Issue 6 - The GC

Review the horace mann

Domestic - International - Features - Economics - Science & Technology - Viewpoints

By Samantha Rahmin

The GC

Course Requirements by Mathieu Rolfo GC vs. DC by Charles Scherr

The Power of the Constitution by Sam Rahmin

The Horace Mann Review: Issue 6

The GC

Features Economics

Domestic

4 The Lesser of Two Evils

26 On a Crash Course

6 A Decade for the Ages

28 Greece’s Crumbling

by david zask

by dan elkind

Economy

by phillip lin

by ZOE RUBIN

9 The Scott Heard ‘Round the World

by alexander daniel

12 State of Stagnation by danielle ellison

15 A Supreme Injustice by emily feldstein

20 Course Requirements:

Advantageous or Oppressive? by mathieu rolfo

22 From GC to DC

by Charles scherr

24 The Diminishing Power of the

Constitution

Viewpoints

16 Miracle on World

30 Communication

Breakdown

by SAM RAHMIN

International

Science and Technology

by alexander posner

36 The Governing Council by jessica bernheim

by daniel grafstein

32 Comfortably Frozen by katherine wyatt

34 Who Will Take the

Blame?

by vivianna lin

18 Goverment:

A Necessary Evil?

by Nathan raab

2

38 American Capitalism by jordan berman

39 Getting to Know the Enemy

by Stephen paduano

HM Review Vol. XIX

Letter from the Editor The Horace Mann Review Volume XIX , Issue 6

Letter from the Editor

A Journal of Opinion on Current Events, Politics, Public Policy, and Culture

Kevin Lin Editor-in-Chief

Nicholas Herzeca

Jason Sunshine Executive Editor

Henry Hoglund Nancy DaSilva Spencer Penn Dan Shapiro Features Editor James Yaro Dan Temel Aradhna Agarwal Starlyte Harris Will Dubbs Editorial Director Production Manager

Alex Falk

Managing Editor

Jordan Federer Freddie Adler Antonia Woodford Ben Marks Mario Alvarez Eric Schwartz Business Manager Hill Wyrough Senior Columnists

Camille Knop Aylin Gucalp Photo Editor

Board of Trustees Maximilian D.C. Thompson, Zachary Freyer-Biggs, Charles Stam, Kunal Malkani, Venkat Kausik, Zachary Malter Associate Editors Aaron Goldman, Andrew Demas, Daniel Grafstein, Danielle Ellison, Deependra Mookim, Justin Katiraei, Victor Ladd Production Assistants Seth Arar, Elisabeth Stam Staff Writers Adela Kim, Alexander Familant, Alex Ma, Andre Manuel, Avital Morris, Christine Kim, Dorin Azerad, Emily Feldstein, Jacob Moscona-Skolnik, Jessica Chi, Justin Burris, Katie Cacouris, Matt Fox, Rebecca Segall, Wallace Cotton, Zander Daniel, Zoe Rubin Contributing Writers Hannah Jun, Nathan Raab, Stephen Paduano, Alex Posner, Greg Barancik, Jessica Bernheim Faculty Advisors Mr. Gregory Donadio The Horace Mann Review is a member of the Columbia Scholastic Press Association, the American Scholastic Press Association, and the National Scholastic Press Association. Opinions expressed in articles or illustrations are not necessarily those of the Editorial Board or of the Horace Mann School.

Please contact The Review for information on advertisements at thereview@horacemann.org.

Visit The Review website at: web.horacemann.org/review/

March 2010 HM Review

Dear Reader, Do you think Horace Mann can be seen as a microcosm of our world?

In this sixth issue of the Horace Mann Review’s Volume XIX, I am proud to present to you a perspective on a political environment that holds parallels to Washington: our very own Governing Council. We have a number of different opinions, such as an article from Charles Scherr comparing Washington D.C. and the GC, or a piece from Sam Rahmin about the Constitution’s diminishing power. Next, on a topic about Horace Mann as a whole, Mathieu Rolfo gives his opinion on course requirements.

Of course, we also have all the other sections in the Review that make it what it is, with stellar articles in each. For instance, Alexander Posner discusses cell phone radiation, while Katherine Wyatt details cryogenics in Science and Technology. In our Domestic section, Phillip Lin gives us a review of tennis over

the decade, and Daniel Elkind talks about nuclear power in the U.S. In our International section, we are proud to present an article

by Nathan Raab on the possibly positive effects of anarchy in Somalia, while Daniel Grafstein takes a look at the Olympics. In Economics, David Zask writes about Toyota’s malfunctioning vehicles. Finally, we offer an opinion on the free market as well as on the importance of the GC in Horace Mann, in the Viewpoints section.

We hope you enjoy the sixth issue of the Horace Mann Review. Our writers and editors have once again produced great work for this issue, both in terms of writing and layout.

Have a happy reading and a great rest of the month!

Kevin Lin Editor-in-Chief Volume XIX 3

Domestic wikimedia

The Lesser of Two Evils by daniel elkind

I

n the country that led the development of nuclear science and international politics, a lack of leadership has completely stymied the utilization of nuclear power to satisfy our desires for energy.

While many countries have capitalized on the promising future of nuclear power, the United States’ progress in the field has been thwarted by both fear regarding the potential hazards of nuclear power and ideologically driven opposition. Following decades of inaction, Congress and the new administration have displayed a modest interest in the construction of new nuclear power plants. They recently proposed $8 billion in loans guaranteed to assist a utility company in constructing a new nuclear power plant. While this new initiative to facilitate the production of nuclear power plants is welcome, it is hardly sufficient. The United States needs to embark upon a government sponsored program - like the Apollo program of the 1960s - to drastically increase U.S. utilization of nuclear power in the near future and raise the United States in step with the achievements of countries like France, Belgium, Switzerland, and Hun-

4

gary.

Non-nuclear power plants utilize either coal or natural gas to produce energy. Coal, which accounts for approximately 54% of the electrical energy in the United States, is the principal culprit in the ‘steamroller’ of pollution ravaging our environment. Coal-reliant utility plants generate the huge carbon dioxide emissions responsible for global warming and emit substantial quantities of sulfur dioxide, which precipitates as acid rain that cripples our waterways and forests. Worldwide, countries have prudently recognized the environmental benefits of converting to nuclear power.

While natural gas supplies are in abundance, natural gas prices are volatile, and natural gas is also required to provide home heating and to power industrial plants.

Although there are an array of non-pollutive green energy sources, including wind and solar energy, these sources are not presently capable of providing more than a slight fraction of our energy needs, and barring incredible technological advances, will not be able to do so for the foreseeable future. Wind

power supplies only 1.9% of the energy in the United States, even though we are the world leader - above Germany - in the wind energy market. Solar power supplies less than 0.1% of nationwide energy requirements. While these “green energy sources” should receive attention and are promising, these sources cannot feasibly provide enough energy to replace coal as a source of electric power in the near future. Nuclear power is a solution for our immediate and long term needs. It is already acting as the most major energy source in countries all across the world, supplying as much as 76% of the energy in countries like France. Nuclear energy has already been implemented on a massive scale - and it is working efficiently.

Environmentalist groups, which have previously denounced utilization of nuclear power plants, citing environmental dangers posed by the nuclear waste, have now become advocates for its use. Stephen Tindale, a Greenpeace activist who previously opposed nuclear power plants and denounced the notion of its increased use, now supports it fervently. “It really is a question about the greater evil - nuclear waste or climate HM Review Vol. XIX

kimedia

Domestic change,” Tindale told the Washington Post. “But there is no contest anymore.

Climate change is the bigger threat, and nuclear is part of the answer.”

The primary justifications for opposing nuclear power today are the concerns over the safety of nuclear power plants, and concerns over how and where the nuclear waste will be disposed. Critics of nuclear power cite accidents like that at Chernobyl, an accident that occurred at an anachronistically designed Soviet power plant in 1986 (American power plants in existence at the same time were far safer than the plant at Chernobyl). Over two decades later, neither of these arguments has retained its merit. Vast improvements have been made in the designs of nuclear power plants over the past 20 years, establishing nuclear power as one of the safest sources of energy available. Over the past 40 years, during which the United States has derived approximately 20% of its energy from nuclear power, not a single fatality has occurred as the result of the operation of nuclear power plants in the United States. Similar records of safety have been witnessed over the past 20 years in the power plants operated throughout Western Europe. In a recent and exhaustive study of nuclear power undertaken by prominent professors at MIT titled The Future of Nuclear Power, the conclusion was derived, as in their previous study undertaken seven years ago, that the safety record of nuclear power plants was “excellent” and dispelled the doubts surrounding its safety. Those who cite the Chernobyl accident decades ago as an example of the hazards of nuclear power ignore that current power plants are constructed with completely different safety specifications and engineering than the Chernobyl power plant, whose poor engineering dates to the 1970s.

The second argument which has stymied the further utilization of nuclear power plants in the United States is the concern over the disposal of the nuclear waste. This claim is built upon emotion, rather than scientific actuality.

Following exhaustive study, the Energy Department identified the Yucca Mountain site in Nevada as a potential storage location for the waste of nuclear power March 2010 HM Review

plants. The Yucca site is geologically inactive, located far from any water tables or sources, and situated in a remote area devoid of human population. When used nuclear fuel rods are reprocessed, the actual amount of nuclear waste which requires placement in storage is miniscule and can be accommodated by a single location like Yucca Mountain for decades to come. The government has neglected to proceed with using Yucca Mountain for nuclear waste storage solely because of ideological, “not-in-my-backyard” pressure from politicians that ignores the facts. Two-thirds of Nevadans think it unwarranted that their state house a nuclear waste depository when there is no nuclear power plant in Nevada.

Yet the deposit of nuclear waste at Yucca is no more hazardous than the already-existent Nevada Test Site, a zone adjacent to the Yucca site where more than 900 nuclear weapons have been detonated. The Department of Energy recently estimated that the radiation exposure to Yucca nuclear waste over the next 10,000 years would be 0.24 millirems per year, well under the Environmental Protection Agency’s proposed limit of 350 millirems per year, and well under the 3 millirems of cosmic radiation to which a passenger travelling on one round trip flight from Nevada to Washington D.C. would be exposed. The Republican staff of the U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works released a report concluding that nuclear waste disposal is an “environmental imperative”, and that Yucca is a “sound” site for the waste disposal to occur. Countries like France, Belgium, Switzerland, and Sweden have pinpointed a solution for disposing of the nuclear waste produced by their nuclear power plants; there is no legitimate reason why we cannot follow suit.

Nuclear power presents significant promise for reducing pollution and environmental damage, freeing the United States from our dependence on foreign oil, and reducing our substantial balance of trade deficits resulting from foreign oil purchases. It is time for the politicians of the United States to plan for the future, overcome their petty ideologies, and do what is right for the country. HMR

Why Nuclear? http://blogs.nature.com/climatefeedback/NF_KK%20image%201.JPGw

• The United States has failed to construct a single nuclear power plant over the past 13 years.

• Nuclear power provides 76.2% of the electrical supply in France, 36.7% in South Korea, and 57% in the tiny nation of Slovakia, to name merely a slight proportion of the nations successfully harnessing the promise of nuclear power.

The United States is mysteriously missing from that list.

• Over the past 40 years, during which the United States has derived approximately 20% of its energy from nuclear power, not a single fatality has occurred as the result of the power plants in the United States.

5

Domestic w

A Decade for the Ages by philip lin

Tennis has sure come a long way since those old days of wooden rackets and strings made out of cat intestines.

Old champions fall, while new champions rise. In today’s world of tennis, wildcards are becoming redoubtable threats to the top seeds at an unprecedented rate.

Who would have ever even thought of Robin Soderling defeating Rafael Nadal, otherwise known as the King of Clay, on the very courts that made Nadal famous?

Who would have thought that Murray would capture the spotlight as Great Britain’s last hurrah in the tennis world? After all the questions fall away, one thing remains clear; the game of tennis has indeed changed.

When comparing players today to players a decade ago, one of the most obvious differences is the rackets players use now. In 2000, Roger Federer, the

6

greatest player of all time, was still using a pro staff 85 made by Wilson. Since then, his arsenal has been upgraded to the Ncode Tour 90, again to the KSix One Tour 90, and now finally to the BLX Tour 90. While these names may not present an eye-catching difference to the average layperson, the differences are quite profound.

The Ncode Tour 90 was the beginning of the nanotechnology era. Wilson released a new line of rackets, which were constructed on the atomic level, and were claimed to have much more power, stiffness, and control. Other racket companies, noticing that Wilson had essentially opened Pandora’s box, began to create their own technologies. Head invented microgel, a unique carbon setup that allowed the vibrations given by the ball upon impact to be uniformly spread

around the racket, creating a much more solid feel. Babolat patented Woofer technology, a system incorporated into the grommets to act as a pulley system, which increased power levels in their rackets significantly.

Strings underwent innovation as well. Strings a decade ago were mostly made out of nylon, and were usually solid core. As string companies researched more advanced technology, strings started to develop. Now, synthetic gut is giving way to a new generation of poly strings, composed of thousands of segments that are about one thousandth of a hair wide. With new technology comes new benefits, and poly-strings offer much more control than synthetic gut. This led to the proliferation of poly-strings, and the rise of string companies such as Luxilon and Signum Pro. Consequently, new HM Review Vol. XIX

s

Domestic

technologies led to innovations exclusively in play style.

Back in the days when Pete Sampras was king of tennis, most players had relatively the same style. The standard build for a player in the 2000’s was an eastern forehand, a one handed backhand, and a good serve to back it all up. Today, there are very few players that can be classified as an old-school player, most notably Roger Federer. As tennis progressed in the first decade of the 21st century, new grips and styles started to become popular. Players began exploring different ways of holding a racket, namely holding the racket like a pan, which became known as semi-western grip. This grip allowed for a less stringent set up, leading to the popularization of bending the elbow while contacting the ball.

Hence, enter the power merchant. A new type of player was born, one who relied upon brute strength to defeat his or her opponent. A notable example is Andy Roddick, who uses a semi western forehand grip, and is known for always trying to hit the ball as hard as he possibly can.

An even better example of how greatly March 2010 HM Review

styles have changed is Rafael Nadal’s grip.

Nadal uses a full western grip, a grip so radical that many people consider it too bizarre to attempt. The key difference between western and eastern is that when using a western grip, the racket face is actually at a nearly 45 degree angle, as opposed to eastern where the racket face is usually at an 80 degree angle or even greater. As a result, Nadal’s shots often land relatively short compared to those of other players and are considerably slower.

Nadal is probably the best example of a defensive baseliner. Instead of contacting the ball and plowing through it, Nadal rakes upwards, essentially turning the shot into an offensive lob/high ball that spins forward vigorously, causing many errors.

Another playing style is the defensive counterpuncher—most notably represented by top seeded Andy Murray.

A counterpuncher is a player the world of tennis had not see before, until now.

Instead of relying on powerful groundstrokes or serves, a counterpuncher returns the ball consistently, eventually wearing down the other player. Murray

is not known for a fast forehand, and although his serves and his backhands are formidable, the truly outstanding part of his game is how consistently he returns the ball. He just keeps returning the ball until he spots a relatively low-risk opening, and then he attacks. All of these new styles and grips proliferated from the vast improvement of non-player factors.

Sadly, this incredible advancement has also brought about tombstones of several strategies that were popular just a decade ago.

Returning back to the days of Pete Sampras and his famous volleys and overhead smashes, we can observe that a popular style was the serve-and-volleyer.

This style required two skills; being able to hit a powerful, well placed serve, and being able to put away volleys. This style was popularized by Pete Sampras, who is considered to have had some of the greatest volleys in history, as well as Tim Henman, who, although he is not as renowned as Sampras, was able to stand toe to toe against other greats like Federer and Agassi. However, when technology started to advance and players started to

7

Domestic

Andy Roddick: Able to hike his serve up to 155 mph, the fastest serve ever to be recorded, Roddick has attempted to use serve and volley techniques several times throughout his career, but has failed in every attempt. Such failures have lead fans to wonder if the style that made Pete Sampras and Tim Henman great may be gone forever.

change their styles, serve and volleyers soon found that many shots were passing them before they could reach the net. The other players had evolved and really had become predators of serve and volleyers, since it was just so easy to out play them.

The results of this evolution are evident in today’s ATP pro tour, because there are literally no serve and volleyers left.

Even the physical build of tennis players have greatly changed over the past ten years. Coming into the decade players like Pete Sampras were the intimidators with powerful serves, standing ‘tall’ at 6’1. As we move into the 2010’s, however, completely new standards have been set for the height of tennis players.

The players renowned for big serves and, such as the American John Isner or the Croatian “Dr.” Ivo Karlovic, are 6’9 and 6’10 respectfully. Even the baseline players such as Nadal are 6’1 and the counter punchers such as Murray are 6’3 --- en enormous difference from the older 5’9 counter punchers such as Michael Chang.

In fact, every player currently ranked under 15 in the world (with the exception of Nikolay Davydenko, who has never won a major) is taller than 6’1. One must wonder if the physical build of players such as Sampras and Chang would have impeded

8

their ability to play at the top of the game today.

In addition to the end of the serve and volley, one of by far the most obvious differences in the tennis world today from that of just 10 years ago is the two handed backhand. It has been so well accepted however, that not many people view it as a new addition to tennis. The truth is, the two handed backhand did not exist before this era. Before rackets started having longer handles, everyone had a one handed backhand. Andre Agassi, was one of the professionals who started using a two-handed backhand, and not long after many other players followed suit. Although there is a marked difference between the one handed back hand and the two handed backhand, both have their own advantages and disadvantages. Needless to say, they are both still an integral part of tennis in the world today.

While the most directly used parts of tennis have been evolving, the less observed factors have been slowly changing as well. Tennis courts have begun to change as well. A relatively unknown fact is that from 1905 to 1987, the Australian Open was actually held on grass courts, even though today’s Australian Open are held on hard courts.

Court technology has even changed, one example being that the Australian Open courts changed from Rebound Ace turf to Plexicushion Prestige turf in 2008.

Plexicushion Prestige is claimed to be less heat absorbent, more consistent in terms of bounce, as well as less strenuous on the

muscles of players.

This is an incredible leap in court technology, because companies have actually been able to develop a court turf that decreases the chance of stress related injuries, as well as decreasing the amount of heat that players have to endure the Australian Open is known for volatile spikes in temperature.)Another court advancement is the retractable roof. Although this has only been available at Wimbledon, the roof is able to fully block any rain or inclement weather precipitation should they arise.

Tennis has gone from a game barely watched on television to a sport that has become respected worldwide. Technology has become an integral part of tennis, while skill and intrinsic talent have remained some at the center of tennis.

As technology can only improve, tennis may change entirely in the next few decades; even more styles will rise, even more rackets will be created, and tennis will live on. HMR

HM Review Vol. XIX

Domestic

bostonherald

The Scott Heard

‘Round the World March 2010 HM Review

9

Domestic by alexander daniel

I

n the most poignant moment in the Massachusetts Senate race, Scott Brown replied to David Gergen’s insinuation that Brown would be “sitting in Teddy Kennedy’s seat” if he voted against Obamacare with just four words: “It’s the people’s seat.” Such populist sentiment swept Brown to victory. After months of irresponsible governance from the seemingly impregnable Democratic dominance, Scott Brown’s decisive election delivered the American people’s referenda on Democratic leadership. Brown’s slaying of the powerful Democratic machine in Massachusetts provided a model for victories in the 2010-midterm elections for an embattled Republican party. After months of arrogantly pursuing radical, progressive policies, the Democrats have been startled by this unprecedented election and have begun to run for the hills. If the GOP conforms to Brown’s template for success by running a campaign rooted in conservative fiscal and security policies, and harneses the re-awakened grass roots support for small government, the Republican Party will maximize its chances for national victories in November. The three keys to Brown’s victory were a well-articulated stance on fiscal restraint and

cally Americans responded to skyrocketing spending only when it resulted in tax increases, Americans are now becoming increasingly dissatisfied by the U.S.’s deteriorating financial security. Most Americans consider Congress’ job creation efforts futile, yet expensive, as only 6% of Americans believe the stimulus package has created jobs. On job creation, voters favored Brown 49% to Coakley’s 33%, due to his backing of tax cuts for small businesses. Moreover, 44% of Massachusetts’s voters prioritized the economy and considered job creation the most important issues.

However, President Obama and congressional Democrats have consistently disregarded the will of the American people. The Republicans have been afforded an opportunity, as the American people directly attribute these policies to the President and his Democratic enablers in Congress. Since nearly every Senate Republican and all House Republicans voted against the stimulus bill, the GOP has the luxury of exploiting this policy: the face child for fiscal irresponsibility. Come November, Democrats will be preoccupied defending spending policies that have burdened the American taxpayer.

President Obama has also taken ownership of pork-barrel spending provisions and can no longer deflect criticism of economic policies to former President Bush. According to the Office of Management and Budget, President Obama will have increased the public debt by $3.3 trillion by the end of fiscal year 2010; President Obama and Democratic Party will have hiked America’s national debt more in twenty months and eleven days than Mr. Bush did in two terms. Massachusetts’s voters and the American people are not inept; they realize excessive government and its ramifications, namely devaluing of the dollar and threatening of its position as the defacto international monetary standard. If Republicans can enlighten the American people to the dilapidated state of government, the American people will gladly usher in a new era of fiscal restraint, along with independently minded fiscal conservatives charged with ensuring their vision comes to fruition. Scott Brown tactfully achieved this end by emphasizing ecoHM Review Vol. XIX

http://www.vixdojo.com/OriginalArt/VixArtwork_RepublicanElephantVSDemocratDonkey.jpg

10

low taxes, a harsh stance on terrorism and national security, and the ability to harness the Tea Party conservatives without alienating Independents.

The varying approaches to the campaign between the Republican candidate, Scott Brown, and the Democrat, Massachusetts Attorney Coakley, were at diametrically opposite poles. Coakley approached the campaign with an unparalleled level of entitlement. She emanated the prototypical indolence of most politicians. When asked to comment about her remiss campaign, Coakley fired back: “As opposed to standing outside Fenway Park? In the cold? Shaking hands?” On the contrary, Scott Brown’s relentless campaign forged trust with Massachusetts’s voters; his routes around western Massachusetts in his beat-up pickup created a likable persona, unlike the stiff lipped Coakley. Although Brown’s well-run campaign was pivotal for his success, his victory stemmed predominately from steering focus towards the pivotal issues for the American people.

President Clinton’s campaign strategist, James Carville, often coined the phrase, “It’s the economy, stupid” when emphasizing the central concern of the American voter. Scott Brown framed himself as a fiscal conservative and proponent of tax cuts and fiscal constraint.

With unemployment topping 10% and evident waste in the Democrat’s stimulus package, the American people have grown worrisome about the nation’s economic predicament. While histori-

Domestic nomic issues as his chief priority and offering pragmatic solutions to ameliorate America’s economic predicament, namely tax cuts for small business and scaling back capital gains taxes and excessive regulation on the financial sector. Republican candidates should follow suit and shift the focus of the campaign to the economy, which Democrats have

Brown’s victory will significantly transform the political landscape in 2010. Most importantly, as the “41st” Republican Senator, Brown effectively gives Republicans the ability to filibuster, which allows for the blockage of socialist health care legislation. inadequately addressed with their majorities in Congress.

Beyond policy issues, Scott Brown effectively harnessed the support of Tea Party conservatives and the fringed elements of the conservative movement, while not alienating independents. In November 2009, national Republicans misread the political climate in New York’s 23rd congressional district. Tea Party activists and conservative Republicans, including Sarah Palin, endorsed the Conservative candidate, Doug Hoffman—causing Dede Scozzafava to drop out of the race and endorse Bill Owens, the Democratic candidate. Hoffman would win the election as independents and moderate Republicans opted for the moderate Democratic over the ultra-conservative. Scott Brown learned from the ill-fated efforts of Republicans to lean to far to the Right.

Publicly, Brown distanced himself from the Tea Party movement and the national Republican Party, saying he was “unfamiliar” with Tea Party. However, in reality Brown hosted a Tea Party fundraiser to raise revenue for his campaign and privately received backing from the Republican Senatorial Committee, according to GOP Chairman, Michael Steele. Grassroots support from Republicans was more enthusiastic and driven than that from the Democrats; however, March 2010 HM Review

independents were not repulsed by an overtly conservative focus in campaign; a sentiment many Democrats held after Sarah Palin was added to the GOP ticket in the 2008 presidential election.

Republicans should heed to the Brown’s template for victory and not bite at the tempting bait that a full-fledge Tea Party-based campaign provides.

For the first time in recent election cycles, Coakley, as a Democrat, faced an unfamiliar feeling: popular opposition to her and mainstream Democrats’ agenda. Accordingly Coakley misread the temperature of the voter in one respect: constant promotion and reminders of liberal policies does not sway voters, but instead alienates them.

Brown’s “anti-machine” tactics proved highly successful, as his platform was tantamount to opposition of the Democratic platform, which most voters, particularly Independents, already oppose.

His election is not an isolated case of Republican victories against the Democrat establishment. In New Jersey and Virginia, Gov. Chris Christie and Gov. Bob McDonnell, respectively won decisive elections for the governorship. In the last year, when the American people had the opportunity to choose between progressive policies and conservative ones, they have opted for the later.

Brown’s victory will significantly transform the political landscape in 2010. Most importantly, as the “41st” Republican Senator, Brown effectively

gives Republicans the ability to filibuster, which allows for the blockage of socialist health care legislation. Furthermore, Democrats are obligated to gain bipartisan support in order to pass bills, which certainly should result in more centrist legislation, and a reconsideration of progressives’ policies. In addition, to many conservatives, his election was surreal and symbolic of the ever-altering environment in the United States. A GOP victory in arguably one of America’s most progressive states to replace liberal icon, Ted Kennedy, truly sent shivers through the Democrats ranks. Sen. Bayh, Dorgan, and Dodd have opted not to face tough re-election battles. Moreover, Brown’s victory function as a morphine shot for an embattled Republican party; GOP fundraising has soared and prospective candidates have been more amenable to runs in next year’s election.

More than anything, if Democrats cannot sell their agenda in the bluest of blue states than they cannot sell it anywhere. In the eyes of the voters “hope and change” failed to deliver the true change that they sought. Americans have heeded the Scott Heard ‘Round the World and are ready to embrace the principles of small government that Scott Brown’s platform exemplifies. HMR

Scott Brown Election Results: A GOP victory in arguably one of America’s most progressive states to replace liberal icon, Ted Kennedy, truly sent shivers through the Democrats ranks. http://i566.photobucket.com/albums/ss108/massrepublican2010/RedMassGroup.jpg

11

Domestic

State of Stagnation by danielle ellison

“One useless man is a shame, two is a law firm, and three or more is a congress,” John Adams once said. But is this in fact what our Congress is coming to today?

Recently, Congress’ approval has been declining, disappointing a record number of Americans. Why is Congressional approval so low? And further, what does this bode for the future of our nation?

The likely reason for such low approval is Congress’ inability to pass legislation regarding critical issues that the people agree are imperative to be addressed. The most pressing concerns include reform of social security, Medicare, and Healthcare in general. Almost all Americans agree that these issues need to be dealt with. The question is, how? And further, how do we pay for it? Regardless of the consensus that action needs to be taken, Congress’ exorbitant partisanship and its fear of being controversial in the “permanent campaign” have hindered legislators’ ability to compromise, make tough decisions, and tackle some of the biggest domestic issues facing our nation.

The approval rating of the United States Congress has been progressively declining over the past eight years, according to the Gallup poll, and currently ties the lowest in Gallup records. CNN and Pew Research Center polls also revealed that popular sentiment is extremely dissatisfied with Congress and believes that the majority of legislators should not be re-elected.

The primary reason for this staggering disapproval is partisanship. Partisanship in the U.S. Congress is certainly nothing new. However, over the past eight years, during which time both Republicans and Democrats have dominated the Houses, party extremism has intensified.

The trend of partisanship started back in the 1990s with strong Republican dislike of Bill Clinton, manifested in his very partisan impeachment (as opposed to for

12

example the less partisan threatened impeachment of Nixon). Partisanship further escalated amidst the controversy in the disputed election between George W. Bush and Al Gore in 2000. In addition, after it became evident that there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, hatred of George W. Bush by Democrats intensified amidst accusations of his being a liar. Finally, President Barack Obama, possessing one of the most liberal voting records in his short tenure in the Senate, has failed to improve the situation with bipartisan executive efforts.

This Congressional partisanship severely debilitates the ability to compro-

mise. Legislators on both sides, right and left, have become more and more stubborn about pushing through a radical party agenda, as opposed to compromising on more moderate policies that will actually pass each House. Although it is of course important for legislators to stay true to their beliefs, it is also critical that they compromise enough to actually accomplish crucial remedies to national dilemmas. Also, filibustering and vehement partisan criticism can often create strong party lines of oppositions towards bills.

In particular, recently the Republican minority has often filibustered bills just because they were in line with left wing HM Review Vol. XIX

Domestic

n Political paralysis caused by partisanship and permanent campaigning has prevented the U.S. Congress from addressing crucial issues such as Social Security, Medicare, and Healthcare.

thinking, rather than trying to understand the bills and perhaps develop a suggested compromise in order to pass the legislation. Thus it is often very difficult for bills to pass through such a partisan Congress, because even if certain legislators actually would support a bill, they are often pressured by party allies to vote against it.

The partisan issue is a significant problem that must be solved if the productivity of Congress is to be improved.

One very viable solution would be to have non-partisan groups draw congressional districts to stop excessive gerrymandering. In many states, such as notoMarch 2010 HM Review

riously in North Carolina, congressional districts are drawn in contorted shapes in order to make it easier for certain parties or individual Representatives to have secure control over a district. However, if non-partisan authorities determine the district, as they do for example in Iowa, congressional elections would become more competitive. The benefit of this would be twofold. Firstly, candidates running for seats in the House will have to run more centrist campaigns in order to appeal to the generally more moderate views of populations in fairly drawn districts. Secondly, more moderate candidates will tend to be elected in fairly

drawn, less partisan districts.

Another factor that has stagnated Congress’ ability to pass tough but imperative legislation is the fact that holding congressional elections every two years has created a kind of “permanent campaign,” causing legislators, Representatives in particular, to constantly be worrying about actions that might alienate voters and partisan interest groups.

Much of the legislation that must be passed, such as laws to fix social security, Medicare, and healthcare, is necessary but controversial. In particular, decisions regarding lowering or raising taxes or changing the age or other preconditions for receiving aid are modifications that must be made in order to save systems in the long run. However, the immediate repercussions of these adjustments on individuals stimulate the objections of many Americans. Therefore, shortsighted U.S. legislators often cave into the equally shortsighted outlooks of voters, and don’t introduce or even vote for controversial albeit imperative legislation.

In addition, this pattern has been grievously intensified by the explosion of media outlets, which, constantly searching for the latest news story, focus on the next election way ahead of time. In an attempt to try and find controversial Congressional actions, the media often harshly places undeserving blame on candidates who take action. As a result, legislators, afraid of losing their seats in the next election, are constantly campaigning rather than governing.

Three key issues that Congress continues to struggle to compromise on are Social Security, Medicare, and Healthcare. Social security is a critical federal program that provides benefits to retired and disabled American workers and their dependents using the Social Security tax money workers pay during their time employed. As the U.S. population grows and life expectancy increases, Social Security is becoming a ticking fiscal time bomb. Within the next generation, as the baby boomers hit retirement age, the Social Security program will have to spend more money than it receives from workers’ taxes. It has been said by U.S. senators that you can solve social security on the back of a napkin; that is, in terms of the

13

Domestic

gallup

actual mathematical calculations, there are economically viable solutions to social security. By a balanced combination of reducing benefits, raising the retirement age, increasing taxes, and investing the funds at higher risks in order to yield a greater return on trust funds, we can fix Social Security without an excessive economic burden on anyone. Unfortunately, as to the degrees of these various adjustments, both Republicans and Democrats have been tenaciously uncompromising.

However, as demonstrated by the 1983 bipartisan commission on Social Security, bipartisan compromise on this issue can be successful, as this group substantially extended the solvency of Social Security.

In addition, regarding reforming Social Security, the problem of the “permanent campaign� is extraordinarily intense. No legislator wants to alienate beneficiaries of Social Security, particularly elderly Americans, by passing controversial legislation. However, this legislation is necessary to fix the system and prevent its disastrous collapse for the next generation.

Similar to Social Security, Medicare, a federal aid program which provides health insurance coverage to Americans over the age of 65 or who meet other specific criteria (such as being disabled or having certain severe medial conditions) is an even larger ticking fiscal time bomb; as the elderly population grows and life expectancy increases, the Medicare program will not be able to adequately pay for the crucial services it provides. However, due to stubborn partisanship and fear of losing congressional seats, legislators have failed to act effectively to reform this program.

Finally, another key debate facing our nation is Healthcare reform. Virtu-

14

ally all agree that, morally, every American should have adequate health insurance. However, millions of Americans are currently uninsured or underinsured. Congress has been debating for months on how to remedy this. However, because of extreme partisanship, no significant reform has been passed. On the one hand, the far right wing maintains that we must use only the free market to expand healthcare. On the other hand, the left wing believes that the government has a moral obligation to insure the uninsured and underinsured however much it costs the government, even if it means raising taxes to unprecedented levels.

However this strategy in particular will most likely ultimately be improbable, as it would make Healthcare another government-funded fiscal time bomb. Both the extreme right and left wing positions, although possessing validity, have created a deadlock in Congress. Now of course legislators who feel strongly should not capitulate on their beliefs, especially moral ones. However, when the alternative is no reform whatsoever being accomplished, significant compromise is imperative.

Optimistically, there are some areas in which legislators are working on bipartisan legislation. One avenue is the passage of reform policies that will cause insurance companies to compete more, thereby lowering the cost of Healthcare through market competition. This solution is particularly economically viable, as it will reduce the economic burden placed on Americans to buy Healthcare themselves, while also avoiding the high taxes necessary to provide governmentfunded Healthcare for more people. Another bipartisan strategy under consideration is the enactment of policies that will

force insurance companies to institute less strict rules on pre-existing conditions, letting people buy health insurance without having to pay excessive fines or fees.

These bipartisan efforts on the part of courageous legislators are hopeful indications that a new era of compromise and productivity may be on the horizon.

In order to save our nation from complete political stagnation and perhaps fiscal disaster, our representatives must remember that their job is, above all, to solve issues that will improve the lives of Americans. Congressional legislators must look past bitter partisanship and concern about being re-elected and avoid falling into the trap of becoming a useless, stagnated body.

If legislators are unable to realize this on their own, then the monumental and crucial task of revitalizing our legislature turns to us, the people. In upcoming elections, we must advocate and vote for more moderate candidates who will be willing to compromise as well as to make tough decisions in order to pass necessary if unpopular legislation. We must

legis.state.ia.us

If non-partisan authorities determine the district, as they do for example in Iowa, congressional elections would become more competitive. try to pull away from knee-jerk party alliances and supporting candidates who may represent our views but may also be too extreme to accomplish critical changes for our nation. We, the people, in conjunction with our legislators in Congress, must work to once again make the U.S. Congress the effective and valuable legislature that it must be. HMR HM Review Vol. XIX

Domestic

A Supreme Injustice

5

by emily feldstein

-4. With such a close vote, the Supreme Court ruled that corporations share the same rights as individuals, at least in terms of political spending. This ruling was made in their decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission.

Citizens United is a nonprofit organization dedicated to restoring our government to citizens’ control. Through a combination of education, advocacy, and a grass roots organization, Citizens United seeks to reassert the traditional American values of limited government, freedom of enterprise, strong families, and national sovereignty and security.

Citizens United brought the FEC to court in Washington D.C. and appealed the decision to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Citizens United. While at first trying to consider the case in narrower terms, the Court shifted its focus to include decisions made in Austin v. Michigan Chamber of campaign spending. In the end, the Court overturned the decision made in Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce, which was the basis for the decision in McConnell v. FEC, and it struck down a ban from the McCain-Feingold bill. Corporations were given the freedom to use their vast resources to support political candidates. In other words, they were given the same rights as individuals.

There is a reason that eight in ten poll respondents in a Washington Post-ABC News poll were opposed to the Supreme Court decision. Corporations now have March 2010 HM Review

the power and resources of a large organization coupled with the rights of an individual. Corporations, trade groups, and unions have the power to employ unlimited spending to further their agendas. Their agendas will certainly be in their best interest; the fact that their desires may hurt the people will be no concern. Individuals do not have the same resources and, therefore, their spending would not have the same influence. Now, these large organizations have the ability to reach wide audiences and influence opinions. This decision could mean a shift in who holds power during elections. No longer will politicians focus on helping the American people; now they will cater to the special interests of organizations. Organizations now have the authority to influence legislation, which would, in fact, remove the power from the individuals who just cannot compete.

In 1886, during the Gilded Age, known for the great disparity between the wealthiest 1% and everyone else, there was a similar case. The Supreme Court ruled that, according to the 14th amendment, which guarantees equal protection of the laws, private corporations were the same as an individual and therefore afforded the same rights. This decision only increased the corruption in government. The leaders in industry could essentially buy legislators. The decision today seems to lead the country in the direction of the Gilded Age. Although some Republican lawmakers have lauded this decision, overall there is a bipartisan opposition to it.

76 percent of Republicans, 85 percent of Democrats, and 81 percent of independents polled were opposed to the ruling.

The decision also holds serious economic implications. Now that corporations and labor unions can advertise for or against political candidates, these large organizations have the power to influence legislation. The decision would help large organizations undermine the American dream. By ensuring that lawmakers support incumbent business interests, a small business, the underdog, has no chance of becoming successful.

The American economy would be completely dominated by a select group of companies with the funds to support candidates, who support the companiesĂ­ own interests.

In the same Washington PostABC News poll, 72 percent were for reinstating spending limits. Legislation seems to be the solution. With the bipartisan opposition to the decision, Congress should be able to pass laws to lessen the serious implications of the Supreme Court’s controversial ruling. According to an article in the Washington Post, Likely proposal include banning participation in U.S. election by government contractors, bank bailout recipients or companies with more than 20 percent foreign ownership. The American people must rely on the system of checks and balances that keep the government stable.

However, it is not solely up to lawmakers to reduce the unpleasant consequences of this ruling. Each American must express his or her distaste for this decision. HMR

15

International

scientif

busi-

Miracle on World

sports illustrated

by daniel grafstein

How the Olympic Games transcend competition to benefit international relations and provide a source of inspiration

very two years something magical happens, something so magical that it can break all of our pre-conceived notions about the world’s strife.

I speak, of course, of the Olympics, the most competitive universal contest that pits country against country and athlete against athlete in their quest for gold. The tournament is incredibly diverse, as its sports range from basketball and hockey to ice dancing and synchronized swimming, and it has been held on four different continents. One might expect the intensity of the Olympics to lead to disputes between nations and have adverse effects on some individual countries. However, the competitive nature of the tournament has always fostered international relations, enriched individual nations involved, and brought our global community closer together.

There is no specific date for the first Olympic events, but records go as far

back as 776 B.C. Those games took place in Olympia where competitors engaged solely in footraces. We have come a long way. For our purposes, the first modern Olympic games occurred in Athens in 1896. Fourteen countries were represented, and 245 men competed in 43 different events. Up until 1924, the Olympics were exclusively reserved for warm-weather sports; however, the Championix Winter Games of that year was retroactively given the status of the first Olympic Winter Games. In 1992, for the first time in decades every single member of the International Olympic Committee (IOC), 172 in all, show up to the games. In 1994, the Winter Olympics first began alternating in two-year intervals with the Summer Olympics. The Olympics are currently in Vancouver, Canada, this being the third time the country has had the honor of hosting the games.

Admittedly, the Olympic Games are not exempt from injustice and po-

registrarism

E

16

litical controversy. In 1936, the summer games were held in Berlin under a Nazi regime which discriminated against “non-Aryans� in all aspects of life, including sport. German Jews were prohibited from participating on their national team. Internationally, the German policy was not received well; it sparked blatant prejudice, Great Britain, France, Sweden, Czechoslovakia, the Netherlands, and the United States all considered boycotting the games. In the end, none of the countries actually did boycott and Germany hid its anti-Semitic propaganda throughout the duration of the games. In 1956, seven countries actually did boycott the Melbourne Olympic Games. Iraq, Egypt, and Lebanon did so because the Israelis were permitted to participate after they sent troops to occupy the Gaza Strip.

Spain, Switzerland, and the Netherlands did not participate to protest the Soviet invasion of Hungary. Despite the smattering of disputes, the games are the brief, HM Review Vol. XIX

International scientific american

yet unique, period of time when, for the most part, countries come together and embody a global cooperation.

The Olympic Games have become an effective media through which it is possible for individual nations to capture the world’s attention and prosper. One of the most well-known stories in the rich history of the Olympic Games involves an undersized, overmatched 1980 American hockey team. The games that year took place in Lake Placid, New York. By 1980, the heyday of the United States had passed, and the country faced a number of small crises. In the 1970’s, Richard Nixon betrayed the country’s trust by abusing his presidential power, Gerald Ford failed to accomplish anything consequential, and Jimmy Carter mishandled a situation in Iran where Americans were being held hostage. In addition to the lack of competent leadership, the Cold War between the United States and the Soviet Union had heated up again and the nation’s economy was in bad shape after years of a stagnant economy and inflation. The American hockey team, made up exclusively of amateurs because professionals were not allowed to participate in the Olympic Games until later in the decade, was not even expected to medal, let alone defeat the world’s superpower in the sport, the Soviet Union.

Overcoming all odds, the Americans beat March 2010 HM Review

the Soviet team and went on to win the gold medal on home ice. The crowd consisted mostly of patriotic flag-wavers and was described as “boisterous.” Though “Miracle on Ice” as it is now referred to in a celebratory tone did not solve anything single handedly, it is a story of pure determination and will power on the part of the underdog, American athletes and coaches. Even more than that, it is a heartwarming triumph that lifted the spirits of an entire nation.

The Olympic Games can help nations materially as well as psychologically. The last two Olympic games that have taken place in Beijing, China and Vancouver, Canada respectively illustrate nations’ ability to reap rewards from the games. In Beijing, the Olympics helped China’s economy and provided a beneficial environmental policy. Additionally, the Beijing Organizing Committee of Olympic Games reduced emissions of air pollutants associated with hosting the Olympics and of sulfur dioxide, carbon dioxide, and other pollutants associated with public works programs in China.

In Canada, the games are strengthening national pride and unity and contributing to the region’s diverse attractions.

According to ESPN, the gold medal game between the United States and Canada was viewed by 16.6 million people, or half of Canada’s population. This figure makes

the game the most viewed national broadcast in the history of the country. Locally, the Olympics have boosted Vancouver’s business district. Improvements include various nations’ cultural “houses,” such as the Holland Heineken House and the Molson Hockey House and the Olympic Line, which connects Granville Island to the Canada Line Olympic Village Station by streetcar.

If one is looking for the volume of touching stories that cannot be replicated without an event such as the Olympics, he or she need look no further than these current Olympic games. Theseinspiring journeys together with the countless others that have taken place since the Olympics’ inception are the glue that hold teh fabric of our global community together. They, in effect, help bring us a little closer even if just for a temporary two-week period. HMR

17

International

Detroit

Government: A Necessary Evil ?

What the US can learn from Somalia’s limited government

18

HM Review Vol. XIX

the resistance

Mogadishu

International

S

the resistance

by nathan raab

ince 1991 Somalia has become a synonym for anarchy in the popular conscience.

Without a central government for now 19 years, most people assume its economy has disintegrated and its people live in constant fear; in fact, Somalia’s economy outperforms many other African nations’ and its citizens are safer now than they were under previous rule. Such a performance— contrary to most political thought of the last century—raises questions about the United States’ supposed need for a large central government.

Before the revolution, dictator Siad Barre had kept Somalia under his thumb since 1969. Barre’s Somalia was straight out of George Orwell’s 1984: dissidents disappeared in the middle of the night, elite storm-troopers regularly murdered and raped those of different clans, and manufactured goods were in short supply. Rampant corruption and a massive debt threatened the very foundations of the Somali state. Rebelling against this repressive political environment, an opposition group called the United Somali Congress overthrew Barre in 1990 and attempted to establish a stable, democratic government. Yet the USC soon fell prey to petty tribal squabbles, and since then, competing warlords have fought for the country’s territory. The Transitional Federal Government (the TFG), what the U.N. recognizes to be the legitimate Somali government, controls only a quarter of the Somali capital Mogadishu.

Yet even in the depths of totalitarianism and chaos, the Somali were not without the rule of law: Xeer, the traditional Somali legal system similar to English common law, ensured that civilization and commerce could continue. Xeer is a civil court, which is to say it regulates disagreements between people instead of offences against a state, and, instead of punishing offenders, compensates for damage to person or property by force or fraud. No government enforces Xeer; instead, people regard it as the fairest way to resolve disputes. In other words, out of the anarchy of tribal Somalia came a system to protect people and what they had earned. Somalis still use it today to March 2010 HM Review

allow their economy to march forward.

So under prevailing political thought, Somalia’s anarchy should have proved a death knell for an already poor population. This, however, is not the case: Somalia in fact has done better under anarchy than it did under Barre, and is doing better than other African nations are doing now under their governments.

Somalia’s current death rate is about seventeen per thousand, which is the 22nd worst death rate in the world.

While that is far larger than that of the United States or any other developed nation, it is comparable to those of other African countries; out of forty-two African nations, Somalia ranks 17th. Moreover, Somalia has improved massively since Barre, when the death rate hovered in the low twenties, with Somalia 30th out of those African nations.

A Somali born today can expect to live about forty eight years. Twenty years ago, he or she would probably live only forty four years. Without a government, Somalia has brought its life expectancy rank from 186th to 158th out of all nations, and from 34th to 18th out of the African nations previously specified.

Somalia comes in 8th place in Africa for telephones, having 15 land lines and 25 cell phones per thousand people. In fact, Somalia has developed a highly competitive telecommunications industry since Barre’s government fell.

The Somali economy in general has also bloomed since 1991. Whereas before Somalia had a national airline with only one airplane, there are now over fifteen airlines in fierce competition; they manage the airports themselves and as a result aviation is also safer. Its telecommunications industry has blossomed as well: it takes only three days to install telephone lines because restrictive regulation has been removed, as compared to Kenya, where it takes over a year. Electricity now lights towns for the first time, and Coca Cola and other companies have built factories in the area. Unlike in much of Africa, there is no problem of corruption because, in the words of the owner of the Somali Daallo Airlines, “there is no government to bribe.”

Some indicators have declined under anarchy—access to fresh water has

decreased, as has access to education and the literacy rate, and roads and health care have declined in quality—but not all of it is due to the sudden loss of government.

Because Somali law is fundamentally organized along tribal lines, it is difficult to control the “free rider problem”: people of different clans use the roads without paying the fees and the law is ineffective against them. Similarly, Somali pirates have no qualms about attacking foreigners and will destroy U.N. aid convoys bearing humanitarian supplies, which in other cases make it to their destinations.

Somalia has been without a government for only a few years, however, and Xeer will probably evolve to solve these problems.

Does the Somali experience mean we should do away entirely with government? Of course not, government still plays a vital role in society, offer-

Does the Somali experience mean we should do away entirely with government? Of course not

ing defense and—sometimes—sensible regulation. But it offers a lesson and a warning. Somalia shows that much of the prevailing wisdom about the role of government is wrong and that the private sector can and will step in to provide public goods. The Somali economy lives without a central bank, fiat currency, or other expensive implements of fiscal policy, and freed of the burdens of corruption and tyranny, Somalis have finally begun to prosper. We, as Americans, must remember that what happened to Somalia under Barre could happen to us. Letting Washington’s powers over the lives of Americans grow without limit shouts come hither to dictators. Given that the alterative—limited government—doesn’t seem so bad, why don’t we try it? HMR

19

Features Course Requirements:

Advantageous or Oppressive?

“It is important that the rules instituted serve their purpose of benefiting the student body, rather than making the course process more difficult and restraining. In some shape or form, the current structure should be reformed.

”

A

by mathieu rolfo

long with clubs, publications, and athletic teams, the courses that a student enrolls in play the largest role in defining the high school experience. At Horace Mann, home to many excellent educators in the sciences, mathematics, arts, technology, and the humanities, the permutations for different paths of learning is mindboggling. The Program of Studies, the

20

list of courses offered by the school, is a prime example of this fact, with last year’s program totaling nearly 60 pages. When students are given the program and the course request form in April of each school year, the plethora of courses is initially confusing. However, the current 5 Major, 2 Minor structure, constructed by the Administration, puts students on a rigid path of academic development.

Although this structure has its benefits, it also presents many problems to stu-

Andrew Demas

dents, particularly in the art courses.

Making this structure more flexible would allow for academic development along with room to pursue individual interests. Given that the administration sets our school’s curriculum and understands the logistics of the process better than the student body, it is only fair that restrictions be made in course selection.

However, it is important that the rules instituted serve their purpose of benefiting the student body, rather than making HM Review Vol. XIX

Features

?

ed

”

Demas

the course process more difficult and restraining. In some shape or form, the current structure should be reformed.

There are a variety of rules and restrictions in course selection aside from the 5 Major, 2 Minor course structure.

Currently, there is a limit of 3 AP courses per year, as well as a restriction on taking honors physics and an AP science concurrently. Recently, the computer curriculum has been restructured, as students now must take a minimum of one halfcredit computer course. Most problematically, students must take three half-credit arts courses, of which at least one must be an art appreciation course and one a studio art. It is this last requirement which has caused strife for many students. Although its intention of exposing students to a variety of arts is fulfilled, it presents a range of undesirable side effects.

All the arts courses at HM are of two types; studio art or art appreciation.

Students who have a particular interest in an art course, such as art history, encounter problems if they also wish to pursue a second art of the same “type” in following years. This occurs because the student must eventually take an art of the opposite type and relinquish one of his or her interests. This course issue becomes amplified for pupils of minor languages such as Russian or German. Under the current requirements, student must take one studio art, one art appreciation, and one computer course in the remaining minor slot. Through this setup, the opportunity to fully explore the arts at HM is effectively nullified. This consequence is unfortunate, as the arts departments contains some of the best opportunities presented at Horace Mann. In reverse, the minor languages are extremely difficult to pursue in the current course system. It is nearly impossible to take one of the minor languages for more than two years without dropping an art course, which began as the original subject of interest. This results in very few students pursuing a second language, as that interest seems to only intercede on a student’s artistic studies. Needless to say, the current minor system is confusing and often prevents students from pursuing their artistic interests to the fullest extent. Ironically, the process designed to create an March 2010 HM Review

interest in different artistic fields prevents one from a true dedication to those same fields.

This dilemma has troubled many students, and thus has resulted in petitions by the student body. A number of bills have been proposed by the Governing Council to resolve this dilemma. Previously, a bill was passed by the GC that would have the art appreciation requirement rescinded for students taking 4 years of a studio art. However, this bill was vetoed by the administration after its narrow passage. Most recently, a junior representative proposed an omnibus bill with five provisions, four of which pertained to course selection. One of these provisions proposed to remove the arts appreciation requirement, and was vetoed by the GC. These two events indicate that the administration was, and is, unwilling to relent on the studio/art appreciation requirement, and not without reason. Removing the arts appreciation requirement sends the message to the student body that those courses are, in some way, inferior to studio-based courses, which is simply untrue. Although these measures failed, the status quo must be changed, for the

Making this structure more flexible would allow for academic development along with room to pursue individual interests. reasons already outlined. Instead, a better solution is to change the 2 minor limit to 3 minor courses per year, with each case undergoing departmental approval.

It allows for all current curriculum requirements to be easily met and students to pursue their varied artistic interests, with no major drawbacks, aside from 45 minutes every other day. Students with the determination to concurrently study two artistic fields would surely relinquish those free periods to develop their talents to the fullest extent possible. At this moment, some students are being allowed to take 5 Majors and 3 Minors at once.

Ideally, this option will become commonplace rather than an exception to the rule.

If it becomes an easily chosen course arrangement, it would resolve much of the stress that comes along choosing minor

courses.

However, it seems sufficient only to extend the limit on minors but retain the existing limit of 5 for majors The administration knows the difficulty of the courses better than any students currently attending HM. By setting the 5 Major mark, they have provided an accessible, yet sufficiently rigorous, platform from which students can pursue academic interests. If the floodgates were opened and students began taking 6 majors, it would set a precedent for future students to reach, so that students would be compelled to take an overly rigorous courseload that would only create more stress in the high-tension environment at Horace Mann. Also, it would result in fewer students pursuing art courses for 4 years, undoing the work our school has to foster artistic development. The last thing HM needs is to produce one-dimensional students; it would devalue the extremely resourceful arts department The course selection process is a complex one, to say the least. The current system, including the 5 Majors 2 Minors restriction, has its several benefits and disadvantages. Its main flaw is that it promotes dabbling in a variety of courses and prevents the pursuit of excellence in those fields. By expanding the curriculum to allow for three minors, the current diversity of courses can be maintained while providing an outlet through which students can become truly proficient, developing not only high-school interests, but hobbies and passions that may last a lifetime. At a school like Horace Mann, every student has extreme amounts of potential. In the end, it falls to the administration to make the right decision and maintain the fine line between a streamlined, straightforward system and one that limits the students it is trying to help.

An extension to 3 Majors while retaining the 5 Minor limit appears to be the most reasonable option, and hopefully it will be instituted in the near future. HMR

21

Features

Is HM’s GC Any Better T

by charles scherr

marines

As everyone in the United States continues to criticize our government, citizens begin to question themselves: Can we believe in the change Obama promised? Will health care work? When will see a decline in unemployment? The country is paralyzed because Obama and Congress can’t get their act together. But are we, the Horace Mann GC, any better?

Move to the much smaller scale of the Horace Mann Governing Council

It is vitally important for the members of the GC to fix these concerns. It is time the council takes action, not only in fixing the school, but, even more importantly, in repairing their own image and purpose, as well as restoring trust in the students whom they represent. This process starts by having a clear agenda, followed by eliminating the discord between students and faculty, and finally, and most importantly, fixing the barrier

jective. Moodle regulation, paper towels, and clearing lockers in the morning are a few of the issues the GC addressed, yet they show no singular focus or objective.

Trying to repair an array of problems at one time will not be successful nor alter the council’s legitimacy, for failure is inevitable. These same problems emerge in our government, as politicians attempt to patch up too many problems at one time.

Thus, the first step for the GC is to articu-

and we can ask ourselves the same things.

Of course, the issues aren’t as important as universal healthcare and repairing the economy, but as far as the school goes, they are significant. Regardless, people can still question the GC’s function, effectiveness, and dependability. In fact, discussing the GC and its relevancy has become a hot topic in the halls of Horace Mann. Similar to the uneasiness in Washington, doubts about the members’ legitimacy and pure representation of their constituents have taken hits, as well as the council’s prestige. This situation is analogous to the current political climate in the Senate.

between the student body and the members of the GC. The first issue that needs to be addressed is what to focus on - in other words, clearing our agenda. The GC needs to decide what it wants to do to improve the school, and the members (myself included) need to adhere to one topic at a time. Whether it be the health, safety, or overall state of students’ lives, the GC needs to select an issue and show the student body tangible changes. As hard as members of the GC have worked this year, putting together a list of what we have done shows no singular ob-

late a clear agenda.

The second issue that the GC needs to address is the divide between the faculty representatives and student representatives. It is unique to have the faculty represented in the school’s GC. However, the understanding that it is the student body’s governing council may be lost in the faculty world. This may be the reason for no new bills or resolutions proposed by the faculty representatives on the GC. This lack of understanding that the GC is for the whole upper division, teachers included, may also be the cause for the low attendance rate of some faculty members.

Teachers work

22

HM Review Vol. XIX

Features

r Than Washington DC? extremely hard, everyone knows this, however if it is really expressed that the GC represents the students as well as the faculty of the upper division, teachers may have more motivation to come and be actively involved with GC. Faculty representatives are essential in the GC’s success, as their devotion to improving the school is just as large as the student’s.

It addition, it is time everyone stops describing bills as either a “faculty ap-

most important aspect of the GC, which in recent years may have been lost, is that we, the governing members of the council, represent our classmates. This representation can only truly work if the students know what is going on in the GC, in order to inform their delegates of their stance on an issue. The closed curtain behind the GC doors in room 145T is something that should be eliminated.

It is essential for any governing council,

to be open and excited to hear what the members of the council have to say, and more importantly, they need to tell their representatives, what they think. Making any governing body successful requires cooperation from both sides.

It is time for everyone at Horace Mann – from the teachers to the students – to take advantage of the opportunity presented by the GC: that of voicing our opinions and addressing problems

proved bill” or a “faculty disapproved bill.” Recently, a resolution (proposed by Matthew Taub and me) was presented to the GC about clearing lockers during the last ten minutes before “A” period.

It seemed the council understood the resolution to be only “faculty approved,” and not “student approved.” This categorization is detrimental to progress and compels student representatives to want to vote down a “faculty proposal” Just because it possesses that quality. Eliminating the discord between faculty and students would benefit the GC and eventually, the school.

The third key problem the GC needs to remedy is that of transparency. The

from Horace Mann to Capitol Hill, to insure that the constituent’s voice be heard.

This issue can be easily rectified and will require effort from both sides. We don’t need C-Span, but we need an open door and window.

Representatives on the GC need to inform their constituents on a consistent basis of the issues we talk about during the meetings. We need to ask their opinion on topics we are debating and be open to their ideas. For the representatives, it is time we go back to our campaign speeches and remember what we promised -- to listen to our grade and keep them involved. On the other hand, the student body needs

within the school and community. The way for our school to truly grasp these advantages starts with the GC taking action in making a clear agenda, eliminating the divide between faculty members and student members, and breaking the barrier between the GC and the student body. It is vital that we don’t let the GC draw the anger of the people whom they represent, just as Washington has done over the past few years Sooner or later, the 5th Grade won’t want to go on the Washington trip, but might as well want to change it to another city. HMR

March 2010 HM Review

Andrew Demas

23

Features

A Nightmare For HM Students: Diminishing the Power of Our Constitution by sam rahmin

After signing the constitution of the United States, George Washington said, “The Constitution is the guide which I never will abandon.” The constitution of the United States was a milestone in government. It was written to state the values of the United States, balance power within America’s government, and guarantee basic rights to the people. America’s constitution has endured for two hundred years and still commands the same amount of respect.

Denying the significance of Horace Mann’s constitution would be similar to diminishing the magnitude of The Constitution of The United States. HM’s constitution is so important that it is constantly being tweaked to perfection so that it can better the lives of the students.

Like The Constitution of the United States, our constitution functions to lay the foundation for student government, and to balance power among the students and the faculty. Additionally, our constitution promises fair and equal rights to

As is the Constitution of the United States, Horace Mann’s constitution is more than a crucial document, but a benchmark for our school that should be appreciated by the all members of the community. each student. As is the Constitution of the United States, Horace Mann’s constitution is more than a crucial document, but a benchmark for our school that should be appreciated by the all members of the community.

It is necessary for every administration to have something to keep it running smoothly and to convey its purpose

Numbers: 81 24

to its supporters. At Horace Mann, we have our constitution. Our school’s objective is communicated in the preamble of the constitution. This powerful introduction explicitly states that it is the responsibility of the students and faculty to “improve the educational community.”

Future students and administrators can learn that members of the community are constantly striving to better themselves through excellence in their studies and extracurricular activities. The preamble goes on to say that it is the job of the HM community to “safeguard values and ideals on which it (HM) is based. ” Our constitution is arguably the most significant document in our school. It is the only document that clearly states our school’s objectives: fostering education to the highest standard and upholding morally correct values.

Our constitution also functions to outline the role of each of our school’s major bodies of government. Article 1 is about the GC, which serves as the legislative body at Horace Mann. The GC’s job is to pass legislative bills, which both create new rules and modify previous mandates at Horace Mann. The GC is thus a vessel of expression for the students, guaranteed by the constitution. Students on the GC can directly communicate with the Head of the Upper Division because he is the one who decides whether or not to pass the GC’s bills. This power enables the students to alter school policies that we feel are not in the student’s best interests. At high schools, students are infrequently given this type of power. The ability to change school rules alone, guaranteed by the constitution, should be regarded as vital to the lives of all HM students. If this were all the constitution promised

Number of pages in the previous Constitution.

16

Number of pages in the revised Constitution

5

students, it would still be important.

However, the constitution continues to promise us even more ways to influence the administration.

The next article in our constitution tells the role of the SBP and SBVP and their function as the executive branch at HM. Moreover, according to the constitution, the primary job of the SBP and SBVP is solely to better life for HM’s student body. This unique office is so valuable because students can have another student, whose sole function is to advocate their peers’ beliefs. We, hard working but hard to please, HM students are allowed to have someone advocate to the administration on our behalf. Class

Number of years since the Constitution’s last revision.

11

Neccessity of the Constitution on scale of 1 to 10.

HM Review Vol. XIX

Features

Camille Knop

officers are mentioned next; their job is to represent their class and serve as the managers of their respective grades. Furthermore, our constitution outlines the Governance Committee, which is responsible for interrupting, enforcing, and updating the constitution, in a way acting as the “judicial branch of student government.” Article VI in HM’s constitution describes the process of a referendum.

Groups of people call for referendum by petition. This enables the student body and faculty to vote on a single a single issue. Whatever is decided from the referendum has the force of the constitution.

A referendum has the power to alter the constitution, but it cannot eliminate the power of a referendum. With this influence, if the majority of HM’s students feel strongly about an issue, regardless of involvement in student government, they March 2010 HM Review

can make a difference.

The definite structure of government written into our constitution is valuable to students. Having a clear structure of government keeps power in check. No one person or body of government can ever overwhelm other systems of government.

Our fundamental principles reinforce the fact that although the administration will and should act on their own discretion, they will be reminded of the students’ interests by the GC, SBP, and referendums and the powers we are granted by the constitution. Most importantly, our constitution states that the government will remain consistent; no one is capable of acting arbitrarily. Overall, the Horace Mann community, especially students, benefit from our constitution.

Furthermore, part of an article in the constitution is specifically designed to give rights to students. All community members have the same equal rights.

Each student and faculty member can attend any meeting of a body of government. Every student is entitled to propose ideas and potentially turn their concepts into reality. The constitution speaks to HM students by showing that any practical change is possible.

Without the constitution, these rights would not be inalienable. Without the constitution, Horace Mann students are not promised the power to impact our school. We would have no way of assuring that power will be balanced by multiple bodies of government. We, the students of Horace Mann School, have a tendency to be very passionate about what we think is correct, and we care about the way our school is administrated. The constitution is the only thing confirming that in fact, we can make a difference in our school. The thought of losing that power is horrifying. As many things change about our school, such as library policies and rules pertaining to managing sports teams, our constitution and its basic values must prevail. HMR

Voices of the HM Students Do You Think The HM Constitution is Important?

N0 33%

Yes 67%

Have You Read The HM Constitution?

Yes 20% N0 80%

Do You Feel the GC Should Focus On Different Topics?

N0 32%

Yes 68%

150 students polled by Alex Posner and Jacob Gladysz-Morawski 25

Deserio Rodriguez

Economics

On a Crash Course What Toyota’s Problems Means for Consumers and the Auto Industry by david zask

O

n Friday August 28th, 2009 the California Highway Patrol received a call from a man claiming that his car, which contained him and his family, was speeding out of control and he could not stop it. Seconds later, he reached an intersection, and he and his family were killed. Almost a month later, on November 25th, 2009

26

Toyota issued a press release regarding a recall and a stop of sales for certain models. There have been 6 million vehicles recalled in the U.S. and 8 million recalled worldwide. This recall was due to a sticky accelerator that caused cars to accelerate beyond control. This is a serious dilemma as it has already attributed to the deaths of many people.

This will cause major short and longterm problems for Toyota. If one wants to see what might happen to Toyota in the

future, one should look at Ford, which was in a similar situation in the mid 70’s.

Ford was a thriving company until some of the models’ engines began exploding.

Ford’s reputation was tarnished from then on forth and its reputation among consumers has still not fully recovered.

It is very possible that Toyota will relive Ford’s past. Toyota, which has a total market capitalization of $233.8 billion, has already lost the worth of the entire Ford Company, which is equal to $4.62 billion.

HM Review Vol. XIX

Economics NYDailyNews

Fallen from the Top: Toyota’s CEO Akio Toyoda will have to restore customer appeal to the Toyota brand while also dealing with the comapany’s legal issues.

However, Toyota still has a chance to recover from this, since it is a larger and more powerful company. In the short term, Toyota will be pestered with many lawsuits. Toyota’s CEO Akio Toyoda has testified in front of Congress against the allegations that he hid evidence that showed safety defects in Toyota models.

He said that he was sorry for all the pain and suffering that he put people through, but his apology holds little value in court against accusations of withholding and obstructing evidence. In addition, the head of a Senate committee investigating Toyota’s safety problem believe that federal regulators could have been bribed

by Toyota. It is believed that Toyota could have offered them jobs as regulators. The fact that there are some former federal regulators that now work for Toyota has intensified this investigation. This incident has caused the consumer to lose trust in Toyota’s safety, quality, and the company in general. These problems have been going on since 2000. It took Toyota a very long time to diagnose, and this hesitation only exacerbated the problem. At first the company simply ignored mechanical problems, ludicrously hoping that they would go away. Then Toyota blamed the braking problem on the floor mat. People cannot trust a company that handles its issues like this. There could March 2010 HM Review

be a safety defect with a car right now and Toyota would be either unaware or in denial. Furthermore, Toyota might also lose its supporters in the Senate and Congress. The company spent 25 million dollars on lobbying last year, and Toyota will probably have to spend even more this year. To save its future, Toyota must take firm action now and regain the trust of consumers.

With the worldwide automobile leader in a downward spiral, will another company take over as a leading auto-

There could be a safety defect with a car right now and Toyota would be either unaware or in denial. maker? Is there an opportunity at all for other competitors? These are the questions that everyone in the automobile industry is asking. There is definitely an opportunity for competitors to grab market share, but it is not necessarily that sizable. Many think that this proves that American cars are safer and that this will be a boost for American car companies.

One of the problems with this statement is that the malfunctioning part was made in America, by an American company. In

fact, this actually suggests that American cars might not be as safe as Toyota vehicles. Nevertheless, American car companies do have a better, more efficient way of addressing problems. For one thing, they have never taken over 10 years to acknowledge a problem, and in some respects, American car companies do have a chance to improve their situation. On the other hand, Honda, the other Japanese automobile giant, also seems poised to become the world leader in automobile manufacturing. The problem facing Honda is that the world may think that Honda’s policies are too similar to Toyota. Honda itself has recently issued a recall for over 1 million vehicles. As a result, consumers might even lose faith in Japanese car companies in general. When gauging any car company’s chances one must also consider the fact that there have been 524 recalls in the past 3 years involving 23.5 million vehicles, so recalls are not uncommon. However, Toyota does seem to be in a particularly difficult situation given the large scope of its recalls; this mechanical problem has been found in the 2007 to 2010 Camry, the 2005 to 2010 Avalon, the 2004 to 2009 Prius, the 2005 to 2010 Tacoma, the 2007 to 2010 Tundra, the 2007 to 2010 ES350, the 2006 to 2010 IS250, and the 2006 to 2010 IS 350.

On the consumer side, this might be a good time to buy a Toyota. Buying a Toyota is a gamble, but it could be a great deal. The prices are much lower due to the company’s economic misfortunes. The cars might even be safer, since Toyota is now being especially careful not to make another mistake. However, the argument could be made that Toyota’s cars are not as safe if they neglected other defects over the years. As for the competition, there might be a new leader in automobile’s for a couple of years, but it will probably not last. Toyota’s shortcomings could mean trouble for the U.S. since Toyota is a large employer of American workers. Toyota does have a rough time ahead of itself, but the company will likely survive and move on. As the biggest automaker in the world, Toyota will be able to rebound, but consumer trust will have to be won back with the next generation of car buyers.

HMR

27

Economics Wikimedia

Greece’s Crumbling Economy

by zoe rubin

I

n the last quarter of 2009, the Greek government confessed that its deficit had reached 12.7% of its gross domestic product (GDP), as opposed to the 3.7% expected. In total, the national debt was 133.4% of the GDP. This final figure reached 121% in 2010. The soaring budget deficit is estimated at between $300 and $440 million US dollars. In other words, Greece is bankrupt.

The announcement triggered a rapid spiral of the Mediterranean state’s economy, culminating in a complete financial panic. Moreover, headlines across the globe have called into question the stability of euro, use of sovereign debt, and the role of high deficits. The crisis’ ramifications can not only devastate the eurozone and Europe on the whole but

28

also foreshadow the economic fate of larger nations such as the United States and China. Yet, despite the only recent alarm of the issue, Greece’s financial crisis has been building for decades.

Both conservative and socialist Greek governments alike have long given out high pay and large amounts of jobs for the benefit of the public sector. Today, public sector wages and pensions make up a shocking 51% of nation’s total budget. Persistent striking has increased government compensation of unions ranging from those for prostitutes to tax collectors. Meanwhile, the nation’s public sector jobs are also increasing at an exponential speed. For example, just in 2009, 29,000 public-sector workers were hired to fill the jobs of only 14,000 retirees. The combination of these compensations and

expansions have caused Greece’s budget to spike beyond the nation’s means in recent years.

Yet, much of the mounting debt remained a mystery to investors and the greater international community until early this year. Financial derivatives from Goldman Sachs, J.P. Morgan, and various other banks allowed the Greek government to conceal its mounting debt behind currency trades. Despite the lack of attention this issue has received on our side of the Atlantic, the European press is furious. Greek and German magazines in particular have targeted their administrations for constantly pushing the issue aside and into the responsibility of future leaders. Even an International Monetary Fund (IMF)– an organization that may aid in bailing out the nation– official commentated that, “if government wants to cheat, it can cheat.” Although the deals between Greece and Goldman Sachs, among others, were technically legal, they were conceived under various loopholes that permitted nondisclosure based solely on the given label of the deal. At the dawn of this decade, the Greek government went so far as to mortgage off its national airports and highways in order to generate some much-needed revenue.

By masking its debts behind these deals, the Euro-using nation violated borrowing limits designed by the European Union (EU) to keep the Euro strong.

A large portion of Greece’s current economic woes derives from sovereign debt– essentially loans created by foreign governments, and in foreign currencies, to fund federal programs. As the nation’s debt spirals, its investors have become increasingly pessimistic over the possibility that Greece will be able to pay back its loans. The growing global panic has prompted fears of a default. If such an event whereby the nation is unable to recover from its debts were to occur, the results would be traumatic for both the value of the Euro and the overall future of the eurozone.

Greece is definitely not the only nation employing such methods as a means of concealing its mounting debt. Through favorable currency swaps with JP Morgan, Italy was able to disguise its rising deficits. Now, the indebted group of EuHM Review Vol. XIX

Economics ropean economies known derogatorily as PIIGS (Portugal, Italy, Ireland, Greece, and Spain) are all at risk due to widening spreads on credit default swaps– a sign that investors heavily believe in the likelihood of default. Already, Portugal has seen the fallout after a failed government bond auction.

The growing panic threatens far more than the recently elected Socialist government. The economic reverberations endanger the common economic unity growing in Europe and more specifically in the Eurozone, the economic and monetary union (EMU) of 16 European nations all of which use the standard euro currency. “This is the first big test for the European monetary system,” explained investment strategist Christopher Wood.

“And it is clear this year that global macro risk will come from Euroland and not the U.S.” If this crisis continues unhindered, the Euro will likely continue its dramatic fall. This drop will correlate with the dive in the economies of all Euro zone nations– from the weaker PIIGS to economic superpowers like Germany and other G-7 or even G-20 nations.

President Papandreou, a Socialist elected in October of 2009, blamed speculation as the root cause of the panic, but he has taken action to limit public sector spending. However, Papandreou’s proposed plan of slowly decreasing the workforce, not their wages, as public sector workers retire has met opposition from those who rightly feel that it is neither bold nor immediate enough. Even if the government were to slash public sector spending, this measure could still devastate the economy. Public sector spending makes up a considerable portion of Greece’s GDP and cutting this GDP component would adversely affect Greece’s economy. Even more recent federal actions at the urging of other European nations are in the works for a freezing of wages, a change in the official retirement age, slashed bonuses, and a crackdown on tax evasion. While these actions are nowhere near effective enough, much of Greece is now aghast.

When asked his opinion about the crisis, Pandias Scaramangas– a Greek economic expert from Hydra– explained that “this is a small country and the government is enormous. When four people March 2010 HM Review

retire, one should be hired. The government should be much smaller and more efficient. It should be more computerized.” Mr. Scaramangas is a wise Greek philosopher and was once counsel on the Board of Directors of the Bank of Greece, but is better known as the man Ian Fleming asked for the use of his last name for the villain in the James Bond movies.

Pandias said as he always does, “Excellent!” as long as he would not get killed.

Lila Skami, who works for the Ministry of Finance, added by phone, “In addition to reducing the public sector, an order should be put in the fiscal plan for taxes.

People don’t pay their taxes regularly.

Double cross the data and realize that it’s not possible to have luxury villas and big yachts when you pay so little taxes.”

Further progress in minimizing the government budget has been stopped by the near-religious fervor with which the Greeks have turned out on the street to protest the cuts. Already, farmers are blockading roads as the protest decreased government subsidies. In addition, a nationwide shutdown strike on February 10th crippled Greece’s schools, airports, courts, and government offices. The president of the Panhellic Union of Exporters, Christin Sakellaridi, explained that “exports have fallen 18% since the beginning of the strike because the shipping of goods via maritime, rail and air links is paralyzed.” Until the nation is able to curb these protests and enact its internal deficit-decreasing initiatives, many foreign agents are adverse to supply the nation with massive aid packages.

Domestic Greek banks have been buying up much of its sovereign debt so that these securities might be used as collateral in exchange for funding by the European Bank. However, the nation still needs to win back the long-term investors, such as pension funds and insurance companies, it has lost due to the drop in bond values.

Currently, European plans to bail out Greece, using as much as 30 billion euros (or $41 billion) are quietly underway, led in particular by Germany and France. However, the German government and Chancellor Angela Merkel, is quick to emphasize that further cuts are necessary before the largest economy in

Europe signs off on a deal. As the Eurozone’s strongest economic power, Germany in particular knows that it will bear the brunt of this crisis and its aftermath.

There is no mandate or structure for a response of this kind and so many of the European leaders are wisely making up as they go along. As a result, politics may play just as key a role as economics in deciding what kind of an austerity package Greece will receive. For example, IMF intervention would be severely detrimental to French President Nicholas Sarkozy as the IMF is headed by his possible presidential rival Dominique Strauss-Kahn.

The recent situation in Greece as well as a possible future crisis in sovereign debt on the whole are indicative of what may falls upon the United States if it fails to decrease its own credit load. Currently, the US’s deficit is at around 10% of its GDP (recall Greece’s was 12.7%). However, both Germany and equally-wary France realize that any intervention by the International Monetary Fund– which has recently aided non-Euro zone powers – would only destroy the standing of the Euro, proving its inability to solve internal issues. As a result, Greek officials have been privately threatening such IMF intervention if the EU bailout does not proceed.

Just last week, a medium-sized bomb was set off outside a J.P. Morgan office building in Athens. Nobody was injured or killed in the incident due to a warning call placed to a newspaper a half an hour earlier for people to evacuate the premises. Yet the financial damage the attack symbolizes is far more devastating. The Greek crisis is a ticking global time bomb, with the potential to blitz not only European but markets worldwide.

This is not the time to allow politics to dictate the EU’s outcome– the stakes are far to great for all nations involved. To quote the character Josh Lyman in “Bad Moon Rising,” a West Wing episode dealing with a Mexican bailout plan, “ ‘If your neighbor’s house is on fire, you don’t haggle over the price of your garden hose.’…

There are too many things in the world we can’t do. Why help them? Because we can.” HMR

29

Science and Technology

Communication Breakdown

C

by alexander posner

ell phones are all around us.

People on trains, in cars, and even in the school hallway all use cell phones. We take cell phones for granted as they allow us to connect with others, yet many fail to realize the danger associated with consistent cell phone use. When you speak into your phone a transmitter takes the sound of your voice and encodes it into a continuous sine wave. After locating the nearest cell phone tower your phone will send out that encoded signal as a radio wave, which is made up of electromagnetic radiation.

As defined by the Federal Communications Division, electromagnetic radiation is “made up of waves of electric and magnetic energy moving at the speed of light. There are two distinct types of electromagnetic radiation: ionizing radiation and non-ionizing radiation. X-rays and gamma rays both fall under the category of ionizing radiation and are considered to pose significant harm to humans as they contain enough electromagnetic energy to strip atoms and molecules from the tissue and alter chemical reactions in the body. On the other hand, non-ionic radiation, which includes radio waves, is not considered to pose significant harm to cells.

So why then are cell phones potentially dangerous? Unlike a microwave, for example, we use a cell phone on a con-

30

sfweekly

sistent basis, usually for extended periods of time. Having this consistent exposure to radiation, especially so close to your body, is where the real danger lies. On top of this, because of the thinness of the human skull, your brain is especially susceptible.

In recent years, there have been an increasing number of studies linking cell phone use to health problems, such as cancer. Studies looking at the effect of cell phone radiation for less than 10 years have found no clear connections to cancer. However studies looking at the danger posed for periods of time longer than 10 years have clearly displayed an increased risk. In 2008 the World Health Organization released its ten-year study called Interphone. As part of an inter-

national collaboration, the 13 different countries involved (Germany, Australia, Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, Israel, Italy, Japan, Norway, New-Zeeland, United- Kingdom and Sweden) all used the same protocols in order to examine the possible connection between tumors and radiation. What they found was astonishing: “among long term users (for more than 10 years) there was a 80% higher risk of developing the tumor at the same side of the brain where they held the phone, in comparison to non-users.�

Interphone also found that specifically glioma, the most common type of brain tumor, had 39% greater chance of occurring in cell phone users. The information on coustic neurinoma (a benign tumor of a nerve between the ear and brain), was HM Review Vol. XIX

Science and Technology the most revealing because it occurs directly where you place your cell phone during calls. The study found that your risk for this tumor was 3.9 times higher if you used a cell phone on a regular basis.

Another related area of concern relates to the safety of cell phone towers.

Because these towers are consistently receiving radio waves, they emit much more radiation than a single cell phone.

A French study in 2002 found that people who lived within a close proximity to a cell phone tower experienced symptoms such as fatigue, headache, sleep disruption, and loss of memory. What’s even worse is that if you live in cities or other urban areas, you are likely to be living and working close to a large numbers of cell towers. Therefore these urban dwellers are consistently exposed to dangerous electromagnetic radiation.

This information is naturally hard for many of us to absorb and accept. We depend on our cell phones on a consistent basis and to part ways with it would be virtually impossible. Responding to these recent studies, many regular cell phone users and advocates have refuted these claims. Looking at the current debate on the risks of cell phone use, we can draw direct parallels to earlier debates relating to the tobacco industry’s handling of reports that smoking cigarettes was dangerous . When information highlighting the connection between cigarettes and cancer was first published, many tried to refute these claims because cigarettes were such a large and common feature of our society. For many years the tobacco industry pushed back hard against the claims that cigarettes cause cancer and other diseases by saying that these connections had not been decisively proven. Today we are fully aware of the dangers of smoking. As we examine the first meaningful studies on the dangers of prolonged cell phone use, we cannot ignore this evidence, as we did for so long with respect to cigarettes.

I am not suggesting that we ban cell phones altogether. However, there are key steps we must take. In Europe they have already set standards as to how much radiation a cell phone can emit and now place warnings on all cell phones before purchase. Here in the United States we have been slow to follow this approach March 2010 HM Review

and the FCC needs to take responsibility for establishing a similar system.

There are a few problems with the current system. First, the FCC set its legal limit on cell phone radiation in 1996 and that legal limit needs to be changed to meet the potential of more modern technology. At the same time we must properly educate consumers about the dangers of cell phone use so that they can make informed purchasing decisions.

The dangers of cell phone use for children and young adults are greater as our brains are less developed. Unfortunately, students and young people are among the greatest users of cell phones and that needs to change. In France, for example, there have been efforts to ban cell phones in elementary schools.

There are many things that average consumers can do to better protect themselves from cell phone radiation.

Headsets are one of the best protections.

Bluetooth technology is not ideal because it also has an earpiece that emits a large amount of radiation. A much better option is to use wired headsets that plug into your phone. Another thing to be conscious about is that cell phones continue to give off radiation even when you are not on a call as your phone must automatically communicate with the tower in order to see if you have texts. Therefore never leave your cell phone on in your pocket and turn it off whenever possible.

The dangers associated with cell phones are real and a growing threat. In fact throughout the world an estimated 4 billion people own cell phones. It is predicted that more people will die from cell phone use than smoking in the coming years. This is a major health challenge in the coming years and it is our responsibility to take appropriate actions to address these health issues and to make a difference. HMR

At the center The headquarters of the World Health Organization, the creator of the ten-year study called Interphone, is shown below.

unesco

31

Science and Technology

Comfortably Frozen

F

by katherine wyatt

rom the Fountain of Youth to the Philosopher’s Stone, people have toyed with the concept of immortality, but it was always science fiction.

With the use of the emerging science of cryonics, however, there now is potential for that science fiction to become science fact. Cryonics, a new and fascinating field, is the study of low-temperature preservation of living organisms, from egg and sperm cells to organs to, more recently, whole bodies. Whereas ancient woolly mammoths, frozen deep within glaciers for thousands of years, have been recovered relatively well-preserved, human cryonics is mostly, at this point, an untested concept. Through this procedure, it is now possible to have yourself frozen immediately after death in hopes that, one day, though maybe decades or centuries away, science and technology will be advanced enough that a person can be resuscitated – for a price, of course. But nothing is certain.

The process of cryopreservation is hardly perfect, though it is improving every day. People who desire cryopreservation, as opposed to burials or cremation, sign up and when it seems as though the end is near – for now, at least – the cryonics company is alerted. This must be done immediately because the faster you are frozen after death, the safer your organs will be from cellular decay.

For every 10o Celsius your core temperature drops, the rate of cellular decay will slow by 50%, so cooling the body quickly is essential. After the patient is legally dead, the company employees (who, at this point, are not all required to be certified medical doctors) arrive and get to work immediately. The body is placed in an ice-filled container and transported to the facility, where the real procedure

32

begins. Combinations of medicines are used to stop blood clotting. Slowly, blood is drained from the body’s arteries, then is replaced with a special antifreeze-like solution to prevent the potentially catastrophic formation of ice-crystals in the body’s cells. The pumping of the cryopreservative into the body must be done carefully for, if it occurs too fast, cells can be torn apart by the high chemical concentration, a process called fracturing.

During this whole process, the body’s changes must be watched because some areas of the body take the cryopreservative solution more easily than others.

This whole process is called vitrification, where over 60 percent of the body’s water is replaced by potentially toxic chemicals, turning tissue to a glass-like solid.

Holes are drilled in the skull to monitor the brain and ensure it does not swell. As severe as this appears, it is quite harmless, being safer than normal brain surgery on living patients. The brain isn’t even being meddled with – only monitored. The body is kept quite cold throughout this process. Once this is complete, the body is placed in a regular sleeping bag and placed, for fifteen days, in an enormous stainless steel, liquid-nitrogen-filled container, where the body’s temperature will drop to -196oC. After this step, the body is placed into another, essentially identical container for the long freeze.

An alternative, which is slightly easier for the surgeons to deal with, is when a person chooses to preserve only their head. The cryonicists call these patients “neuros.” All memories, personality, and thoughts are stored in the brain.

So, if a whole body might one day be revived, it doesn’t seem implausible that a brain could simply be put into a new body and be totally functional. Neuros are easier to deal with during preservation because the brain is the only focus.

freezerworks

Surgeons do not need to worry about fracturing anywhere else. The process itself is also quicker.

Cryonicists have speculated about the future of those bodies and how one might revive them. If the effects of the toxic cryopreservative chemicals can be reversed or prevented, whatever ailment killed the patient (be it cancer, infection, etc.) must also be reversed. The body must be rejuvenated for a new life.

Some have theorized that the success of this curing and rejuvenation process lies in Nano-medicine technology, which some day may be able to operate within the body and repair it cell by cell. But nothing like this technology exists so far, which is why no revivals have yet been attempted -- no one knows how to do it.

The first step to being cryopreserved is finding a company to do it for you. There are only about half a dozen cryonics companies in the U.S., the two foremost being Alcor Life Extension Foundation, in Arizona, and the Cryonics Institute of Michigan. Since neither company has attempted to revive a patient yet or is planning to do so in the immediate future, one cannot really say which company is preferable for cryopreserving oneself. With so few companies in this relatively small field, information must be exchanged to aid in the search for better cryopreservation techniques.

This small circle of communications may generally render their preservation processes similar. The companies, rightly so, are careful to avoid false hope that being revived is a definite possibility. Alcor’s website states, “Cryonics is a speculative life support technology,” and their mission is, to placate those with religious conflicts, “an attempt to preserve and protect the gift of human life.” The Cryonics Institute’s website states that people can be “maintained indefinitely in cryosHM Review Vol. XIX

rworks

Science and Technology tasis (ie, stored in liquid nitrogen). When and if future medical technology allows, our member patients hope to be healed… and awakened.” Though the companies’ view is optimistic in order to attract clients, they are careful to avoid certainty.

With a science as new as cryonics, the companies take care to note that nothing is definite. This notification that cryoics has potential, not certainty, is essential, especially because of the immense price.

Alcor charges $150,000 for the freezing of

ing and then reviving a body? Either way, you are reversing what, only decades ago, would have been inevitable death.

Another issue, which is more potential than reality, is that of increased overpopulation. If people have the chance to live life again (providing the whole technique of cryonics is successful and gains popularity), where would all the revived patients live? Is there really enough space on our earth? The answer now is no. But no one can predict the fu-

“wholebody patients”, with the Cryonics Institute in a similarly lofty price range.

Cryonics, like most other novel discoveries, is bound to encounter cynicism and criticism because it has the potential to change our perception of human life and its worth. Is your life worth so much to you if you can just relive it later? Stemming from this drastic change in how some people may view human life, religious controversy arises. Some argue that it is not our place to meddle in the comings and goings of human life because it violates certain religious teachings. However, people once vehemently believed the earth was the center of the universe and they were proven wrong.

Could the same not be achieved here?

And of course, meddling with human life occurs every day, ever since the invention of the defibrillator. In reality, is defibrillation morally any different from freez-

ture of cryonics or of the world and its population. Our situation could change and overpopulation could one day end.

Yet, we do not know that now and it’s too risky to take that bet, some critics say. Were cryonics to become popular and better understood, the question of eugenics, choosing to freeze some while denying others this opportunity, might arise. The process is expensive, so would the rich be favored? How would it be decided who should or shouldn’t be frozen, to prevent an excess of cryopreserved patients? It could be based on any criteria, such as genetic prowess, intelligence, or wealth. As mentioned earlier, cryonics might not even work. But, on the chance cryonics does work, we’ll have to handle the obstacle of eugenics when we come to it. The biggest immediate danger, affecting the patient’s body alone, is that of cellular decay before the body can be

March 2010 HM Review

frozen. Only minutes after death, body cells begin to die due to lack of oxygen (known as hypoxia). While most organs, if slightly decayed, can be fixed, the most fragile organ is the brain. If brain decay occurs too severely immediately following death, when and if a person is awakened, they may, at best, lack some memories – at worst, they could be revived but end up in a vegetative state. The same effect may occur if fracturing occurs in vital parts of the body, such as the brain.

Another factor to consider is psychological effects – will memories remain after patients are reawakened? Will it be a serious shock to the system or the mind?

This is the very reason scientists are waiting for more advanced technology before reviving patients. The more we know and the better the preparation, the better the chances of successful revivals.

For those few who are aware of cryonics, being frozen is a matter of choice. Some may have ideological views that prevent them from viewing cryonics as a post-mortem option. Others may simply find it unsatisfactory to lie in a stainless steel container, waiting for a second lease on life, while their whole family tree lies six feet under. Still others may just find the option gross, or view cryopreservation as an understandable but senseless manifestation of humankind’s fear of death. The majority of controversies existing over the issue of Cryonics are purely hypothetical, but only because cryonics is just that – hypothetical. Scientists have frozen patients, yes, but no one has attempted a revival. Many may say cryonicists are con artists, tricking people out of their money, while others say the scientists are simply crazy. But a century ago, who would have believed man would one day walk upon the moon or map the sequence the entire human genome?

Only time will tell the future of cryonics. Right now, scientists are working to discover more answers and unlock the very secrets of human life itself through revival of the dead. It is not unrealistic to believe that, one day, we’ll have our answer. HMR

33

Digital Journal

Science and Technology

Who will take the blame?

Faced with high malpractice insurance costs, we have to cope with the problem of rising medical expenses.

Here’s a look at the issue as a whole:

M

by vivianna lin

edical malpractice is the act of negligence made by healthcare providers when treating patients.

Around 98,000 patients die annually due to medical errors. However, medical malpractice affects not only the patients and their families, but also every person that receives medical treatment. This is not the fault of the doctors, but rather of the tort system.

Why do these errors occur so frequently? From the standpoint of the patient, the doctor is supposed to be curing them. So if he fails to do so and instead maims the patient, shouldn’t the doctor’s right to practice be taken away? It is much more complicated than that. Oftentimes, errors in the medical field are not just made by one person at a certain time, but rather a series of mess-ups. In order to view the entire situation, we must also look at the doctor’s view. Doctors have to take care of many cases each day, working 80 hours or more a week. They are the ones that cure patients and they succeed quite often. If they weren’t willing to take on the job of treating their fellows, then who would? We, as the patients, as people who are not doctors, should not be so quick to point the finger.

The problem with medical malpractice suits is that they make adversaries of

34

Tort reform Without any recognizable change in recent years, the problem of avoiding defensive medicine can seem unsolvable.

Some of the statistics are highlighted on the next page.

the patient and the doctor. This causes both sides to tell a twisted version hornbillunleashed of the events and the doctors almost never medicalforum have a chance to honestly talk about their mistakes. Doctors are demonized too often for making errors. Some people may think doctors to be liars for withholding this information, but doctors are not to blame, for they are only trying to protect their practice. Medical training is just like any other art, like playing an instrument or a sport. Doctors need to make mistakes in order to learn from them and move forward. The only problem is, doctors practice on people, which makes the art so dangerous. Each mistake may be a step forward in a doctor’s career, but the cost may result in the death of a patient.

Nearly all states require physicians to buy liability insurance. Physicians get their insurance from commercial companies or physician-owned mutual companies. Premiums for malpractice insurance are set according to past losses and expenses of the physician. Physicians use 10% of their patient’s expenses to pay for their malpractice insurance.

In the last sixty years, the people’s expectation of the health care system has risen due to the many advances in medicine. But with higher expectations comes HM Review Vol. XIX

Digital Journal

Science and Technology

eashed

lforum

greater disappointment and anger when the healthcare providers fail to meet them. Certain professions, such as neurosurgery, were always risky procedures to begin with, so the patients will know of the gravity of their situation. However, the patients of obstetricians all expect the same thing: a healthy baby. If the baby is born with neurological defects or heart problems, the mother will be devastated.

Obstetricians are the doctors with the highest rate of malpractice insurance.

One in twelve obstetricians who reported changes in their practice due to the risk of professional liability have stopped delivering babies.

The reason medical expenses are so expensive is because 10% of it is used for malpractice insurance. If the malpractice insurance were not so expensive, perhaps the cost of healthcare would not be so expensive. The malpractice insurance rate of an obstetrician can cost up to $200,000 annually.

Malpractice insurance is very expensive because of the compensation the doctor needs to give the patient if they are found guilty. Should the doctor be found guilty, then they have to pay for the plaintiff ’s lawyer and other court expenses.

Then the patient will be compensated for the pain and suffering costs they en-

dured because of the injury. The amount of money to be compensated for pain and suffering is determined by the court. For example, if someone was unable to work for a full year because of an injury sustained during surgery, then they would be compensated for a full year’s salary. All of these compensations could amount to a great value, and because the malpractice insurance covers it all, it is very expensive. The plaintiff would also be compensated for the pain and stress of the injury.

One solution to lowering malpractice insurance is to limit the plaintiff lawyer’s fee. There should be a limit to how much the lawyer charges so the defendant’s insurance company can pay less.

The amount of compensation for pain and suffering should also have a limit, because it is completely determined by the court.

The costs of the tort system could also be raising the costs of health care, including the cost of lawsuits and defensive medicine. Defensive medicine is the practice of taking extra precautions to avoid malpractice liability, rather than to help the patient. Many doctors use defensive medicine; the rates of defensive medicine in the United States can be as high as 79% to 93%. There are two types of defensive medicine: assurance behav-

ior and avoidance behavior. Assurance behavior takes the form of ordering extra unnecessary tests to leave nothing overlooked and as evidence for liability claims. Avoidance behavior occurs when doctors refuse to treat their patients due the high risk. In the case of assurance behavior, the unnecessary tests add up on the patient’s bill, greatly increasing the cost of health care. This is a direct cause of the tort system. Doctors practice defensive medicine in order to protect against liability claims. Raising the costs of health care could decrease the number of people with access to it. In some cases, avoidance behavior could be even more detrimental. If the doctor refused to operate from his own fear of liability, then the patient would have to find another doctor. And what happens if the patient doesn’t have time to find another doctor?

Doctors are supposed to treat all patients without prejudice. Turning away a patient for fear of liability is just wrong. In the end, it all comes back down to the tort system.

Our medical malpractice system is flawed with no direct ways of addressing the problems. In order to start lowering the cost of malpractice insurance, we must take it step by step. HMR

Statistics

Some numbers are given below as they pertain to medical malpractice, according to recent data.

Around 98,000 patients die annually due to medical errors.

The average defense for dropped or dismissed cases is $18,774.

The malpractice insurance rate of an obstetrician can cost up to $200,000 annually.

For jury cases ruled in the physician’s favor, the average defense cost $93,559.

Physicians alone paid $6.3 billion in malpractice premiums in a year.

March 2010 HM Review

75% of liability claims were closed without payment to the patient.

40% of these were filed without merit.

A Health and Human Services report from 2003 found that tort reform would reduce federal spending by $28 to $51 billion per year.

35

Viewpoints The Governing Council

Can it change our school? by jessica bernheim

T

he Governing council is an integral part of Horace Mann. Students can voice their opinions and representatives can write legislation to facilitate change. It is often said by students that the GC can only be as successful as the student body allows it to be. Moreover, it can only be as productive as the student body allows it to be.

However, I disagree. While the majority of the student body might not care about the GC or not know what occurs within this body, the importance of the GC is not lessened as every single representative takes a serious interest in its success.

Every Tuesday in room 145T all representatives are ready to debate legislation that other members or they themselves have written. The representatives find the GC important. We care, and we will continue to care until we have made change

36

noticeable enough for the student body to care.

It is also said that we have little power, and unfortunately, that is true. We are students in high school; the administra-

We care, and we will continue to care until we have made change noticeable enough for the student body to care. tion has more power than us. This is the way it has been, is, and always will be. But make no mistake; the administration is there to encourage us, to foster our ideas, and to make Horace Mann better. While that may not always seem true, it is. Our job as students is to learn, to be educated, to have our lives enriched by the vast array of activities that are offered to us.

And through the governing council we have been given an outlet to express our concerns and make changes we feel are

necessary and beneficial to the school. .

The GC has a similar format to the United States Congress. We follow the same rules as they, and similarly, when a bill is passed, it goes to the president, who in this case is Dr. Schiller. However, while we follow the same format as the congress, we are not a body of equals. Dr. Schiller has the power to veto, and the GC cannot override his decision. While this may seem necessary in order to ensure that a bill, for example, mandating the construction of escalators or the addition of candy bars into all classrooms is not passed, it is my opinion that the GC should be given the power to override Dr. Schiller’s veto. The GC makes decisions from a standpoint that is unlike the average student. Representatives take into consideration economic costs, feasibility, and the positive effects said change would have over the entire Upper School. While HM Review Vol. XIX

Viewpoints Trying to make change is harder than it seems. Representatives Max Moran and Katie Cacouris (left) puzzle over bills that the administration, headed by David Schiller (right), will pass. this might have something to do with the pragmatic representatives on the council, I believe that any representative who has been entrusted with the confidence of their grade will make decisions that are not frivolous and will take into consideration the feasibility in implementing any new changes before voting, thus, ensuring the responsibility of our representatives when overriding Dr. Schiller’s veto.

We are students, we are kids attending Horace Mann and we are not regarded as equals. We cannot make changes without the approval of someone with more authoritative power than us. So when it seems as nothing has been done, that too is untrue. We have passed many bills, but not many bills have become laws. Nevertheless, we will keep trying.

As representatives we will push forward writing more legislation in the hope that we will make positive change. However, as a school we need more cooperation with the administration. But before true change and development can occur, both parties need to take several steps forward.

As a student body we have to stop saying that the administration is trying to undermine student effort at change and is acting as a conspiracy to stop any student power. Conversely, the administration needs to be more welcoming towards student written legislation and more forthwith with the passing and enforcing of GC bills. Many bills have been passed in the GC that will be entirely beneficial for HM, but they need to be passed by Dr. Schiller and integrated into the daily life at Horace Mann.

An overview of the GC’s accomplishments: The first trimester was spent going through the revised constitution, which had been cut from 81 pages to 15. While the revision process was extremely time consuming, it was necessary. The constitution is the foundation for our school and by far the most important document at our school. The time spent working on it was essential to the wellbeing of HM. March 2010 HM Review

It covers the purpose, structure and responsibility of the GC, as well as the steering, disciplinary and finance committees.

Conversely, this trimester has been spent writing and passing legislation.

Over 6 bills have passed while approximately, 3 have failed. Passed bills include emergency allocations for the Math Club and FAD magazine as well as a bill to reinstall paper towels in addition to the hand dryers and regulate the times teachers can post HW on Moodle, First Class, or any online form of communication.

Many others have passed as well, and discussions concerning Haiti Relief, Hygiene at bake sales and Hallway traffic have taken place.

Our system of government is more sophisticated than most. At Horace Mann, we are legislators; we have to ability to write bills and resolutions. It is a privilege to have a system that actually allows us, the students, to make change.

The majority of schools in the United States have a Student Body President whose sole duties are to encourage school spirit, raise money at bake sales and other menial tasks such as those. We actually have the opportunity to address issues like course load, funding for clubs and publications, and the school constitution.

We are not limited to specific tasks. The ambiguity in our job description allows us to write bills that might normally not be seen in the jurisdiction of a student.

For example, a bill was recently proposed to restrict the time that teachers could post homework on Moodle, first class, or

any other online site. Its purpose was to ensure that students have enough time to complete homework each night. By mandating that all assignments posted online had to be up by 5:00, power was taken away from the teachers to benefit the students. Surprisingly, this bill passed; students and even some faculty members came together and recognized a problem and decided to take action. Another bill that passed that might not have been though to be within the GC’s jurisdiction was one proposing mandatory meetings once a trimester pertaining to matters within the GC to increase transparency among representatives and constituents.

We have been given this opportunity to make a difference at Horace Mann. We should be careful not to squander it by saying we have no power. In truth, our power expands each time a representative or a student takes the initiative to follow through on a passed bill, meeting with administration and faculty members to try to enforce it.

The GC provides an outlet fro discussion, dissent, and debate. It is a necessary element of Horace Mann. As in every body of people, be it students or the citizens of the United States, there needs to be a forum for discussion concerning relevant issues pertaining to our constituents. If there is not, a form of dictatorship will ensure replacing a representative system. GC representatives take their position very seriously; while we care about making change, the most important issue is that the student voice is heard. HMR

37

Viewpoints

American Capitalism

A

by jordan berman

s the United States surpassed Russia in the Cold War by becoming the lone World Superpower, the US capitalist economy became the dominant force in the world economy. The market economy and capitalism that it promoted also became the dominant form of economy for world powers to utilize, over Russia’s socialist economy. Now, in the 21st century, with the recent economic troubles that we have been facing, economists and historians alike are reevaluating the question of which type of economy was best.

The capitalist economy essentially keeps the government as far out of the equations possible. This means that the government controls and owns as little as possible. This tends to actually be a good thing, as when the owner and operator of a business is the same person, he has a greater incentive to cut costs and increase efficiency, whereas when the government owns a business and hires someone to operate it, there is no incentive to cut costs, utilize new technology, or even to not hand out kick-backs. This was seen most in the Soviet Union, as over time, the government runs agencies became sluggish and unable to adapt to. One of

38

the main problems that people have with our Capitalist Economy is that they complain that lobbyists and special interest groups control too much of the politics, and get in the way of helpful legislation.

They say that this problem would cease if there were no organized special interest groups, or if the government ran all special interest groups. However, in a government where special interest groups held a seat in the government, they would have more power and more access to politicians in order to corrupt the system to get their industries to continue.

The main selling point for capitalism other than the reducing of corruption and the controlling of business’s impact on government is capitalism’s encouragement of competition. This system forms the backbone of capitalism and is what allows into succeed as a system. This causes the companies to compete against one another for the buyer’s money, and causes a scenario where the buyer is the one who really wins, as he can demand better service for less in return for his money. In a socialist economy, there is no competition. The buyer must trust that he is getting the best that the government can afford, which opens the door for rampant corruption.

Capitalisms definitively the best type of economy, the government does need to regulate it in order for it to work correctly. In this respect, a pure capitalist economy where the government does not interact at all with the businesses isn’t the correct choice. The government is needed to make sure dangerous horizontal monopolies are not formed, where a company is the only company who provides a certain, necessary service for the people. The greatest example of this was Standard Oil, which was a monopoly that owned the oil business, and through a series of complex business relationships, controlled the flow of oil to the people of the USA. These kinds of monopolies, made possible by the same technology that allowed for the market economy to flourish, are quite dangerous to a capitalist economy.

Although the capitalist model is definitely the right one, there are certain problems with it that require government regulation, however, these flaws do not require the entire system to be thrown out and a new system put in place; they just require a bit of tweaking on the part of the politicians. HMR

HM Review Vol. XIX

Viewpoints

Getting to Know the Enemy

Would anything change with new government measures?

F

by stephen paduano

Taliban fortress A fortification in Herat, Afghanistan, it last saw fighting before the Taliban abandoned the complex in 2001.

March 2010 HM Review

or the past nine years the United States government has devoted approximately $254 billion and nearly 40,000 troops to overthrowing the Taliban regime throughout Afghanistan and places in Pakistan. On Wednesday, February 3rd, the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence called together CIA director Leon Panetta, FBI director Robert Mueller, Director of National Intelligence Admiral Dennis C. Blair, director of the Defense Intelligence Agency General Ronald L. Burgess Jr., and the acting Assistant Secretary of State for the Bureau of Intelligence and Research John Dinger. These intelligence and security chiefs testified in front of the Senate Intelligence Committee led by Sen. Diane Feinstein (D-CA) to explain the current status of the United State’s safety and to cast their predictions on threats to this country.

The verdict of this hearing was all five intelligence chiefs in agreement that a plot to attack the United States by AlQaeda, the Taliban, or terrorist affiliates in the next three to six months is certain.

This statement was based on the assumption that the United States will carry out the rest of the war the way it has for the past nine years. However, recently President Obama and the Joint Chiefs of Staff have changed their approach to dealing with Al-Qaeda and the Taliban, which will most likely have an effect on domestic attacks. Under the President’s new strategy, an additional 30,000 troops will be sent into Afghanistan, the United States along with its allies in NATO will seek out the terrorists in their new location of Waziristan, Pakistan, and will rely more heavily on Predator drones

and air support that have the ability to stalk suspected terrorists and eliminate them at any point. With this new agenda, we must determine whether or not our armed forces are capable of stopping the terrorists and preventing attacks prior to coming into the United States.

Although Director of National Intelligence, Dennis C. Blair, and his colleagues in the intelligence community did agree that an “attempted attack is certain,” and not that there will definitely be an attack, I would like to reexamine the situation with the government’s new measures. First we have to take into account that since the devastating attacks of September 11th, the United States homeland has not been in serious danger. Although this may be due to the enhanced, precautionary measures taken by airline security, it is also a direct cause of American occupation in Afghanistan. While airline security does help the United States monitor and restrict certain people from boarding flights, these people must have already been flagged as terrorist or terrorist affiliates and marked on the “no fly list.” Yet, this intense and often unconstitutionally invasive system has proved to not be a final solution to aviation security, as shown during the attempted Christmas day bombing by Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab. Intelligence department chiefs have also recently expressed their concern that well-known terrorist organizations may be adapting to our system and as a result be executing attacks through newly trained and unidentifiable people. Based on these reasons, the intelligence chiefs’ claims are absolutely correct. However, the chiefs did not take into consideration the new military initiative, which could potentially stop terrorist activity at its source. Nevertheless this is improbably, though not impossible.

If the United States is successful in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and manages the withdrawal of troops from Iraq properly, the fear and number of attacks should lessen significantly. With most terrorist ties leading back to this region, a successful clear-hold-build operation in theory would be able to prevent future attacks.

In order for an operation like this to be successful, the intelligence agencies will not be as relied upon as brute military force. HMR

39

The Horace Mann Review Horace Mann School 231 West 246th Street Riverdale, New York 10471

40

HM Review Vol. XIX