the election issue Vol. 9
Issue 1 Nov. 2, 2012
s s I
e u
on i t a m ents r fo d t In pen imi on de e L i t ec f In Ag for l 2 E se o ting ase 1 20 Ri Vo e C e 3— 5— 7— Th Sid d n and nd 8— ch a 2 4 6 a ge Ea s s ge age ges Pa a P P Pa
In
d i s
t e
s i h
(acumen.)
Welcome to the Acumen’s Election Issue
Contact information Mailing Address: 520 E. Main St., Carmel, IN 46032 Phone: (317) 846-7721, Ext. 7143 Website: www.hilite.org E-mail: Staff members of the HiLite may be contacted via email by using their first initial and their last name appending @hilite.org. For example, Victor Xu will receive mail sent to vxu@hilite.org.
Purpose Acumen is an issue-based publication serving to supplement the HiLite. Acumen is distributed to the students, faculty and staff of Carmel High School. Opinions expressed herein are not necessarily representative of those held by CHS, the Carmel Clay system faculty, staff or administration.
Dear readers, The results of this presidential election will directly impact our future. The two main candidates, Barack Obama and Mitt Romney, clearly distinguish themselves through their differing opinions on issues that will lead the country on different paths. It’s always disappointing to witness that our generation lacks political knowledge of and has apathy toward the future of our country. Our goal is to provide you with information you need to be involved with the affairs of your country. The rise of social media outlets to express political views has helped to encourage more of the next generation of voters to get informed. All throughout Twitter, Tumblr and Facebook, we see our peers getting involved by either sharing memes of Big Bird or posting statuses about how Romney dominated the first presidential debate. No matter whom you support or if you choose not to support anyone at all, there’s no doubt: change is around the corner. Our calling for you is to get involved starting now, regardless of whether you are voting. The future of America is in your hands. Your Acumen editors, Dhruti Patel and Julie Xu
2012 Presidential Election: By the Numbers The Money Race
Staff Acumen Editors
Reporters/Photographers/Graphics
HiLite Editor in Chief HiLite Managing Editors
Principal Superintendent
Dhruti Patel Julie Xu James Benedict Gavin Colavito Connie Chu Chrishan Fernando Conner Gordon Omeed Malek Hailey Meyer Naomi Reibold Melinda Song Liane Yue Victor Xu Natalie Maier Melinda Song Tony Tan Ryan Zukerman
President Barack Obama, with the Democratic Party and Priorities USA Action Super PAC, has spent
11% not spent 89% spent
$615.6 million out of the $690.1 million raised.
84% spent
Gov. Mitt Romney, with the Republican Party and Restore Our Future Super PAC, has spent $530.7 million out of $633 million raised.
16% not spent
John Williams Jeff Swensson
Want to find out more about the 2012 elections?
CONNER GORDON / COVER PHOTO LIANE YUE, GAVIN COLAVITO / LOGO
Page 2
The New York Times predicts that Obama will have 237 electoral votes from “solid Democratic states,” and that Mitt Romney will have 191 electoral votes from “solid Republican states.”
9
states are considered “toss-up” states: Nevada, Colorado, Iowa, Wisconsin, Ohio, Virginia, North Carolina, Florida and New Hampshire.
Indiana is considered to lean toward the Republican Party, despite President Obama’s close win here in 2008. Our proximity to Chicago, though, still holds some hope for Obama.
Chicago
Talk the Talk: Political Lingo Politicians often use loaded, key phrases in debates and speeches to prove their cases against opponents. Here’s an explanation of the most common ones, their meanings and the reason why politicians use them “Jam Down Our Throats”
“Ground Zero Mosque”
“The Cultural Elite”
“The American People”
“Will Not Rest”
“That’s a Good Question”
Politicians often say this phrase when trying to prove why their policies are correct. While public opinion is relevant to policy decisions, the phrase encompasses all 300 million Americans into one talking point.
President Obama often uses this phrase to prove his commitment to working hard until policies are passed and life changes for the better.
This phrase has two common uses: one, to stall answering a difficult question or two, to endorse a controversial opinion without explicitly stating it in order to avoid backlash from the opposition.
This phrase is often used by conservative politicians when the government forces them to do something they don’t like. Often used when referencing President Obama’s healthcare bill.
Check out the HiLite’s election site. There are links to major candidates’ websites, social media coverage and a poll to track your political opinions.
Projection of Electoral Results
This references the mosque being built two blocks away from Ground Zero. It is not strictly a mosque, but an Islamic cultural center. This phrase is often used by those in opposition of the project.
This phrase is often used by prominent Republicans to describe Democrats who advocate for a big government that would regulate citizens’ everyday lives.
JULIE XU, DHRUTI PATEL / GRAPHICS CBSNEWS.COM, NYTIMES.COM / SOURCE
ACUMEN
Where They Stand
Take a closer look at the positions of presidential nominees Barack Obama and Mitt Romney regarding some key issues of the 2012 presidential election
MELINDA SONG / GRAPHIC BBC.CO.UK, BARACKOBAMA.COM, MITTROMNEY.COM, TAX POLICY CENTER / SOURCE
Economy Romney’s plan for economic growth focuses on tax cuts, a repeal of Obama’s 2010 healthcare reform law and a repeal of 2010 Wall Street banking regulations. This election, the two candidates’ approaches to the economy reveal a distinct divide between liberal and conservative ideology.
In 2009, Obama signed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, which includes tax cuts and investments in education and infrastructure. Obama has repeatedly cited his bailout of the American auto industry, but critics say that its effects have been overstated.
Foreign policy Romney’s plan has called for more efficiency in the design and distribution of weapons systems. BBC reported that Romney’s investment in military spending would add about $100 billion to the Pentagon’s budget. Critics have stated that the Department of Defense has not asked for increased federal funding.
In October 2011, Obama announced that he would pull troops out of Iraq by the end of the year, which was when the formal military agreement between the United States and Iraq would expire. He also agreed to a $487 million reduction in defense spending over a 10-year period with congressional Republicans.
Healthcare In 2010, Obama spearheaded healthcare reform. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act aims for universal health insurance coverage. Under this act, individuals without health insurance are required to purchase individual policies, which are now offered at lower rates.
As governor of Massachusetts, Romney enacted a healthcare law that became a model for “Obamacare.” However, in his campaign, he has stated that he would return most health policy to the states. Romney also supports privatization of Medicare, instead of government-funded healthcare.
Taxes Obama has repeatedly stated that he has invested in the middle class by cutting its tax rates. Obama has also supported the “Buffett rule,” named after millionaire Warren Buffett, which would raise the effective tax rate for millionaires.
Nov. 2, 2012
If elected, Romney has stated that he would make permanent the Bush-era tax cuts from 2000. However, how Romney will fund these tax cuts without worsening the deficit or hurting the middle class still remains unclear.
Page 3
35% of registered
voters identify with the Democratic
Party
33% of registered voters identify as
Independents
Everything in Moderation Young voters are turned off by the extremes of the Democratic and Republican Parties. By Naomi Reibold, nreibold@hilite.org
H
e’s just not that into it. “Right now on the (political) spectrum, I think I’m off the spectrum,” Nicholas “Nick” Johnson, self-declared independent and senior, said. “It’s just frustration, apathy.” Johnson said that before last year, he was more supportive of the Democratic Party but has since fallen away from the liberal side. “It’s been exactly what (the politicians) haven’t done. They haven’t stood very strongly for anything, some things sure, but nothing inspiring. There’s no vision behind it,” Johnson said. “The more I follow politics, the less I esteem either (presidential candidate).” Johnson is not alone. The political extremes of both the Democratic and Republican parties have discouraged many other young potential voters, and as a result, many identify more with
the Independent Party. According to a nationwide poll conducted in June by the Garfield Institute for Public Leadership at Hiram College, 70 percent or more of young voters ages 18 to 29 said the government is broken and that both political parties are out of touch with each other and the electorate in general. Also according to an article written in August of this year in The New York Times, the Democratic and Republican platforms over the past 30 years have increasingly appealed to the extremists of their parties. U.S. History teacher Will Ellery said because both parties are now more extreme, there’s no middle ground anymore, where a lot of potential voters usually stand. “The parties have had, due to the (electoral) primary system, to lean more toward their extremes in order to get their party’s nomination
in the primaries,” Ellery said. He went on to say that as a result of this, youth choose not to affiliate themselves with either group but rather begin to classify themselves with independent parties. “I would contend that if there’s a growth in (independent parties), it seems to be in the Libertarians,” Ellery said. “That’s because elements of the Libertarian Party appeal to both Republicans and Democrats, and so that’s where you have a little more tendency for youth voters to lean.” Both President Barack Obama and Gov. Mitt Romney are struggling to stimulate the youth in this election, according to Ellery. “The problem for President Obama is, four years ago in 2008, he had galvanized the youth with this idea of hope and kind of the promise of significant changes. I think many of the youth
It’s been exactly what (the politicians) haven’t done. They haven’t stood very strongly for anything, some things sure, but nothing inspiring. There’s no vision behind it. Senior Nicholas Johnson Page 4
ACUMEN
HAILEY MEYER AND OMEED MALEK / PHOTO ILLUSTRATION PEW RESEARCH CENTER / SOURCE
Rise of the Independents History shows us the growing popularity of independent voters and candidates in the last few decades. In 1992, Ross Perot earned 19 percent of the popular vote, running one of the most successful independent campaigns in U.S. history.
28% of registered
voters identify with the Republican
Party
Ralph Nader influenced the 2000 presidential elections by taking away votes from Democrat Al Gore, allowing President George W. Bush to win the election.
A 2011 analysis in USA Today showed the number of registered Independent voters increased in 18 states.
Both Democratic and Republican parties trail Independent voter registrations in key battleground states for the 2012 election.
Net registered voter increase or decrease for each party in 2012 Nevada
Florida
would argue that their lives are not really any markedly different now than they were four years ago. We don’t see the ground swell of youth support for President Obama,” Ellery said. “At the same time, presidential candidate Romney certainly does not seem to appeal to youth at large.” According to Ellery, both presidential candidates in this election have solidified their parties, causing polarization in this election. “President Obama appeals more toward the left of the Democratic Party, and certainly presidential candidate Romney appeals also to the left of his party, which is an interesting dynamic as Romney is trying very hard to get to the right, to prove that he is a conservative,” Ellery said. Many young voters have begun to recognize this change in the parties. “I think Obama, when he was (first) president, he originally had kind of an anti-gay marriage stance,” Madeline Tatum, self-declared independent and senior, said. “But he increasingly got more liberal, like when he repealed ‘Don’t ask,
Third Parties and the U.S. Nov. 2, 2012
Don’t tell’ and is now supporting gay marriage. I would say that’s an example of (how he became) more liberal.” Johnson also said he recognized changes in this election compared to the 2008 election. “From my memories in 2008,” Johnson said, “there was way more discussion than people talking about this election now. Even with my friends, where my conversations are primarily political, we don’t even mention it. It’s kind of embarrassing to even talk about.” Johnson said his frustration with politics is in the rhetoric of each party. He said he finds that each party is dominated by party ideals, instead of individual interpretations, which creates smaller platforms. Johnson said these extremes cause him to feel as if he cannot associate with any party. On the other hand, Tatum, who said she is relatively new to politics, said she finds the growing extremes of both the Democratic and Republican parties helpful. “It just makes it so easy to decide which side you’re on because (the parties) are so different. I think that with most elections (the candidates
Colorado
Republicans
Iowa
Democrats
Pennyslvania
North Carolina Independents
USATODAY.COM, WASHINGTONTIMES.COM, NEWS.YAHOO.COM / SOURCES
are) so similar that it’s just hard to tell exactly what your stance is because they’re just so darn similar. But I like it that I can really differentiate where my views are and matching them with the candidates,” Tatum said. However, Tatum said she does have frustrations of her own with the large distinction between parties. “There’s not enough compromise for legislature, ” Tatum said. Johnson and Tatum also differ on the decision whether to vote or not. Tatum said she will always vote because it’s her duty as an American. On the other hand, if both political parties become more and more extreme, Johnson said he most likely would not vote and would rather not participate. “I feel like both the candidates and the voters are just getting tired,” he said. Page 5
18
& under
Students and faculty consider the pros and cons of lowering the voting age
By Chrishan Fernando cfernando@hilite.org
Senior Olivia Ross fought quite a few battles as a freshman–not battles of bloodshed but rather of words. Ross participated in political debates in her class, Debate 1. She said that the debates she had in class helped her become a more politically aware voter for the future. “(Debate 1) really forced me to take a stand on the issues I have an impression about,” Ross said. The National Youth Rights Association (NYRA), an organization devoted to promoting youth rights, argues that there are many other teenagers like Ross who are well-versed in political issues and should be able to vote as young as 16 years old. However, others, such as government teacher James Ziegler, disagree. Ziegler said that few students coming into his
class are aware of political issues. “It doesn’t seem like a lot of kids who are 16, 17 and 18 have too much of a background in what happens in the political world,” Ziegler said. Despite her political experience, Ross pointed out that many students are quick to follow other people’s political views without any justification. “I think a lot of people just go along with whatever their parents are for,” Ross said. The NYRA argues that youth may support the candidates their parents vote for because they have similar beliefs as their parents and not because the younger generation are persuaded to do so by their parents. However, Ziegler said he disagrees. He said he believes teenagers have a tendency to support candidates their parents support as a replacement for doing their own research on candidates
“(A teenager) may just vote based off what they hear someone else saying and not be fully going out and investigating on their own,” Ziegler said. “Or maybe their parents vote a certain way so they’re naturally just going to follow what their parents vote (for).” Either way, the NYRA states that lowering the voting age will increase political interest and voter turnout among youth. Ziegler, however, is doubtful of the potential benefits of lowering the voting age. “I think it’s a worthy cause to get more people voting, but at the same time, the lowest voter turnout is amongst our youth,” Ziegler said. “I don’t know if lowering the voting age would… contribute to a larger amount of (youth) voting.” Senior Akshay Kumar, unlike Ziegler, agrees with the NYRA’s belief that lowering the voting
A Brief History of U.S. Voting Requirements
1787
1810
1870
1971
1920
VOTER
Only white, male, adult property owners are allowed to vote.
Last religious prerequisite for voting is eliminated.
The 15th Amendment extends suffrage to adult male citizens of any race, including former slaves.
19th Amendment ensures women’s suffrage.
Minimum voting age is set at 18. CONNIE CHU, JULIE XU / GRAPHIC INFOPLEASE. COM / SOURCE
Page 6
ACUMEN
Around the Globe: Minimum Voting Ages 16 17 18 19 20 21
CONNIE CHU, JULIE XU / GRAPHIC CHARTSBIN.COM / SOURCE
Nov. 2, 2012
Nevertheless, he said that there are many ways for teenagers to learn more about politics, such as watching the news or listening to podcasts of political discussion. He also said teachers could help by incorporating the study of current events into regular classroom discussions. “I think just exposure to the issues (of politics) could help teenagers become more politically aware,” Ziegler said. In particular, Ziegler said he believes it is a good idea that government be a required class for high school seniors in Indiana in the sense that it allows students to learn more about the workings of American politics and to be informed of the government. “Hopefully once (students) begin to learn a little bit more about the issues (of modern American politics) by taking government, it strikes that passion in students (to learn more about the policies that affect them),” Ziegler said. Kumar said he believes that schools could allow students who are not politically aware to become more so by emphasizing politics in courses even more. “(Teachers) could start teaching government classes a little early on in high school than wait for it to be taught in senior year,” Kumar said. “History classes that (students) do take should stress government issues a little bit more than they do currently.” Meanwhile, Ross said she continues to expand her political knowledge and offer advice to other teenagers to help them learn more about politics. “Watch the news. At my house, (my family and I) read the newspaper together every morning,” Ross said. “Group discussion is great.”
By the Numbers: Youth Voting
49% of citizens 18 to 24 years old voted in 2008
67% of citizens over 24 years old voted in 2008
50
% of voters 18 to 20 years old
age will increase political interest in youth. In addition, Kumar said that lowering the voting age could be beneficial because present-day teenagers are more intelligent than those before. “Most (teenagers), at a lower age, are starting to mature a lot faster than we were before,” Kumar said. “We have strong political views and we should be able to express our views.” While Kumar acknowledges that not all teenagers are mature or politically aware, he states that such people would not cause a problem if the voting age is lowered because they probably would not vote anyway. “If (some students) don’t want to vote or aren’t politically aware, then they just don’t have to vote,” Kumar said. Freshman Ryan Middleton also said he believes that the voting age should be lowered. In fact, he said that lowering the voting age would cause him to become more politically aware. Despite their opposing viewpoints about the voting age, both Ziegler and Middleton agree with the NYRA’s argument that teenagers have a unique perspective of American society of which they should inform politicians. “I think (politicians) could get a better representation of the younger generation (if they vote),” Middleton said. However, Ziegler said that more teenagers should become politically aware before any decisions are made to lower the voting age. In addition, he said that the reason youth tend not to be very politically involved is that many important political issues do not immediately affect them. “I think as a kid, you’re just not interested as much in (politics),” Ziegler said. “You don’t necessarily see how different political policies and philosophies impact you as a kid as much as they do when you’re an adult.”
40 30 20 10 0
1996
2000
2004
2008
Election Year JULIE XU / GRAPHIC U.S. CENSUS BUREAU / SOURCE
Page 7
Opinion
Edging the Line Managing editor Ryan Zukerman and GMN Liaison James Benedict make the case for each major party in this year’s election
The Case for Change Responsible Recovery By Ryan Zukerman Before I begin, it is imperative that we are all on the same page. This election is not a social election. In all facets, it is purely economic. While I understand that issues like gay marriage and abortion are important, please understand that I’m not asking you to change your stance. This election is about something larger than social concerns. This election is about the continuing survival of the United States of America. Don’t get me wrong; I would be the first person to support these social issues, and I often identify myself as a moderate, but I realized about this time last fall that this election was a pivotal point for our country. We could either turn and embrace the future with a renewed economic policy, or continue our descent into the darkness our current president has made the norm. So, as I said before, this is entirely an economic election. In August we watched a documentary titled “I.O.U.S.A.: One Nation. Under Stress. In debt.,” and for the first time in my life, I felt a legitimate concern for my own future as well as the future of the United States. You see, the national debt of the United States currently sits above $16.5 trillion, and it is our generation that will have to deal with the growing black hole in the future. Four years ago, the current administration observed a similar problem, and as any leadership team would, it tried to fix the problem. In fact, it promised the American people that it would fix the problem. So, through a series of economic stimulus plans such as “cash for clunkers,” the current administration played its hand at fixing the economy, and it failed. Proponents of the stimulus packages argue that they prevented a second Great Depression, and I agree. Without any action there is no doubt the nation would have continued its downward spiral of hardship and decay. But here’s the catch: the current administration didn’t do enough. It reneged on its promise to the American people to “jolt our economy back to life.” Ironically we now find ourselves in a position where the supreme commander of change himself needs to be changed. In fact, it’s just common sense. When something doesn’t work, when someone doesn’t do his job, you bring in the next, most qualified person to take over the position. And that person is Governor Mitt Romney. The way I see it, Americans have a very simple choice: we can either continue our period of mediocrity and leave it to the future to fix, or we can go with the alternative and play a new hand on an old and tiresome problem. The way I see it, this is a pivotal opportunity for America to recover and to reclaim the title of world economic leader. The way I see it, it is time for change. Again.
Change is the only way to fix a broken system
PAGE 8
By James Benedict I agree with Zukerman on this point: this election comes down to the economy. In the end, if the United States runs out of money, it cannot promote the values of justice and liberty I hold dear to my heart. I also share the belief that President Barack Obama has not succeeded in the way millions of us wished. The country faces trying times and must accept there is no quick fix; it will recover only if both parties work together to push towards recovery. However, the nation must either choose President Obama or Gov. Romney to lead us through this revival. Faced with these options, the responsible and reasonable choice is to allow President Obama to continue on his path toward full recovery. It is easy for the stagnant economy to enrage citizens and cause them to blame the incumbent. It is equally as easy to forget that the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act created 2.5 million jobs, expanded the economy by 3.8 percent, kept 7 million Americans above the poverty line, cut taxes for 95 percent of the work force and invested billions in scientific and industrial research which continue to pay dividends. Regardless of your point of view, these are the facts: the stimulus helped. The country is not where it needs to be, but it is heading toward recovery, and stagnation is always better than recession. I would go on to Romney’s economic plan; however I, like many others, remain in the dark about what he would actually do. I believe he would follow through on his published economic plan, which promises to reduce the deficit by extending the Bush tax cuts permanently, cutting the income tax by 20 percent and giving the military $2 trillion, although this contradicts basic addition. Romney added he would fund his entire plan by closing loopholes and deductions, although he has yet to list a single loophole or deduction he would close (as of press deadline). Even if he had, this income would come nowhere close to paying for his plan. Regardless of your point of view, these are the facts: his proposed plan is not mathematically possible. He has essentially justified a widespread cut of income by hoping there is enough change in America’s couch cushions. His plan of saving the economy without new taxes sounds ideal, but like all ideologies, it is not realistic. In order to diminish the deficit, the country will need to reduce spending, eliminate loopholes, and raise taxes. There is no way around it. The country remained opposed to any revenue increase for eight years, and it just narrowly avoided a second Great Depression. Times are too dire to elect a candidate based on vague economic jargon interspersed with Bush-era policies. President HEE JU NG KI Obama’s plan isn’t perfect, but it has helped M / GRAP HICS millions of Americans and is mathematically possible. The country can either elect Romney and hope he formulates a new plan in which two plus two equals four, or re-elect President Obama and continue a slow but assured recovery.
Rash ideology will only worsen a weak economy
ACUMEN