERMAN

ood Insecure. It’s a weighty phrase, despite only being four syllables. It tips your jaw back, making your tongue stop at an angle like it’s about to swallow. Resting on the in-between of your throat and mouth, reverberating around the space. When most picture the phrase ‘food insecure,’ they see completely barren cabinets and stomachs devoid of substance. For some, that is true, but according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, (USDA) food insecurity affects 1 in 8 Americans and over 7,000

members in Des Moines, and that description doesn’t cover their stories. Food Insecurity is defined as “Lacking reliable access to a sufficient quantity of affordable, nutritious food,” by the USDA. This ability is being inhibited by Urban food deserts, which are areas that must have at least 500 citizens that live more than 1 mile from a grocery store. Luke Elzinga is the Communications and Advocacy Manager for Des Moines Area Religious Council (DMARC), where he works as a

lobbyist on behalf of DMARC and participates in legislative sessions by testifying for sub-committee meetings. Recently, DMARC and other antihunger organizations have spent their time defending the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). SNAP has replaced ‘food stamps’ by allowing users to carry a card that will enable a certain amount of money supplied by the government, depending on the average household income and family members, to buy groceries. “We’ve been playing defense DRAKE POLITICAL REVIEW

on SNAP. There is one senator in particular who has been attempting to pass, in our view, some very restrictive bills,” Elzinga said. In recent years, the Iowa Senate has passed multiple bills to add eligibility checks to public assistance programs— an effort supported by Iowa Republicans who argue the additional verifications will help prevent fraud. However, Republicans in the House have stalled many of the proposals. Anti-Hunger groups in Des Moines, such as Eat Greater Des Moines, DMARC, and the Des Moines Hunger Coalition, are constantly working to address the issues. They advocate for a larger budget for citizens in need of support and placing more accessible food pantries and stores in food deserts.

WE HAVE TO ADDRESS SOME OF THE MORE ROOT CAUSES. LUKE ELZINGA, COMMUNICATIONS AND ADVOCACY MANAGER FOR DES MOINES AREA RELIGIOUS COUNCIL

“SNAP is a band aid… If we are serious about ending food insecurity that can’t just be continuing to provide more food, we have to address some of the more root causes,” Elzinga said. Some larger entities in government don’t support an increase in funding to fight against food insecurity, despite the immediate needs of citizens. Iowa Governor Kim Reynolds (R) is one such figure. “The safety net has become a hammock,” Said Reynolds during her State Address this past January. Though without support from the government, nearly all support would have to come from nonprofits and charities. “Before the pandemic, 6-7 million dollars in snap benefits were given every month in Polk county which is significantly higher than our annual operating budget. This idea is that it’s not the role of the government. It’s the role of charities. It is just unrealistic,” Elzinga said. “Because unless someone wants to start writing us 10 million dollar checks every month, we

can’t do that. We can provide a three days supply of healthy food and our anytime items.” Not only are charities unable to fully provide a week’s worth of groceries, donations do not sufficiently provide the needed and appropriate foods for each family. For example, if kosher items are donated, there is no guarantee of there being enough of the donations to feed multiple households. Some spices and ingredients don’t get donated at the rate where each family that would be able to appreciate and utilize the item have access to it. Looking at these issues can be overwhelming, but there are ways to help lessen the burden of food insecurity and deserts. Donating time and items is helpful—helping sort food, bagging items, helping with office tasks, and taking calls to help with immediate needs. Both Eat Greater Des Moines and DMARC can use volunteers with access to vehicles to drop off no-contact groceries and help supply communities’ pantries and fridges around Des Moines.

This community pantry is found in Des Moines, IA and is provided by the Drake Neighborhood Little Free Pantry Project. Photo by Madissen Kerman.

6 | SPRING 2022

LocalLOCAL

TRAVERSING THE TRANS ATHLETE BAN Supporters and critics speak out after Gov. Kim Reynolds signs an Iowa bill that bans transgender individuals from playing sports that align with their gender identity. WORDS BY EMMA BRUSTKERN | ART BY MADISSEN KERMAN

n early March, University of Pennsylvania swimmer and transgender woman Lia Thomas made history by becoming the first openly transgender athlete to win an NCAA Division I national championship in any sport. Her participation and success were met with widespread backlash and concern over transgender women participating in sports alongside individuals who were assigned female at birth. While Thomas was the one making headlines, a similar debate was happening in Iowa; on March 3, 2022, Gov. Kim Reynolds signed HF 2416, a bill that would effectively ban

transgender individuals from playing sports that align with their gender identity, into Iowa law. “An interscholastic athletic team, sport or athletic event that is sponsored or sanctioned by an educational institution or organization must be designated as one of the following, based on the sex at birth of the participating students: (1) Females, women, or girls. (2) Males, men, or boys. (3) Coeducational or mixed,” the law reads. “Only female students, based on their sex, may participate in any team, sport, or athletic event designated as being for females,

women, or girls.” The bill was initially introduced in the Iowa House of Representatives by Rep. Skyler Wheeler (R-Orange City) and Rep. Henry Stone (R-Forest City). Stone believes the bill is necessary to protect cisgender female athletes from having to compete against “biological males” who may have a biological advantage. “How does a girl feel when she works hard and can’t compete now because her spot is taken?” Stone asked. “The girl’s point of view is being lost in this whole discussion. That’s what we want to do, just make sure that girls were being heard and DRAKE POLITICAL REVIEW

Photo Source: Ted Eytan, Creative Commons Attribution

that they were being protected.” These sentiments were echoed by Reynolds at a press conference following the bill’s signing. “Girls have dreams and aspirations of earning a scholarship to help pay for college. Girls have dreams and aspirations of one day competing in the Olympics,” Reynolds said, according to The Des Moines Register. “So it’s a fairness issue.” As of March 31, there have been no reported or documented instances of a transgender female athlete in Iowa displaying an unfair competitive advantage. In the months since the bill’s passage, Stone claims he has received positive feedback. He reports holding four forums in early March where many constituents voiced their support for the bill. “I’ve heard overwhelming support on both sides of the aisle,” Stone said. “They said they were glad that their granddaughters were still going to be able to compete against other females.” However, HF 2416 is not without critics. Many organizations, schools, legislators and doctors have voiced opposition to the bill, saying that 8 | SPRING 2022

banning transgender girls from sports will further isolate them from their peers and be harmful to their mental health. “Anytime we see legislation coming from the highest law making body in the state that really demeans or diminishes their identity, it’s very hurtful,” said Damien Thompson, the director of public policy and communication at Iowa Safe Schools. “When you’re talking about mental health outcomes, transgender youth already have some of the most grim outlooks on life expectancy, suicidality, lack of belonging and other negative mental health side effects. And so when you see this kind of legislative push, which then trickles down to the schools, and really enables bullying, both from administration and students, it really has a pretty awful effect overall.” According to The Trevor Project, 94% of LGBTQ youth reported that recent politics affected their mental health. Furthermore, over 50% of transgender and non-binary youth seriously considered attempting suicide. Despite these concerns, Stone does not believe restricting transgender girls from participating in

girls sports will be detrimental. “This bill does not exclude [transgender female athletes] from continuing to compete alongside everyone that they’ve been competing with, just with males,” Stone said. “I don’t think that they’re going to be ostracized because they’re already competing with males. . . it’s just kind of status quo.” Iowa is not alone in banning transgender athletes from participating in girls sports. In fact, nine other Republican-led states have passed similar legislation restricting transgender students’ participation in athletics, according to The New York Times. Opponents of the bill are already considering how to move forward to combat the legislation. In particular, LGBTQ advocates believe the legislation may violate Title IX.

IT’S VERY CLEAR THAT THE LAW VIOLATES TITLE IX BOTH AS INTERPRETED BY THE SEX DEFINITION IN [THE] COUNTY . . . AS WELL AS THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION’S INTERPRETATION. DAMIEN THOMPSON, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC POLICY AND COMMUNICATION AT IOWA SAFE SCHOOLS

“In terms of future steps, we’re really looking at litigation at this point, which is most likely out of our hands and would be on a case-by-case basis,” Thompson said. “But it’s very clear that the law violates Title IX both as interpreted by the sex definition in Bostock v. Plaint County . . . as well as the Biden administration’s interpretation of sex as including gender identity in Title IX.” However, until legal action can be taken, the bill will remain in effect as signed. “We feel that we’re in a strong position to defend against any possible claim that might come forward against this legislation,” Stone said.

LocalLOCAL

IOWA DEMOCRATS PUSH FOR A JOINT RESOLUTION

New legislation would allow for the regulation of cannabis for recreational use in the state. WORDS BY CARMON BAKER | ART BY AMANDA O’BRIEN

n recent months, three Iowa state senators have proposed a constitutional amendment to legalize recreational marijuana in the state. The proposal needs to obtain a majority in the state House and Senate in two consecutive General Assemblies. Once passed through state Congress, it would be included on a ballot, where more than half of Iowans need to vote for the amendment for it to pass. Sarah Trone Garriott is a Democrat state Senator who represents Windsor Heights, Clive, Waukee, and West Des Moines. Trone Garriott is one of the three senators at the center of this reform. “Senate Joint Resolution 2003 is

about changing Iowa’s constitution to allow the regulation of marijuana for adult use so that legislatures, governors couldn’t come in and change the law if it was passed through the legislature they could do that the next session, could reverse all of the changes that were made,” Trone Garriott said. “And this is an opportunity to give the people of Iowa the chance to be a part of the process.” At this point in the legislative process, Trone Garriott does not believe that it will pass in this legislative session. The legislation would need to move through a subcommittee hearing, public meeting and pass a vote, but it’s failed to move through the legislative process.

However, Trone Garriott believes there is potential that the amendment still passes. If it does not, Trone Garriott says that lawmakers can reintroduce legislation, especially if the balance of power in Congress changes. “At any point, they can bring forward a leadership bill,” Trone Garriott said. “At any point, they can attach an amendment to even unrelated legislation, even on the last day. Nothing is truly dead until we adjourn for the session. So, there’s always a possibility, but with Republican leadership, I don’t think there’s an interest in talking about these issues, working on them, at all.” In Illinois, where cannabis is regulated, one-third of marijuana sales DRAKE POLITICAL REVIEW

come from out of state, and Trone Garriott believes many of these sales come from Iowa. This is especially relevant for Trone Garriot, as her district contains MedPharm, a medical marijuana dispensary in Iowa. “People are going to other states to get what they need,” Trone Garriott said. “They can get the products they need at the price they want, and especially if you live in one of those border communities, it’s much more accessible than anywhere here in Iowa. But it also does mean that people in Iowa are being forced to walk on the wrong side of our current laws to access what they need.” In addition, Trone Garriott believes that the legalization of cannabis could reduce incarceration and drug offenses, which disproportionately affect lowincome people and people of color. “We know that the choice to prosecute can vary depending on who you are and what kind of legal representation you have access to,” Trone Garriott said. “So that’s going to be likely more folks who are on the 10 | SPRING 2022

lower socioeconomic end of things, folks of color, and we’re going to see a higher level of incarceration and fines and convictions for those folks. It’s not a fair system. Because there’s so much access right around our state, we know we’re putting Iowans at risk for greater, life-long impacts of being convicted, fined, imprisoned for cannabis possession.” According to Trone Garriott, she believes that a lot of hesitation surrounding the amendment comes from inaccurate language used to describe its purpose. “We don’t use the term ‘legalize’ because tomatoes are legal,” Trone Garriott said. “Anyone can sell them, anyone can grow them, anyone can have them. But what we talk about is regulation.” Trone Garriott says marijuana regulation in the state would mirror alcohol regulation; Selling, making, possessing and using the substance is restricted. “We’re not talking about a free-forall, we’re talking about a regulated

product, and we have other regulated products we can look at to think about how that would look here in our community,” Trone Garriott said. Ultimately, Trone Garriott thinks that it is important for Iowa to pass legislation regarding marijuana because of a general changing culture in the United States. In her opinion, legislation now could be beneficial in anticipation of changes on the federal level.

THE WORLD IS CHANGING AROUND US, AND IOWA IS NOT CHANGING WITH THE TIMES. SEN. SARAH TRONE GARRIOTT, D-IOWA DISTRICT 22

“The world is changing around us, and Iowa is not changing with the times,” she said. “Regardless of what it looks like in the end, we need to revisit our cannabis laws, we need to look at our medical program, we need to think about the impact that it’s having on our state.”

LocalLOCAL

These dolls are being collected and dressed in culturally appropriate outﬁts, which are being sewn for them by members of the Des Moines community. They will be handed out to Afghan children in the area.

AFGHAN RESETTLEMENT IN IOWA: DIFFICULTIES AND DEFICIENCIES

Afghans in Des Moines feel abandoned in the difficult process of resettlement after years of fighting. WORDS BY LUKE CLAUSEN | PHOTOGRAPHY BY ERIN BELL

ast year, American troops left Afghanistan after twenty years of war, a decision resulting in hundreds of thousands of Afghans ﬂeeing their homes—some of whom have faced greater challenges in their relocation to Des Moines than in their home country. According to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), Afghans make up one of the largest refugee populations worldwide, with over 2.6 million registered Afghan refugees in the world. After the withdrawal, the Biden administration agreed to let about 74,000 Afghani refugees into the country, about a thousand of whom are coming to Iowa, according to The Gazette. Only about 125 people will be resettled in the Des Moines area, according to the Des Moines Register.

Iowa has a history of welcoming refugees, including late Governor Robert D. Ray’s push to resettle thousands of refugees for South Asia in the aftermath of the war in Vietnam, a defining part of his legacy. There are currently three resettlement agencies in the Des Moines area: Lutheran Services of Iowa (LSI), US Committee for Refugees and Immigrants (USCRI), and Catholic Charities Des Moines. These three agencies are tasked with providing the initial support and assistance to Afghans from the moment they step off the plane at Des Moines International Airport until a set number of months after they arrive. The government does not technically label people coming from Afghanistan as refugees. Instead, they are termed “parolees” since the Biden administration is only allowing people

who helped America in Afghanistan to become residents of the United States. “The Afghans that we’re dealing with right now came from a completely separate process than the normal refugee resettlement process,” LSI Community Engagement Specialist Natalie Rork said. In Des Moines alone, their past experiences range from translators at the US Embassy to working with the US Air Force against the Taliban. “I had a 23-year-old looked me straight in the eye and say, ‘If I was there, I’d be dead.’ That’s the reality,” Rork said.

I HAD A 23-YEAR-OLD LOOKED ME STRAIGHT IN THE EYE AND SAY, ‘IF I WAS THERE, I’D BE DEAD.’ THAT’S THE REALITY. NATALIE RORK, LSI COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT SPECIALIST

The journey from Afghanistan to their final destination in Des Moines is long, taking months from when Afghans board the plane leaving the Kabul airport. “They were taken out of Afghanistan as urgently as possible because their safety was in danger. And then they kind of got put in a holding pattern,” Rork said. “They were spread in all sorts of military bases across the United States… They waited anywhere from three to six months on those military bases based on when they got out and when they got resettled. And then from there, they’re being placed across the country with all sorts of different resettlement agencies.” Once the Afghans reach Des Moines, LSI gets to work in setting the foundation of their new lives. Typically, the first step is providing a place to stay. Most live in temporary housing, according to Rork. Smaller families are often placed in extended stays in hotels while larger families are provided Airbnbs to accommodate their size. The resettlement agencies also receive around a thousand dollars per person DRAKE POLITICAL REVIEW

| 11

This microwave is being delivered to an Afghan family’s apartment.

to spend on essentials such as groceries. “We are kind of the stewards of that money on behalf of them. When they get here, we make sure that they have a hot meal that’s culturally appropriate to them.” Rork said. “We make sure that they have a fridge full of groceries, and that they’re going to a place where their basic needs can be met.” However, people and their needs have fallen through the cracks during the resettlement process. Former Afghan Military Intelligence Battalion Commander Shiragha Safi currently lives in the Des Moines metro. He worked with the American military and intelligence to root out terrorists across Afghanistan before evacuating. “My life is hell. My life is upside down. I lost everything and have never worked for someone… I had all my businesses, I had honor in my country. I had a special position in my country. I was something in my country,” Safi said. Safi, who was resettled by the Catholic Charities of Des Moines, says that the American government and refugee resettlement agencies have failed Afghans in numerous ways. “When we came to Iowa, the 12 | SPRING 2022

way resettlement agencies and the government here treated us, it was very unfair. We never expected America would do that with us. Especially resettlement agencies,” Safi said. In February, some families who resettled in the Des Moines metro had run out of food, according to the Des Moines Register. A 911 West Des Moines police log from February documented a call from a family who had become desperate for help: “Caller is an Afghan refugee. He said he has not heard from his caseworker. He said they have no food and don’t know what to do. He said there are other families in the similar situation.” Several services that LSI provides help to nullify the culture shock that comes with the resettlement process. However, all services are only provided for a brief period. For LSI, the contract only lasts 90 days. “They get here and then for 90 days, we’re filling out all those forms. We’re finding them more permanent housing. We’re helping to get them a job,” Rork said. “We do not want people that are dependent on LSI. We want them to be independent and live like normal people in this wonderful

state that we call home.” The affordable housing crisis and understaffing make the resettlement process difficult for organizations like LSI. Because most Afghans resettling in Des Moines were from middle and upper-middle class households in Afghanistan, settling for a low quality, entry-level home in Des Moines is all but ideal. “It’s hard for anybody to find an apartment that they find affordable, much less people that don’t speak the language…We’re kind of the people in the background that can help out if anything changes, finding affordable housing with landlords that will accept these people with no credit history, no background checks, no nothing,” Rork said. “It’s really that fine balance of trying to find places that are nice enough that they can also afford.” Honor and dignity are hard to come by if someone does not know the language, customs, or culture of the country they are in. Simple misunderstandings can and have turned deadly. Safi said that he believes that this comes from a lack of basic responsibility on the part of resettlement agencies to adequately assist Afghans.

WHAT SIN WE DID, WE DON’T KNOW. BUT WE’VE NOT BEEN TREATED WELL. SHIRAGHA SAFI, DES MOINES RESIDENT AND FORMER AFGHAN MILITARY COMMANDER

“If you come to Afghanistan, if you tell me, ‘I want to eat your part of your body,’ I will cut any part for you. That’s Pashtun and Afghan hospitality. That’s our line,” Safi says. “But we were never expecting that from the [American] government. We don’t know why… What sin we did, we don’t know. But we’ve not been treated well.” At the end of the day, Safi said that he and many others feel abandoned after everything they have done for the United States. “Am I not honest? Am I not loyal?” Safi said. “I didn’t sacrifice for you? Where are you now?”

NationalLOCAL

for her role as Miranda in “Sex and the City” ran for governor of New York against Andrew Cuomo for the democrat nomination but was ultimately defeated.

From Cleats to Elected Seats

CELEBRITIES AS POLITICIANS WHO WILL BE NEXT? WORDS BY JULIA CASH | ART BY AMANDA O’BRIEN

n recent years we have seen an increasing number of celebrities share their political views, run for positions in public office, and even be successful in elections. These celebrities are musicians, athletes, actors, and even veterans, leaving many to theorize about which celebrity will be next to enter the political arena.

From Celebrities to Presidencies

It is well known that Kayne West was on the ballot in the 2020 presidential election as an Independent. He received a total of 66,636 votes in the election. West has since made his future intentions clear with a post on Twitter from Nov. 4, 2020, that stated “KANYE 2024”. Most people are aware of Former President Donald Trump and Ronald Reagan’s careers before becoming presidents of the United States. Trump launched his presidential campaign in 2016 after being a real estate magnate and TV personality. Reagan was a Hollywood actor and started his political career as the governor of California. He then went on to be the United States president from 1981 to 1989.

Celebrities Taking ACTion

There have been many actors and actresses that have switched to having

political careers. Many of these are stars in which it was not initially clear to people what their political affiliation or views were. One of the most popular actors who has gotten involved in politics is Jerry Springer, who was a politician before he became an actor. In 1971, Springer was elected to the Cincinnati City Council as part of the Democratic Party but resigned in 1974 due to him admitting to hiring a sex worker. He came back in 1975 in the same position and served as the mayor in 1977 for a year. Everybody knows her for being the leading film actress during the Great Depression, but Shirley Temple also ran unsuccessfully for Congress in 1989 for the Republican party. She raised money for the Republican Party by working with the League of Women Voters while also supporting Richard Nixon. Temple presented issues concerning refugee rights and environmental concerns. Temple was appointed to Ghana in 1974 and Czechoslovakia in 1989 as their ambassador. Mostly known for her role in the movie “Clueless” as Dionne Davenport, Stacey Dash started her political career as a commentator on Fox. She ran for Congress in the 2018 election for the California 44th district but dropped out. Actress Cynthia Nixon, known

World Wrestling Entertainment (WWE) had some of its employees become politicians over the years. Linda McMahon was the former CEO of WWE. McMahon ran unsuccessfully in the US Senate races in 2010 and 2012 as a Republican candidate. She became the Administrator of the Small Business Administration in the US after being appointed by Trump. Kevin Johnson is a former NBA player for the Cleveland Cavaliers and Phoenix Suns who got into politics when running for mayor of Sacramento, Cali. as a Democrat. Johnson ran successfully and became the 55th mayor from 2008 to 2016. A former Pittsburgh Steeler’s defensive back, Dwayne D. Woodruff went on to become a Judge of the Court of Common Pleas in Allegheny County, PA. Woodruff played 12 seasons for the Steelers, went on to the SuperBowl, was as Team MVP in 1982, and was the team captain in his three final years of playing. He currently handles the Juvenile cases in the Family Court Division. Sharice Davids was a mixed martial artist who fought professionally from 2013 to 2014. Davids was sworn into the 116th Congress as a Democrat serving as a US Representative. This means she is one of the first two Native American women to be in Congress.

Who Will Be Next?

People have been curious about what celebrities or inﬂuencers will be next in the world of politics. Some of these celebrities and inﬂuencers have shared their views, but does this mean they will take the step further to be politicians? If Kayne can get on the ballot for a presidential election, who knows, maybe someone from the Hype House will be our president one day. DRAKE POLITICAL REVIEW

| 13

National

POLITICS IN FILM Unpregnant

2020 Directed by Rachel Lee Goldenberg 17-year-old Veronica discovers she is pregnant, and to her disappointment, she is not allowed to get an abortion without parental consent in her home state of Missouri. Desperate to keep her predicament a secret, Veronica hitches a ride with her ex-best friend across the country to New Mexico, the location of the nearest Planned Parenthood that does not require parental consent. This buddy comedy tackles the flaws of teenage friendships, teen pregnancy and decreasing access to safe and legal abortions. Though quite overlooked, this movie represents the potential consequences of reproductive healthcare bans and how far people will go to secure an abortion when bans exist.

Don’t Look Up

2021 Directed by Adam McKay This star-studded film is a satirical take on the dire implications of capitalism on our climate. This film displays the impact of corporate greed and the grim future of our planet if we do not change our ways. Though the storyline is comical and slightly camp, it should serve as a wake up call to all the potential impacts of our carbon footprints on the future of our planet. The main takeaway of this movie is to always listen to scientists.

14 | SPRING 2022

A Contemporary Analysis of Socio-Political Topics in Movies

WORDS BY MADELINE CRAWFORD | DESIGN BY AMANDA O’BRIEN

The Fallout

2022 Directed by Megan Park “The Fallout” tackles the gun violence epidemic in America through the eyes of a teenage girl struggling with grief after witnessing a mass shooting at her high school. It is a story of self-discovery in the wake of tragedy and the trials and tribulations of coping with the loss of innocence. This is the first coming-of-age film I have seen that represents the anxiety and desensitization of those in Generation Z that have grown up post-Columbine.

The Trial of the Chicago 7 2020 Directed by Aaron Sorkin

Photo Source: All: IMDb

This biopic follows the infamous Chicago 7 as they undergo trial in federal court after protesting the Vietnam War at the 1968 Democratic National Convention in Chicago. Although the film is based in the 1960s, it is eerily relevant to current discussions surrounding how far the freedoms of speech and protest extend in American society. For those who are fans of historical dramas and courtroom chaos, this film is perfect for you.

DRAKE POLITICAL REVIEW

| 15

National

A newly weaned piglet explores its new home in a nursery. As it grows this pig will move through several diﬀerent barns and eventually enter the food supply or be selected for breeding and placed in a gilt development unit.

16 | SPRING 2022

NationalLOCAL

HUMANE REGULATIONS OR HOGWASH? How a ballot proposition from California made it all the way to the Supreme Court and will impact pork producers and consumers across the country. WORDS AND PHOTOGRAPHY BY GRACE LONG

he concept of pork barrel politics, commonly understood as spending earmarked for projects of dubious value in exchange for political support, has made metaphorical pork part of political dialogue since the 1870s. However, a recent Supreme Court (SCOTUS) case has thrust pork into the political spotlight in a much more literal sense. On March 28, SCOTUS granted a Writ of Certiorari petition in the case of National Pork Producers Council v. Karen Ross. The petition was filed by both the National Pork Producers Council (NPPC) and the American Farm Bureau Federation (AFBF) and argues that a California ballot initiative called Proposition 12 (Prop 12) violates the Constitution’s commerce clause by attempting to regulate pork production on a national level. This case underwent quite the legal journey before making it all the way to the Supreme Court, so to fully understand the critical implications it could have for consumers and farmers alike, it’s important to look back at the case’s origins.

Beginning with Ballot Initiatives

The groundwork for this case can be traced back to a ballot initiative called Proposition 2 that was presented to California voters in 2008. The Human Society proposed the ballot initiative with intentions to ban the confinement of pigs, calves and hens in a manner that did not allow them to turn around freely, lie down, stand up, and fully extend their limbs.This initiative’s focus on animal movement makes it a similar, but distinct predecessor to Prop 12, which focuses more on specific square-footage requirements.

California voters approved the initiative and it was implemented in 2015, demonstrating that animal confinement campaigns could be successful in California. Then, in 2018, the ballot initiative officially called the Farm Animal Confinement Initiative and commonly referred to as Prop 12 was presented to California voters. If passed, the proposition would require higher minimum space requirements on farms with egg-laying hens, breeding pigs and calves raised for veal. Products from farms that failed to meet these expanded confinement requirements would be banned from sale in the state of California. Prop 12 requires compliance with very specific standards for an animal’s freedom of movement, cage-free facility design and minimum ﬂoor space square footage requirements. On Nov. 6, 2018, 62.66% of California voters approved Proposition 12, and the ballot initiative became law. Because of the staggering impact this newly approved law would have on the agriculture industry, in particular on the pork industry, many agricultural groups moved to take immediate action against it. Their concerns centered around the costs of revamping their existing farms and production facilities to meet Prop 12 requirements. A very small fraction of pork production facilities around the United States are currently in compliance with Prop 12. Most barns would have to be reworked to meet the new space requirements and through that process would lose anywhere from 25% to 33% of their sow capacity (space available for mother pigs). To compensate for these changes while still upholding a

consistent level of pork production and meeting consumer demand, a large number of entirely new pig farms would have to be built at a high-paced rate. This infrastructure overhaul that would be required to bring all farms up to code would put a financial burden not only on pig farmers, but consumers as the cost would likely be passed on down the supply chain.

ALMOST ALL OF CALIFORNIA’S PORK IS IMPORTED FROM OTHER STATES. IF PORK FARMERS WANT TO BE ABLE TO SELL IN CALIFORNIA THEY WOULD HAVE TO SPEND HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS TO CHANGE THEIR ANIMAL HOUSING. JEN SORENSON, 2021-2022 PRESIDENT OF THE NATIONAL PORK PRODUCERS COUNCIL

“If allowed to stand, Prop 12 would create huge supply shortages in California. The state consumes about 13% of the nation’s pork production. Yet, only 4% of pork produced in America meets Prop 12 requirements,” said Jen Sorenson, who served as the 2021-2022 President of the National Pork Producers Council. “Almost all of California’s pork is imported from other states. If pork farmers want to be able to sell in California they would have to spend hundreds of millions of dollars to change their animal housing to be Californiacompliant. This is a perfect example of how the costs of overregulation are passed along as higher costs of food DRAKE POLITICAL REVIEW

| 17

A group of weaned pigs that have just been moved into a nursery look curiously at the camera. This open pen set up is conceptually similar to open gestation pens that are at the center of the Prop 12 controversy.

without any increase in a consumer benefit, like health or safety.”

The Commerce Clause and Grounds for Legal Action

Due to these concerns surrounding Prop 12, a ﬂurry of legal suits were filed to invalidate the law. On Oct. 4, 2019, the North American Meat Institute asked the U.S. District Court for Central California to void Prop 12. Their petition was denied by the District Court, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and finally on June 28, 2021, the Supreme Court. North American Meat Institute v. Becerra marked the first major legal challenge to Prop 12. A few other state-level suits have been filed, most notably an Iowa Pork Producers Association injunction that was filed in August 2021. Iowa produces more pork than 18 | SPRING 2022

any other state in the nation, and Iowan farmers will be particularly hard hit by the projected costs of Prop 12 compliance. The Iowa case, like most other cases filed to stop Prop 12, was dismissed. Then, after several years of failed legal action, came National Pork Producers Council v. Ross. On Dec. 5, 2019, the National Pork Producers Council and American Farm Bureau Federation filed a legal complaint asking the U.S. District Court for Southern California to invalidate Prop 12. Their petition was denied by the District Court and the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, but in March of 2022, the Supreme Court agreed to hear the case. At the time of this article’s publication, oral arguments had not been made nor had a decision been reached.

However, when NPPC and AFBF do go before the Supreme Court, their legal argument will rest largely on the back of the Constitution’s commerce clause and the federal government’s power to regulate trade between states.

A Producer’s Perspective

Putting all the complexities of Prop 12’s legality aside, many consumers are curious about one thing: is this law helping pigs? Is it improving the conditions sows are living in? Lauren Duncan, a swine caretaker who works for Schwartz Farms Incorporated has the experience to address questions like those. Schwartz is a Minnesota-based pork production company leading the way in terms of Prop 12 compliant facilities. Lauren works in one of their gilt

(a female pig that has not yet had piglets) development units and works diligently everyday to provide her pigs with the best care possible. After a brief training period working in barns that have already been converted to meet Prop 12’s space requirements, she will be moving to Kansas to lead the company’s first-ever facility designed and built to meet Prop 12 without renovation.

I WOULD SAY IT’S A GREAT IDEA, BUT IT’S STILL BRAND NEW, SO THE EXECUTION ISN’T ALWAYS PERFECT. AND THAT’S JUST A LEARNING CURVE THAT COMES WITH ANYTHING THAT’S BRAND NEW.

LAUREN DUNCAN, SWINE CARETAKER FOR SCHWARTZ FARMS INCORPORATED

“We are working on converting some of the barns to Prop 12. The goal right now is to adhere to those requirements and see if raising the pigs in these more open pens helps them later on,” explained Duncan. “Some of the farms are converted, some of them are not. It’s kind of a

guessing game right now, since all the laws and regulations haven’t been fully published. I would say it’s a great idea, but it’s still brand new, so the execution isn’t always perfect. And that’s just a learning curve that comes with anything that’s brand new.” Duncan explained how one of the biggest changes generated by Prop 12 - open gestation pens - looks at her operation. In a traditional gilt development unit, once pigs reach a certain stage of development, they are moved into individual gestation crates or stalls in which they have access to food and water but are often unable to turn around or move freely. The use of this style of crates was implemented to protect the pigs from fighting that may occur in the larger group settings as well as to protect their caretakers. Prop 12 attempts to keep those same protective measures in place while offering more freedom of movement to the pigs in large gestation pens that contain an entire group of pigs. “The Prop 12 set-up is half crate, half pin, essentially. The crates have a swinging design, so they open from the back until the pig walks into it and ﬂips the front of the crate open,” explained Duncan. “That way she can lock herself in and get away from other pigs if she needs or wants to. An exterior view of an Iowa pig farm located in the middle of a corn ﬁeld with four feeders on the left side. This barn would not comply with current Prop 12 requirements.

She is free to go in and out and walk around as much as she wants.”

The Consumer Perspective

Prop 12 has accelerated the rise in demand from consumers for what is now commonly referred to as gestation stall free pork. This is something that is projected to be integrated into the industry whether or not Prop 12 stands. The Supreme Court’s ruling on Prop 12 will simply determine how these changes are implemented on an industry wide level. “If this is really something consumers demand and want to pay more for, then the food chain will supply it,” said Sorenson. “Farmers recognize the free market works just fine. People who want “pastureraised” pork and eggs can pay $20 a pound or $10 a dozen at their local high-end grocer. Those who want affordable and humanely raised foods can get those, too. We have deep concerns that consumers in California—especially those at risk for food security—will not be able to afford protein in their diets.” It’s clear that Prop 12 and its most recent development with National Pork Producers Council v. Karen Ross will have far reaching implications within the pork industry for both farmers and consumers. However, even in the face of legal complexity, concerns over animal welfare and a threat to the need for affordable food, Prop 12 offers a chance to address the ever-widening gap between producers and consumers. “This is a chance for producers to tell consumers, ‘We’ve listened to you, but it’s time for you to listen to us about something we are experts in: raising these pigs,’” said Duncan. “I think it’s a good opportunity for producers to improve how they share their message on social media, in their local community, posting articles, making videos, giving speeches and other things like that. Although there are high costs and it’s controversial, one thing Prop 12 does do well is give producers and consumers an opportunity for education.” DRAKE POLITICAL REVIEW

| 19

National

JOHN DEERE STRIKES: THE INTERSECTION OF WORKERS’ RIGHTS When workers protest, there’s much more at risk than just their jobs. WORDS BY NASH LINSLEY | ART BY AMANDA O’BRIEN

he collective human consciousness is divided on the topic of workers’ rights and has been since before these thoughts were ever formally introduced into the realm of academia. This division opens up many different veins of discourse, but one that is often neglected is the intersectionality of workers’ rights and the consumers who are potentially affected. Workers of all industries are responsible for producing goods and services for consumers and other labor forces. Their interconnection allows the global market to function properly. However, workers fighting for

20 | SPRING 2022

rights in the workplace can hinder the production of these goods and services. The most obvious implementation of this concept occurs when workers refuse to work in order to pressure their employer to meet their demands. This tactic is known as a strike and has been used since 1170 B.C. in ancient Egypt. Around 10,000 workers at John Deere, an agricultural equipment and heavy machinery manufacturer, went on strike in late 2021, risking their jobs in an effort to receive a pay increase and extend consistent retirement benefits to newly hired employees. These workers were

members of a union group formed by the United Auto Workers (UAW), a Detroit-based union advocacy group that formed in 1935 to help auto workers obtain social and economic rights from their employers. Negotiations between John Deere and the UAW began a few weeks before the disputed contract was set to expire on Oct. 1, 2021, but the deadline still had to be temporarily extended to finish negotiations. Even though the UAW claimed the proposed contract would be beneficial to both new and existing workers, members of the union voted decisively against the new contract on Oct. 10

Photo Source: U.S. Department of Agriculture Lance Cheung/Multimedia PhotoJournalist

and began to strike on Oct. 14. Workers’ rights are important, but they are often taxing for everyone involved with and connected to the business being protested. The union members who participated in the strike lost almost an entire month’s worth of pay, and John Deere went without the production power of 7.5% of their workers. However, these drawbacks do not take away from the pivotal role the strike played in convincing John Deere to meet the workers’ demands. “Over the last 13 years, I have gotten very involved with the union and labor movement. Just trying to make sure that women’s rights and protections for us are just as important as anything else,” said Jill Scott, a UAW representative for John Deere. Those participating in the strike received a payment of $275 a week from the UAW to incentivize workers to forgo their usual pay and put pressure on John Deere to accept a new contract. This is a fraction of the amount most union members would receive for a normal week’s pay which made the decision hard for many individuals. The stark difference in pay meant some members and their families would suffer greatly, but most still joined the efforts. From Oct. 14 to Nov. 17, union members took a stand against John Deere and ultimately persuaded them to boost worker pay over a period of six years. This included a 10% increase in the first year, followed by a 5% increase in the contract’s third and fifth years along with a new worker signing bonus of $8,500. While John Deere workers may have gotten what they wanted in the end, the hard-fought strike had major impacts on other areas of the supply chain. John Deere was founded in 1837 as a company that sold steel plows made by none other than John Deere himself. Since then, the company has become a global leader in agricultural machinery and heavy equipment manufacturing, supplying farmers and businesses with a variety of vehicles and products.

Deere is the world’s largest agricultural equipment producer, selling twice that of their next two competitors combined. Farmers make up the company’s largest group of consumers, and they are easily one of the most affected demographics from the strikes. In an already inﬂated market, farmers were forced to deal with higher prices for used John Deere tractors and combines as well as a shortage of replacement and repair parts due to the 10% to 15% reduction in production during the fourth quarter of 2021 and the first quarter of 2022. These challenges come at a time when family farmers are already feeling the effects of economic hardship due to the COVID-19 pandemic, rising suicide rates, loan delinquency, bankruptcy and other obstacles facing rural communities. As a result, smallscale family farms are becoming increasingly difficult to maintain.

IT’S GOTTEN TO BE A PRETTY BIG BUSINESS NOW. JILL SCOTT, UAW REPRESENTATIVE FOR JOHN DEERE

Scott grew up in a farming family and has experienced this decline in small-scare farms over the past few decades. “It’s gotten to be a pretty big business now. There’s very few that I

USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack with United Auto Workers in Ankeny, Iowa during a strike for better beneﬁts, fair wages and retirement security.

know of, anyways, small farmers like what I grew up in,” she said. Crisis after crisis has forced a rising number of farmers to leave the industry and sell their land to corporate farms in order to survive. According to The Des Moines Register, J.P. Morgan analyst Ann Duignan expects John Deere to increase their prices by 1.5% to offset the recent pay increases for workers which is estimated to cost the company up to $300 million. Although at first glance farmers and John Deere factory employees may seem quite different, the last year has shown that they both struggle against the powers of the larger economic market. John Deere workers face the power their employer holds over them and farmers’ labor costs are determined by the volatile market of the goods they produce. Both are forced to fight for their voices to be heard within an economic framework they have very little control over. Workers, both those on the assembly line and those in the fields, face these issues. It doesn’t matter whether they wear safety glasses and vests or a pair of coveralls and steel toed boots; both have faced the consequences of an unstable economic market. DRAKE POLITICAL REVIEW

| 21

National

THE CARBON DIVIDE America is more polarized than ever. Climate change could be to blame. WORDS BY GRANT MORGAN | ART BY AMANDA O’BRIEN

olarization. It’s a term in modernday American politics that’s often thrown around as this existential force that is seemingly only growing worse and more destructive. From disagreements over abortion and public education, to arguments over Dr. Seuss and green M&M’s, it seems polarization has taken over cultural and political systems. However, at this incredibly pivotal moment it’s important to realize that something has to be driving this polarization. Some force or actor must be causing the issue to become more acute and overt. Many claim tribal culture is to blame. Others argue the media is the problem, especially the inﬂammatory comments that often stem from the mouths of pundits and commentators. Some even argue this polarization is a fundamentally unique aspect of American life and culture that is not going to go away. However, America’s growing polarization, while

22 | SPRING 2022

of course impacted by cultural and media shocks, is instead driven by something much more structural and profound: a growing divide in the economy called the carbon divide. If nothing is done to mitigate it soon, it is becoming increasingly likely that the country—and environment—will fall apart at the seams.

A Carbon Divide?

Economic divides have existed in America for centuries. The early 20th century was dominated by stark economic divisions between Gilded Age industrialists and labor unions. The Great Depression highlighted unbearably high economic divides which had grown as a result of free-market capitalism. The 1970s put America on the path to even greater economic divides and deindustrialization. Today, the country is once again facing an economic divide which is quite exorbitant. However, what’s different

about the current divide is the fact that an incredibly unequal economy is now paired with a planet that is experiencing rapid and destructive ecological changes. Climate change has changed the name of the game. No longer are incredibly high economic divides detrimental merely because of their effect on the social world. Now the physical world is also starting to strain and suffer. “There is about a 40% chance of the annual average global temperature temporarily reaching 1.5 degrees Celsius above the preindustrial level in at least one of the next five years — and these odds are increasing with time,” the World Meteorological Organization (WMO), a specialized agency of the United Nations, said in 2021. That chance has doubled from 20% in the last decade, according to the WMO. Despite the fact that the planet is slowly running out of time, many people are still opposed to a green transition. Mark Blyth, an international economics professor at Brown University, believes he knows why. Blyth is an expert in the political economy and for decades has been able to correctly define and articulate modern events in ways that make them seem more coherent and understandable. “Does polarization show up in cultural terms? Yes absolutely”, Blyth said. “Culture is a reﬂection of more fundamental processes....You can’t explain a cultural change in terms of cultural change.”

CULTURE IS A REFLECTION OF MORE FUNDAMENTAL PROCESSES. MARK BLYTH, INTERNATIONAL ECONOMICS PROFESSOR AT BROWN UNIVERSITY

Essentially, Blyth argues that while polarization is definitely showing up in culture everywhere from critical race theory to green M&M’s, these subjects often don’t convey the mechanisms

progress. To many, compromise does not seem like a viable option.

Photo Source: Markus Spiske, Unsplash

The Politics of Carbon

behind polarization that causes it to intensify. After all, as Blyth says, we can’t simply just look at things getting worse and claim that they are getting worse because we can see things getting worse. That’s faulty logic. Instead, something deeper within the American system is causing this shift towards polarization, and Blyth claims that climate change is to blame. This concept becomes clearer when examining the industries that fuel state economies. States must have a viable business model in order to succeed, Blyth argues. The coastal states, for example, have been able to do quite well by diversifying their economies. California has Silicon Valley and Hollywood. New York has finance, real estate, health insurance and a plethora of other services. However, when it comes to the Midwest and other more rural states, these places are seemingly struggling with diversification. Rural areas, which tend to lean more conservative, have become the places where business models “... are absolutely dominated, or at least

extremely, importantly governed, by the extraction, refinement, transportation and transformation of carbon and its derivatives,” Byth said. And it is not only Blyth who has realized this. Many people in carbon-dependent states have also caught on to this issue, and they are responding in a way that is understandable given their position. To the individuals whose livelihoods depend on carbon, the Democratic states that are working diligently to pursue a green transition truly do represent an existential threat to their way of life. People often fundamentally understand the green transition must happen, but in an economy where, as Blyth puts it, states are “knee deep in carbon” and are not “owned a living” by anyone, it is easy to see why people feel more strongly about opposing green policies. Both leftleaning voters who are nervous about climate change and right-leaning voters who are nervous about their business models view each other as existential threats and impediments to

When the Trump administration fought vehemently to protect coal, natural gas and oil drilling over the course of four years, many viewed these acts as gifts to business, and to a certain extent, they were. However, these acts, aside from being merely economic, were also incredibly political. Trump won carbon-dependent states and counties by wide margins in 2016 and likely wanted to repay them for being a loyal part of his base as well as ensuring their continued support for his 2020 campaign. Lo and behold, that’s exactly what happened. States like fVirginia, Kentucky, North Dakota, Louisiana and Ohio voted for Trump in overwhelming numbers. Trump might have lost the election, but in the minds of millions of people across the country who work in the carbon industry, he defended their way of life. Ultimately, both sides of the aisle must work together to make a green transition happen. Politics is not going to magically deliver a peaceful transition to wind turbines and solar panels. Instead, the transition is likely going to be deeply and profoundly political. After all, the government creates and stabilizes markets, and has the ability to decide, occasionally, who the winners and losers of certain situations will be. When the government, for example, supported the liberalization of trade but did not support universal retraining programs for affected workers, it made a choice that determined who would win and who would lose. Companies won and many blue-collar workers lost. Thus, if Democrats are serious about the green transition, they must realize that carbon states and workers cannot be left behind. Carbon voters, at the end of the day, must be given a reason to trust the government and its initiatives again and not just be told about potential wonders that may never actually come to fruition. DRAKE POLITICAL REVIEW

| 23

National

PECULIAR PRESIDENTIAL PET PROFILES

ccording to some historians, President Harry Truman once said, “If you want a friend in Washington? Get a dog.” While the origins of this quote can’t be definitively tied to Truman, the ideas behind it still rings true. The United States has a long tradition of presidential pets with 44 of our 46 Commanders in Chief keeping some type of pet during their time in the White House. Fittingly, from Abraham Lincoln’s beloved dog, Fido, and Richard Nixon’s infamous

cocker spaniel, Checkers, to the current residents of 1400 Pennsylvania Avenue, President Biden’s German shepards, Major and Commander, 70% of our pet-loving presidents brought dogs with them to the Oval Office. However, some other presidents looked beyond man’s best friend for more unusual companions that served a larger political purpose! Read on to learn more about the politics of some of the most infamous creatures that have called the White House home.

Josiah the Badger President: Theodore Roosevelt Time at the White House: May 1903 to September 1903 About: Theodore Roosevelt is another president known for keeping a veritable menagerie of quirky animals at the White House. One of his most infamous companions was a badger named Josiah. Roosevelt was on a railroad tour in Kansas when a young girl gifted him a baby badger. True to his reputation as a lover of nature and the outdoors, Roosevelt named the badger and brought him home as a present for his son Archie. Both Archie and his father attempted to tame Josiah, with limited success that can best be summed up by this quote from Archie, “He bites legs sometimes, but he never bites faces.” Needless to say, Josiah certainly encapsulated Roosevelt’s image as the untamable outdoorsman with a forceful personality.

24 | SPRING 2022

The First Flock President: Woodrow Wilson Time at the White House: 1918 to 1920 About: Woodrow Wilson brought the barnyard to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue in 1918 when he borrowed a flock of sheep that roamed freely and grazed on the front lawn of the White House. While admittedly very cute and cuddly, the sheep were expected to earn their keep by saving trimming and landscaping the lawn. Their presence was part of a larger public relations effort from the Wilson administration to establish the first family’s image as a rationing American family during World War I. To top it all off, before leaving the White House, the sheep were sheared and their wool was auctioned off to raise money for the Red Cross War Fund. The wool auction raised almost $52,000 and solidified Wilson’s role as president who was willing to make patriotic sacrifices for the war.

Spotlighting some of the most unique pets that have called the White House home. WORDS BY GRACE LONG | ART BY AMANDA O’BRIEN

The (Almost) Presidential Tiger Cubs President: Martin Van Buren Time at the White House: Technically none About: Before Martin Van Buren was officially inaugurated as president (but after he was elected in November), he was gifted a pair of tiger cubs from Kabul al Said, the Sultan of Oman. Records from the time show that he was extremely excited about the gift and began making the necessary plans to keep them at the White House. However, the preparations came to a halt when Congress found out about the situation. In order to stop Van Buren, Congress argued that the cubs were a gift meant specifically for the president, pointing out that he was still president-elect. According to that logic, Congress asserted that the cubs belonged to the U.S. government. Van Buren fought quite passionately in hopes of keeping the cubs, but in the end Congress prevailed. Before they even set foot in the White House, the cubs were confiscated and donated to a zoo. This failed tiger cub campaign almost feels like a preview of Van Buren’s subsequent failed attempts to remedy the disastrous financial downturn that would consume his presidency and earn him the the nickname “Martin Van Ruin.”

The First Hive

Rebecca the Raccoon President: Calvin Coolidge Time at the White House: 1926 to 1929 About: Contemporary research shows that having a pet in the White House can increase a president’s approval rating, and it seems that Coolidge had already figured this out back in the 1920s. He was often perceived as a very stoic and serious president, but balanced that reputation with a menagerie of wild animals. The Coolidges cared for everything from bear cubs and a pygmy hippo to lion cubs and a wallaby, but none of these critters were more famous than Rebecca the Raccoon. She was sent to President Coolidge as a gift from one of his supporters in Mississippi who suggested the first family serve the raccoon for Thanksgiving dinner. Instead, the family kept her as a pet, taking her for walks on a leash, bringing her along on their vacations, making her the center of attention at the annual White House Easter Egg Roll and even building her an outdoor play pen on the White House lawn. It’s safe to say Rebecca and her antics helped boost Coolidge’s image from boring to adventurous.

President: Barack Obama Time at the White House: 2009 to 2017 About: When most people think about President Obama’s pets, his fluffy pair of Portuguese water dogs, Bo and Sunny, come to mind. However, Barack and Michelle also brought a more untraditional group of pets to the White House - a hive of honey bees. The hive sat on the South Lawn and was meticulously cared for by the official White House beekeeper, Charlie Brandt. Honey harvested from the hive has reached wounded warriors, school kids, the president’s dinner table and even the Pope! Notably, keeping bees in such close proximity to presidential events did yield some challenges. For example, when a few bees flew through the White House Easter Egg Roll in 2015, one headline posted the following day read, “‘President Obama unleashes the bees as children scream.” All antics aside, this presidential beekeeping initiative was a part of Obama’s larger goal to implement a federal strategy intended to promote the health of honey bees and other pollinators, and with headlines like that, it certainly caught the public’s attention.

DRAKE POLITICAL REVIEW

| 25

National

THE FUTURE OF ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATION West Virginia v. EPA and the Separation of Powers Debate

WORDS BY MACK SWENSON | ART BY AMANDA O’BRIEN | PHOTOGRAPHY BY ELLA FIELD

ne of multiple high-profile cases on the docket during this Supreme Court session, West Virginia v. EPA has the potential to determine the future of Greenhouse Gas regulation — or, maybe it doesn’t. Since Congress passed the Clean Air Act in 1970, which made the Environmental Protection Agency responsible for improving national air quality and regulating emissions through state and federal laws, the EPA has faced a plentitude of challenges to its authority. However, depending on the ideology of the presidential administration in power, the EPA — which operates as part of the executive branch — has even challenged its own authority to regulate Greenhouse Gas emissions. The current consolidation of cases is a complicated tangle of conﬂicting statutes and inconsistent previous 26 | SPRING 2022

rulings, further complicated by the fact that there is currently no EPA rule in effect for the plaintiffs to challenge. To top it off, the case is set within central debates about the inﬂuence of politics in the Supreme Court and the separation of powers between Congress and the executive branch. First, a bit of background about how agencies such as the EPA operate. They don’t create laws, per se, but congress has given them the authority to create regulations that determine what is legal and what is not. Each presidential administration’s EPA issues a rule detailing how the EPA is going to fulfill its function of minimizing environmental harms to public health. “What is this fourth branch of agencies? It’s not exactly the presidency. They answer to the president, but they also do their own thing in response to congressional

statutes,” Jay Austin, the Editorin-Chief of the Environmental Law Reporter, said. “How do you legitimize their activity and how much does Congress need to say? That’s where the crux of the disagreement is.” The debates discussed in West Virginia v. EPA started in 2015, when private plaintiffs challenged the Obama administration’s EPA rule, the Clean Power Plan. The majority opinion of the 5-4 decision argued that the EPA had overstepped their regulatory authority and sent the case to the D.C. Court of Appeals. Ultimately, the rule never went into effect. Enter the Trump administration. The Trump Administration EPA’s first act was to throw out the Clean Power Plan altogether and then issue its own plan, known as the Affordable Clean Energy Rule. In contrast to the Obama administration EPA’s rule,

the Trump rule was considered more lenient in that it authorized only “inside the fence line” measures of regulating greenhouse gas emissions. Such measures can only regulate emissions within power plants themselves, as opposed to “outside the fence line measures” that impose broader standards on the entire industry and permit carbon offsets. “[The Trump Administration’s] argument was that the EPA is authorized to regulate the power plants themselves. They are not authorized by Congress to do what the Obama administration wanted to do, which is look at the electric generation system and say there are lots of ways to reduce emissions, not merely by burning less coal or better fuel at these plants, but also by increasing renewables elsewhere on the grid,” Austin said. But then the ACE rule was challenged — for the opposite reason as the Clean Power Plan. Environmentalists took the ACE rule to court on the grounds that it wasn’t enough to address climate change, one of the EPA’s charges. Then, in a ‘turn of the tables’ decision, the D.C. Court of Appeals ruled that section 7411 of the Clean Air Act does authorize the EPA to use “out-of-fence line” controls such as fuel-switching, even though they had indicated in their ruling on the Clean Power Plan that such rules exceeded the EPA’s authority. Essentially, the issue in these cases is that the Clean Air Act is written in broad, general terms, Iowa State University law professor Shannon Roesler said. Therefore, how the EPA actually carries out its charges is somewhat open to interpretation. This is where doctrines and statutes come into play. According to Roesler, the Chevron Doctrine allows agencies to “fill in the gaps” left by “highly technical” statutes. The equivalent legal opposition to the Chevron Doctrine is the Major Questions Doctrine, which states that statute interpretations of “vast political and economic significance” cannot be

deferred to agencies like the EPA. In this instance, a Major Questions Doctrine argument essentially indicates that Congress has deferred too much power to the EPA by allowing it to conduct outside-thefence line regulation. Roesler said that conservative justices, which currently outnumber non-conservative justices six to three, are more likely to cite the Major Questions Doctrine. “[The situation] looks like we’re dividing along political lines, but we have to be careful because it’s about the justices view with respect to the reach of what we would call the regulatory state,” Roesler said. “Those again tend to divide along political lines, but more conservative justices may be interested in emphasizing that Congress has a role to play here and should be more explicit when it wants an agency to take such big steps.” There are three possible outcomes in West Virginia v. EPA. The first is that the court could decide to vacate the case, meaning that they have determined they do not have the power to issue a ruling given that the Biden administration EPA has not yet issued a plan to address GHG emissions. “There are some issues with regard to whether it is a justiciable case under the Constitution,” Roesler said.

“It looks advisory. Right it looks like the court is about to say, ‘well, even though you’re not going to implement these regulations, we think you need some guidance.’” The second possible outcome is that the case could rule in favor of the plaintiffs by citing the Major Questions Doctrine. A Major Questions Doctrine argument would argue that Congress’s delegation of broad legislative authority to the EPA is unconstitutional, hence taking away the EPA’s authority to issue outside-the-fence line regulations. However, the court upheld the EPA’s authority against a Major Questions Doctrine years ago (what case?), Austin said, so putting forward this argument now could open up the door to many questions of legislative delegation and doctrines. “The legal conservative movement has argued…a doctrine that says if we deem this is an important enough question — a major question [that] affects a broad swath of the US economy — that gives us pause,” Austin said. “That makes us think Congress needs to be exceedingly clear about its direction to an agency in order for this to be a legitimate exercise of the agency’s [the EPA’s] power.” Finally, the court could rule in favor of the EPA, delegating it the DRAKE POLITICAL REVIEW

| 27

National

authority to take such broad actions if it so chooses. However, the potential impact of the ruling on environmental regulation as a whole is far from black and white. While one might initially suspect that a ruling against the EPA would cutthroat environmental regulation, the subsequent delegation of powers to Congress could encourage the legislative body to take the sweeping actions demanded by environmental advocates, Roesler said. This is because the rules of the EPA have, in a way, acted as stand-ins for Congressional legislation (or rather the lack thereof) to address environmental problems. “In an ideal world, [a ruling against the EPA] would galvanize Congress to get a solution done because what the court would be saying is, ‘we just think this is your role’” Roesler said. “In the real world, of course, we know that there are political obstacles to getting it done.” 28 | SPRING 2022

To complicate things further, some states and large power companies have sided with the EPA. Rather than viewing a ruling in favor of the EPA as a hindrance to their business model or a they may view the EPA’s expertinformed rules as more achievable than Congressional legislation, according to Roesler. “[States and power companies on the side of the EPA] fear more limited EPA authority because then it will be harder to work with the federal government as they already do under the Clean Air Act, to integrate emissions reductions for greenhouse gasses,” Roesler said. For many environmentalists, the most favorable outcome is that the court throws out the case, Roesler said. Essentially, this would buy time for the Biden administration EPA to issue a rule rather than issuing an advisory opinion that could potentially “tie the EPA’s hands.” “Most environmental advocates really didn’t want the court to take

this case,” Roesler said. “There’s concern that with a fair number of the justices interested and thinking about the separation of powers and these issues of congressional delegation to administrative agencies that this could be a case that limits EPA authority.” The entire messy situation is set within debates about the inﬂuence of politics in the Supreme Court. Even though the Court is meant to be nonpartisan, relying on precedent rather than politics, Austin said its decisions have become more inﬂuenced by politics in the last two decades. Despite the Court’s conservative majority, however, he cautions against trying to predict the outcome of the case. “Lawyers pick up on a lot of nuance that doesn’t make the headlines,” Austin said. “A lot of times, a case will get decided and it may look like it’s an anti environmental case, but it may actually be getting decided on some technicality or some procedural doctrine that doesn’t always neatly track along liberal conservative lines.”

InternationalLOCAL

LET’S TALK ROYAL POLITICS Reflecting upon Queen Elizabeth II’s time as monarch upon her 2022 Platinum Jubilee. WORDS BY HAYDEN WITTROCK | ART BY AMANDA O’BRIEN

ueen Elizabeth II has reigned over the United Kingdom for a better part of a century, making the next couple of months critical in terms of both celebrations and plans for the future. The year 2022 marks the Queen’s 70th year since her ascension to the throne back in 1952. In celebration

of the UK’s longest serving monarch, the royal family has announced plans for a Platinum Jubilee with various events scheduled throughout the year. Additionally, as the Queen approaches her 96th birthday, the Jubilee has prompted preparation for protocols to be followed upon her majesty’s death. Furthermore, it is important

to acknowledge the changing role of the Monarch and Royal Family on a political world stage.

History of the Jubilee

Jubilee celebrations have a long history in the Royal Family. Typically celebrated on milestones of the monarch’s long reign, Jubilees consist

PUTTING THE QUEEN’S REIGN INTO PERSPECTIVE Then: 1952 Queen’s Ascension to the Throne

Now: 2022 Queen’s 70th Platinum Jubilee Celebration

US President: 33rd President Harry S. Truman UK Prime Minister: Winston Churchill Number of Countries in Commonwealth: 8 World Population: 2.6 Billion Queen’s Family: 2 kids

US President: 46th President Joe Biden UK Prime Minister: Boris Johnson Number of Countries in Commonwealth: 54 World Population: 8 Billion Queen’s Family: 4 kids, 8 Grandchildren, 12 Great-grandchildren DRAKE POLITICAL REVIEW

| 29

of events throughout a particular anniversary year of a monarch’s reign. According to the Royal Household, King George III, who reigned from 1760-1820, was the first recorded monarch to celebrate an official fifty year Golden Jubilee. Queen Victoria, who Queen Elizabeth II beat out in 2015 as the U.K.’s longest serving monarch, celebrated Gold and Diamond Jubilees, respectively marking her 50th and 60th reigning years. Queen Elizabeth’s Platinum Jubilee is her fifth official jubilee having celebrated a Silver Jubilee in 1977 to mark her 25th year as a monarch, a Golden 50th year Jubilee in 2002, a Diamond Jubilee in 2012 and even a Sapphire Jubilee in 2017. The Jubilee years have typically been a heavy year of travel for the Queen as she makes various tours around the Crown’s Commonwealth. Other events that typically occur in Jubilee years include the support of charitable focuses in which the Monarch chooses, concerts, parades, pageants, contests and special head of state visits, lunches and dinners. As announced by the Royal Family, the 2022 Jubilee’s Central Weekend will extend from June 2nd to June 5th and designate a bank holiday to commemorate the reign of the Queen. Furthermore, a key aspect of Jubilees, this years’ Platinum included, is celebrating the ascension of a monarch. Queen Elizabeth ascended to the throne at the young age of 24 after news broke of her father, King George VI’s, death on Feb. 6, 1952. An official ceremony swearing her in as queen took place on June 2, 1953.

The Queen’s Role in Politics

The monarch is a figure meant to be a designated, non-partisan head of state for the entire Commonwealth. There are fourteen commonwealth countries that recognize Queen Elizabeth II as their monarch with 54 independent countries in the commonwealth all together. However, the non-partisanship and “figurehead” title does not translate to a lack of authority or power. 30 | SPRING 2022

While being effectively separated from the legislative matters of the British Parliament labeled as the ‘sovereign’, the monarch still has a special advising relationship with the British Prime Minister. Queen Elizabeth II has administered her role with 14 prime ministers over the course of her reign. Similarly 14 U.S. presidents have held office in her single tenure as Queen. In Queen Elizabeth’s time in the throne, she has witnessed and inﬂuenced the commonwealth on everything from international diplomatic tours and visits to handling domestic British issues such as the Royal image itself.

Queen Elizabeth II in 1959.

A Reign of Scandal

While there is much to celebrate regarding the Queen’s reign, her time as monarch has not been without scandal. While being one of the most prolific and recognizable figures in the world, she is also a central figure in the royal family as mother to four children and a grandmother and great grandmother to many. One of the family’s largest scandals which the Queen had to navigate involved her eldest son, Prince Charles, and his then wife, Princess Diana, as their relationship affairs unraveled in front of the public’s eyes. After being separated for four years, a 1995 LA Times article reported her intervention, “Angry at the spectacle of soiled royal linen being washed in public, Queen Elizabeth II has ordered her son Prince Charles and his estranged wife, Princess Diana, to divorce.” Shortly following the royal’s divorce, Princess Diana, who had captured much of the public’s heart,

died following a car accident while being followed by paparazzi. This was a catalyst for many to question the position of the conservative royal institution in such modern times. Similar feelings arose again recently, when Prince Harry married American actress, Meghan Markle. Prince Harry and Markel decided to step back after alleging that individuals in the institution of the Royal family were making racist comments toward Markel, who is biracial. The palace expressed their disappointment, but have sidestepped the allegations. Scandal persisted throughout the family as the monarch’s son, Prince Andrew, has been tied to convicted sex-offensor, Jeffery Epstein. Despite concerns by the public regarding the Royal Family on many occasions, Queen Elizabeth has always had a knack for staying neutral in political

Photo Source: Left: Unknown / Library and Archives Canada. Right: Sergeant Adrian Harlen with Defence Imagery, ﬂickr

Queen Elizabeth II at a ceremony in June 2013.

matters in and outside of her family. Despite the Queen’s consistent apolitical demeanor, some still can not help but wonder what the Queen’s stance is in instances surrounding family, British, or world politics. For example, in 2018 as the UK was looking towards leaving the EU in Brexit, some began to analyze her words suspecting her political stance may be hidden within. While there is a separation of church and state to which the Queen loyally adheres to when it comes to commenting on political opinions, transparency is still something the public asks for in the royal family affairs. This call for transparency has been present throughout her reign despite her family’s attempt, being the first to open the royal palace doors in 1969 for a documentary that attempted to acquaint the public with the inner workings of the Royal Family. However, some recent scandals have dubbed the monarchy “outdated” suggesting that reform might be needed looking to the future. In talking with Professor Robert Hazell from the University College London who studies constitutional monarchy, he referred

to research he has done regarding the potential resilience of the monarchy looking toward the future. Questioning whether the UK would ever become a modern republic, his work points to the need for constitutional interference and a decline of public consent of the monarchy. “In Britain support for a republic has rarely exceeded 15-20 per cent, and support for the monarchy has rarely dropped below 70-80 percent” Hazell found. Furthermore, despite scandals questioning the authority of the crown, it is more than likely that the Institution will prevail.

PRIME MINISTERS COME AND GO, BUT A MONARCH CAN REIGN FOR DECADES. ROBERT HAZELL, PROFESSOR AT UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON

Hazell also refers to the continuous legitimization that occurs with the public opinion and the monarchy which he and colleagues further explain in their book, The Role of Monarchy in Modern Democracy. He says that one form of legitimacy

comes from the monarchy serving almost as a protector to their democratic style government. The second way the monarchy will continue to stand is through continuity, “Prime ministers come and go, but a monarch can reign for decades, accumulating wisdom from long experience. The monarchy is also defended for its contribution to society, through royal visits and patronage; and to the economy, as a tourist attraction” Hazell explains. Aside from the politics and scandal, the monarch is still a figure that is well respected around the world. The nearly three generations that Queen Elizabeth II has reigned have been no exception. As 2022 marks her Platinum Jubilee, 70th reigning year, and 95th birthday, it becomes a time to reﬂect on the historical impact of the queen’s reign. There is no doubt that we will soon be looking to the future of the monarchy, which will for the first time in many people’s conceivable memory, be occupied by a new member of the royal family. Upon Queen Elizabeth’s death, the UK will enter into a period of mourning and immediately spring into motion a ten day pre-planned government plan named “Operation London Bridge”. Furthermore, as Hazell’s constitution unit explains, “Charles will become King the moment the Queen dies, under the old common law rule Rex nunquam moritur i.e. ‘The king never dies.’” The British government and the royal family strive for a monarch’s death to additionally signify the beginning of a new reign. By any measure, Queen Elizabeth will leave an immense legacy on the crown not just by the nature of time she spent as monarch but by the many world events she witnessed occupying it. As the world continues to navigate the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic, the Queen’s Platinum Jubilee will allow Britain, the greater Commonwealth, and the world to celebrate a monarch that has held such a prominent place on the world stage for multiple generations. DRAKE POLITICAL REVIEW

| 31

International

ISSUES IN THE GLOBAL SUPPLY CHAIN Production, shipping, and distribution exist in a complicated, co-dependent, and ever-changing dynamic. The fastest way to throw a long-lasting wrench in the delicate industry? A pandemic. WORDS BY SOPHIE GLOO | ART BY AMANDA O’BRIEN

t has been more than two years since the World Health Organization (WHO) confirmed the first case of COVID-19 in December of 2019. Since then, the WHO has confirmed nearly 450 million cases of COVID-19 and approximately 6 million deaths, making it virtually impossible for people to have not felt its impact. But the pandemic hasn’t solely affected people’s personal relationships and human lives—it’s also given rise to massive issues within the global supply chain. While the international economy is no stranger to supply chain issues, COVID-19 has caused unprecedented disruption, especially when it comes

32 | SPRING 2022

to the importation and exportation of goods on a global scale.

Port Shutdowns: Only the Beginning

The brunt of this disruption can be attributed to virus mitigation measures like China’s zero-tolerance policy which seeks to contain virus outbreaks as soon as they arise. The country’s efforts to minimize the spread of the virus saw the shutdown of its Ningbo-Zhoushan port, the thirdbusiest shipping port in the world. This, and other shutdowns of essential international shipping ports placed tremendous strain on the global supply chain and overwhelmed surrounding ports and distribution centers, many

of which had already been under stress due to labor shortages even before the pandemic started. The nature of the work done in these types of jobs has not allowed for a switch to online work, forcing workers in these fields to remain in close proximity with one another, especially in areas like warehouse buildings that are commonplace in shipping ports. As a result, these industries have seen increased case numbers and pandemic-related losses which has only added to the alreadyexisting shortage of labor. Coupled with labor shortages, the shutdown of key ports has caused unprecedented levels of delay in distribution. Shipping ports in

IMPACTED INDUSTRIES Products and industries impacted by pandemic-related global supply chain issues: Food/restaurant industry: chicken, aluminum (canned goods), styrofoam takeout supplies, cream cheese, potatoes, champagne, maple syrup. Medical industry: general medical supplies, dialysis-related products, personal protective equipment, testing supplies and equipment, ventilation-related products, blood. Construction industry: garage doors, lumber, aluminum (building). Electronics/tech industry: computer chips and GPUs, consumer electronics (lack of parts), cars (lack of parts).

Photo Source: Left: David Vives, Unsplash. Right: Mika Baumeister, Unsplash

Other: Ivermectin/horse dewormer, toilet paper, bikes, chlorine, coins, canned pet food. • Los Angeles and Long Beach, California, reported a recordbreaking increase in the number of cargo ships waiting for space to dock and unload their contents. The number of cargo ships waiting to dock at these ports prepandemic ranged from zero to one. After China’s shutdown of NingboZhoushan, that number skyrocketed to 65. Ports like Los Angeles and Long Beach along the coast of Southern California account for almost half of all U.S. imports, yet the issues these ports are facing are being felt around the world. It seems as if no industry is immune to the effects of the supply chain. However, although the issues are widespread, some industries have suffered more than others. The restaurant industry, for example, is one that has been hit particularly hard by these supply chain issues, and,

like port shutdowns and distribution delays, these issues can be traced back to attempts to stop the spread of the virus early on in the pandemic.

The Consequences of Carryout

When the first wave of pandemic restrictions were set in place back in April of 2020, restaurants were forced to close and/or switch to exclusively carry out dining. While the food products themselves are not necessarily in short supply, the styrofoam carryout containers intended to package products for carryout dining are hard to come by as a result of the sudden switch from in-person dining during the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic. Elaine Apostolopoulos is the owner of Paul’s Family Restaurant in Elgin, Illinois. Paul’s Family Restaurant is just one of the many restaurants

and businesses across the country and across the world that have been impacted by supply shortages in the past two years. At the beginning of the pandemic, the restaurant was forced to move all of its business to carry out dining, which Apostolopoulos says has been challenging. According to Apostolopoulos, one of the biggest sellers at Paul’s is its specialty soups, but the restaurant has struggled to meet the high demand for carryout soup orders because of a lack of styrofoam cups and bowls.

WE’RE STRUGGLING TO GET THE CONTAINERS TO PACKAGE AND SELL [SOUP], SO IT’S BEEN A CHALLENGE. ELAINE APOSTOLOPOULOS, OWNER OF PAUL’S FAMILY RESTAURANT IN ELGIN, IL DRAKE POLITICAL REVIEW

| 33

“We’re struggling to get the containers to package and sell it [soup], so it’s been a challenge,” Apostolopoulos says. She says that she recognizes that many restaurants and businesses have not been as fortunate as Paul’s has, but that the restaurant continues to deal with the fallout from the initial pandemic restriction measures that were put in place. Because restaurants like Paul’s are still relying on their carryout business now more than ever, something as simple as a shortage of containers can prove to be quite detrimental. In the same way that Paul’s Family Restaurant has plenty of soup to sell, but no containers to sell it in, many supply shortages are not because of a lack of product itself, but rather a shortage in the products needed in the packing and distribution process. Although this does not create a direct product shortage, it does cause a bottleneck in the product production process even if the product is in ample supply. 34 | SPRING 2022

According to Hanner Orr, an Assistant Store Manager at Tractor Supply Company, this is the case with cat food at their Mauldin, SC store location. Oddly enough, however, the shortage only exists for wet cat food. This is because the supply issue is not related to the cat food at all; The issue stems from a shortage of aluminum used to make up the cans that the wet food is packaged in. Store shelves around the globe are empty of canned items like wet cat food because they cannot be packaged without an abundant aluminum supply. The shortage of aluminum is another issue that can be attributed in part to the initial pandemic response efforts that forced breweries, like restaurants, to transition to carryout. Customers who would normally be able to drink at their local taprooms had to carry out their favorite craft beers, causing a noticeable increase in demand for canned beverages that aluminum manufacturers are still struggling to meet given pandemic-related labor shortages and distribution delays.

Can the Supply Chain be Fixed?

Unfortunately, there is no simple way to go about fixing the global supply chain issues that COVID-19 has caused. Any solution will be as complex as the supply chain itself. Ideally, the best way to combat pandemic-related supply issues would be to reduce consumer spending and decrease demand in order to alleviate some of the stress on production and distribution. If demand were to decrease, it would give supply a chance to catch up and allow things to begin returning to normal. However, the reality is that people will not simply stop buying things, and the pandemic is still a very present hurdle that cannot be ignored. If past examples of global supply chain issues are any indicator of what can be expected moving forward, it is that things are likely to get a whole lot worse before they get any better. The good news is that past examples of global supply chain issues can act as case studies to give some idea of how to move forward, and how to prevent these issues in the future.

International

REALPOLITIK, UKRAINE AND A NEW RUSSIAN EMPIRE Putin’s leadership is bringing 19th century politics into the modern world. WORDS BY JACK PARKOS | ART BY AMANDA O’BRIEN

n 2014, Russian President Vladamir Putin shocked the world when he annexed Crimea from Ukraine. In response to this, former Secretary of State John Kerry accused Vladamir Putin of acting in a “19th century fashion” during the 21st century. Kerry’s accusation was reaffirmed on Feb. 24, 2022 when Putin launched a full scale invasion of Ukraine. The world watched as Russian troops marched into Ukrainian

territory and Ukrainian civilians desperately armed themselves. People were outraged and scared but also confused as to what Putin’s ambitions in the region were. Professor Mitchell Orienstein of the University of Pennsylvania explains that there is a “massive gap of understanding between how Russians see Europe and Europeans see Europe.” Many people do not understand

why Russia would invade another European nation with little resources. John Kerry’s statements from eight years ago, however, give us a clear picture as to what Russia is doing now.

Realpolitik: A 19th Century Idea

When Kerry called Putin’s approach to foreign policy a 19th Century approach, he was referring to the approach to international DRAKE POLITICAL REVIEW

| 35

politics known as Realpolitik. Translated from German as “Real Politics,” this approach to foreign policy builds on the idea of Realism: that leaders should approach politics in a realistic or pragmatic approach, not with ideology or ethics. Supporters of Realpolitik see it as a pragmatic approach while those opposed to it often accuse it of being amoral and Machiavellian. In the 19th century, Prussian Prime Minister Otto Von Bismarck used Realpolitik to build the German Empire. This political approach is focused on power and areas of inﬂuence, and practitioners of it are not afraid of using military power to secure these ends. Bismarck was concerned with creating a balance of power in Europe and used military conquest to attempt to achieve his 36 | SPRING 2022

balance of power.

Putin’s Adaptation

Much of the modern Western World has since moved on from Realpolitik. An ideology of international cooperation is seen in organizations such as the United Nations, NATO and the EU. This is typically called Liberalism in international relations, and it rejects power politics and focuses more on ideological ends. However, not all of the world agrees with Realpolitik. Vladimir Putin sees the liberal world order through the lens of 19th century politics. “It’s about power,” Orienstein said. “[Putin] doesn’t feel like Russia has an appropriate place in the European Security Structure. He wants to assert Russian interests.”

Putin does not believe the modern structure of Europe gives Russia a proper seat at the table and is ambitious to change that; he believes that the best way to do this is through traditional foreign policy. “Russia is not very institutionalized,”Orienstein said. “So, they are not very comfortable with operations in the EU.” Oreinstein further believes that Putin sees himself as a Tsar-like figure and that “Russians have a very imperial mentality.” To him, Russia does not want to work within global organizations.

Power Balance

Orenstien explains that these power politics are “widely rejected in the rest of Europe,” and that European economies are intertwined. Putin

Photo Source: Daria Volkova, Unsplash

does not understand this, however, as he does not see the EU as being about cooperation or unity but about power. Since Putin does not believe Russia has a fair place at the table in European affairs, he sees a power balance against Russia. In Putin’s mind, “All these places are controlled by Germany,” Orienstien said. “They take a great power view of everything, to them Europe isn’t in charge of its security, it’s the U.S.” Putin does not see the EU as an economic or political alliance of independent European nations, but rather as a US and German controlled alliance aimed at shifting power away from Russia. And with Realpolitik’s emphasis on the balance of power, Putin has decided that Russia must tilt the balance of power in Europe back towards Russia. In his mind, the best way to do this is imperialism. James Andrews, Professor of Modern Russian and Comparative Eurasian history at Iowa State University, says that while Putin may resemble a Bismarck-style foreign policy, it more clearly resembles an attempt to “resuscitate some, but not all, of the former USSR, and re-integrate…former republics into a newly reorganized Russian empire.” Andrews points to his actions in Crimea, as well as sending “peacekeepers” into Kazakhstan.

If Putin can reintegrate former soviet territories into a new Russian “empire,” this will balance power out between the west and Russia. This is the mentality Bismarck had towards European empires in the 19th century. Putin views the EU similarly to how Bismarck would have viewed the Austrian Empire.

Why Ukraine?

Only eight years separate the Annexation of Crimea from Russia’s full scale invasion of Ukraine, it is clearly high on Putin’s agenda, but why specifically Ukraine? “If you want to have a Russian Empire, you have to have Ukraine first,” Oritenstien said. While Ukrainian sovereignty is widely accepted around the world, Putin does not recognize its legitimacy and recently blamed Vladimir Lenin, former leader of the Soviet Union and founder of the Russian Communist Party for creating this false idea of legitimacy. “Ukraine has had a very tense relationship with Russia going all the way back to WWI,” Andrews said. After World War I, Ukraine became an independent republic, however, they were soon absorbed into the USSR in 1922. The Ukranians were not pleased with being under Soviet control.

According to James, a popular referendum in 1991 Ukraine showed that almost 90% of Ukranians supported independence. Of course, in 1991 the Soviet Union ceased to exist, and Ukraine was independent, but Putin does not see it this way. Ukraine’s desire to join NATO caused fear in Vladamir Putin. NATO was originally meant to be an alliance of Western European countries against Soviet aggression, yet despite the fall of the USSR, NATO remains in effect. Putin, in true 19th century fashion, claims that Ukraine joining NATO would be a threat to Russian security as it would allow for American troops to be put on the Ukrainian-Russian border. Ultimately, this was the straw that broke the camel’s back and prompted recent invasions.

The End Goal

Much of European history has been about power dynamics, and different kingdoms and empires fought tooth and nail to secure their interests. The 21st century has seen a decline in Realpolitik and a rise in liberalism as nations now seek to use diplomacy and internationalism to interact with other nations and solve potential conﬂicts. However, as Orenstien put it, “Putin is a KBG guy, a cynic.” Author Terry Pratchet is quoted as satirically saying “Do unto others before they do unto you,” which serves as a strong summary of Putin’s vision of the world: it’s a “kill or be killed” power game to him. Russia must become a powerful empire before other empires threaten Russia. Putin does not care about ideology; he isn’t explicitly fighting for or against capitalism and democracy. His focus is power. He is a practitioner of Realpolitik and modern imperialism, and he doesn’t want to play by the West’s rules. Will 21st century diplomacy prevail? Or will Putin prove to the world that his 19th century approach is the best way to manage Europe? The answer to these questions could likely be answered by the outcome of the invasion of Ukraine. DRAKE POLITICAL REVIEW

| 37

You can find us at

DRAKEPOLITICALREVIEW.COM @DPRmagazine

@DPRmagazine

@DrakePoliticalReview

WANT TO HELP US MAKE OUR NEXT PUBLICATION OR BE ADDED TO OUR MAILING LIST? SCAN THE QR CODE!