Issue 3 - Election Season by The Horace Mann Review

Review the horace mann

Domestic - International - Features - Economics - Science & Technology

Issue

FROM THE EDITOR

Review The Horace Mann

A Journal of Opinion on Current Events, Politics, and Social Issues

Rebecca Segall Editor-in-Chief

Andre Manuel Mathieu Rolfo

Creative Executive Editor

Seth Arar Andrew Stier

Senior Production Supervisor

Alexander Daniel Emily Feldstein

Editorial Executive Editor

Harrison Manin

euclid public library

Senior Editor - Domestic

Zoe Rubin

Senior Editor - International

Dorin Azerad

Senior Editor - Features

wordcount

Our Role in the Political Process

his issue of The Review explores the significance of elections. Writers look into how our votes influence our politicians and how the election process influences the way we think. Some examine the politics of specific presidential candidates in the United States, while others look at the electoral process in other countries, or the pitfalls of the game itself. The topic of elections is an exciting one for us as adolescents. Most of our senior staff will be able to vote in the upcoming presidential election. Now is the time for us to educate ourselves on the policy issues that matter to us, in order to make informed decisions at the polls. Interested in current events and in our country’s political and cultural change, we at The Review look forward to casting our first ballots. But as students of writing, media, and debate, we also attempt to find our place in the political process, recognizing the impor2

tance of challenging what we see on the news and formulating our own opinions. We are responsible for elevating dialogue and awareness in our own communities. And we can each have a stake in our country’s policies, 18 or not. It follows that The Review is always open to new writers looking to explore current events of relevance to them. As always, this issue features articles on a range of topics, from Iran’s nuclear program to economic crisis in Europe to Mississippi’s battle over abortion law. We look forward to sharing more of our thoughts with you in the future as our political process continues to unfold and we continue to react to the political, social, and cultural change that surrounds us.

Jordan Berman

Senior Editor - Economics

Katherine Wyatt

Senior Editor - Science & Technology

Aramael Pena-Alcantara Jessica Bernheim Production Consultant

Senior Contributor

Spencer Cohen Benjamin Davidoff Treshauxn Dennis-Brown Daniel Elkind Maurice Farber Jacob Gladysz-Morawski Nicholas McCombe Stephen Paduano Alexander Posner Nathan Raab Elizabeth Rosenblatt Charles Scherr Junior Editor

Philip Perl Ryan Thier David Zask

Junior Contributor

Max Bernstein Tianhao Chen Vivianna Lin Samantha Rahmin Associate Editor

Gregory Donadio Faculty Advisor

Rebecca Segall Editor-in-Chief Volume XXI

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 at thereview@horacemann.org.

The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXI

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Domestic Operating on Ohio

Susannah Cohen

Scandal at Penn State

Charles Cotton

The Anti-Environment President

Catherine Engelmann

State of the Unions Mississippi’s Legislative War on Abortion

Isaiah Newman

10 12

Jonah Wexler, Henry Luo

An Occupied Nation

International BASTA!

Sam Henick

Women in the Middle East

Ikaasa Suri

Addressing Our Greatest Fear

Laszlo Herwitz

Influence from an Unlikely Source

Matthew Harpe

Revolt in Syria

Sahej Suri

Public Enemy

Neil Ahlawat

Change We Can Believe In?

Mihika Kapoor

Liberty in Nicaragua

Caroline Kuritzkes

The Wrong Choce: Rick Perry

Hannah Davidoff

Debating the Debates

David Hackel

President Gingrich

Zachary Landzberg

Fixing Europe’s Economic Woes

Vivianna Lin

Taming the Economic Contagion

Jennifer Heon

President Obama’s Class Act

Jonathan Slifkin

They Are Merkozy

Nathaniel Tillinghast-Raby

Greece in Crisis

Ben Davidoff

Features

Economics

Science and Technology Net Neutrality

Mohit Mookim

An Uncertain Future

Julia Pretsfelder

The Horace Mann Review | Issue 3

Domestic

Operating on Ohio SUSANNAH COHEN

Washington Independant

The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXI

The Horace Mann Review | Issue 3

health care. This passed by a vote of 66 to 34 percent, by the same group who voted 61 percent to 39 not to rein in unions, indicating the widespread dislike of Obamacare even among Democrats and working people. This vote has given rise to some controversial questions. The first question is: Can Ohio nullify a federal law? Ohio is not the first state to attempt to override a federal decision by passing a state law that would overturn it. This concept of “nullification”

with Idaho, Maine, Montana, Oregon, Nebraska, Texas and Wyoming, all of which base their claims on the premise that Obamacare is unconstitutional. This raises another major facet of this debate: Is Obamacare constitutional? If it were, then Ohio’s amendment would have no real legal leverage, and would be largely symbolic. However, if Obamacare were in fact not constitutional, then the state law would be upheld. The debate has become so heated that the Supreme Court has agreed to review the constitutionality of Obamacare’s individual mandate to buy insurance in 2012. This controversy has also raised some serious doubts for Obama’s fate for the impending 2012 election. If the same group of voters who came out to the polls to vote for unions, a group likely made up of mostly Democrats, does not support Obamacare, who will? Since Obama first campaigned for office, the country has gone into a recession, and the economy has taken priority over healthcare reform for the average citizen. This could have a negative effect on the Obama administration and make the president seem out of touch if he keeps pushing his health care agenda. At this moment in time, Obamacare seems to be losing support, as illustrated by so many states taking the initiative to overturn it. Obama needs to listen to the public’s reaction, keep his finger on the pulse of the states, and refine his health care platform, or he will surely be a one-term president. HMR yaymicro.com

very U.S. president has a defining moment that shapes his term of office and place in history. For George W. Bush, it was 9/11 and the war in Iraq. For Barack Obama, the economy and the backlash against health care reform are taking center stage and will likely dictate the remainder of his presidency. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, known to millions of Americans as Obamacare, is arguably the most important part of President Obama’s term thus far, and also the most controversial. Obamacare is bold and ambitious, undoubtedly the most sweeping health care reform in 40 years, since Lyndon Johnson introduced Medicare and Medicaid. It was one of Obama’s major election promises, garnering widespread public support at the time. Although his plan was signed into law in early 2010, states have not received Obamacare as warmly as the President had hoped. On Tuesday November 8th, Ohio held a statewide referendum, in which Ohioans overwhelmingly voted to repeal and replace the individual mandate to buy insurance, a major part of Obamacare. Issue 3 proposed that an amendment be added to the state constitution, which reads, in part, “No federal, state, or local law or rule shall compel, directly or indirectly, any person, employer, or health care provider to participate in a health care system,” basically preserving Ohioans’ right to choose or refuse to purchase

Domestic

began with Thomas Jefferson, a staunch supporter of states’ right to nullification. The first major instance of this idea in action was the South Carolina Nullification Crisis of 1832, when South Carolina tried to nullify the “Tariff of Abominations” passed by Congress on the grounds that it was unconstitutional, and therefore its people did not have to abide by it. Ohio is one of eight states that has recently considered nullifying Obamacare, along

Domestic

SCANDAL AT PENN STATE www.thedailybeast.com

CHARLES COTTON

media.lehighvalleylive.com

n November 9, 2011, a sex abuse scandal at Penn State University took the nation by surprise. One of the Big Ten football schools in the country had been harboring an alleged child abuser, and the people in power had done very little to stop it. Assistant Coach Jerry Sandusky, a 30 year veteran of the Penn State Athletic Department, had been arrested for taking advantage of young boys whom he met through his charity. When the dust had settled, legendary Penn State football coach Joe Paterno had been fired, and the President of the University had stepped down. The night the story broke, Penn State students rioted in the streets of State College, Pennsylvania. It is a small idyllic college town in which the Nittany Lions are the most famous sports team for miles around. These dramatically contrasting images of the university’s actions and the students’ protests present the fundamental question: are the individual victims of this alleged crime less important than the football program at Penn State, and are similar cover-ups taking place at other sports-centered universities? Understandably, the students at Penn State are devoted to their team and to “JoThe Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXI

Domestic

media.al.com

ePa,” the affectionate nickname for Coach Paterno, who had been on the coaching staff for 62 years and head coach for 46 of them. As the team for one of the “Big Ten” schools, the Lions games attract upwards of 100,000 spectators to Beaver Stadium, which is the second largest stadium in the western hemisphere. The entire University gets caught up in the football season each year, and the football culture permeates all aspects of student life. The team generates large amounts of revenue that help the school function on an everyday basis. There is outstanding loyalty from the fans at the school and throughout the region. Nevertheless the question must be asked: is that loyalty causing these students to be blind to the larger question? The students at Penn State are typical college students. They are not necessarily thinking about large ethical and moral questions all the time. The idea of the victims is abstract to them. They are more focused on their team and on the reputation of their school. Even though, when asked or interviewed, the students will usually talk about how the crimes committed against the children were completely unacceptable, someseem to convey the message that they really don’t care very much about these children at all. For example, though they seem to think that what Sandusky may have done is obviThe Horace Mann Review | Issue 3

ously wrong, they are far more upset by the fact that the crimes have cost their beloved coach his job. They are also worried about the overall status of the team and the possibility that the Lions may have to decline their invitation to a bowl game later this year. If we consider football schools overall, we may have to come to the conclusion that the attitude of the students at Penn State is most likely the attitude of students at foot-

The victims of the alleged crime are much more important than the football program at Penn State. ball colleges across the country. However, there are students who want to address the subject more directly and focus on the victims. Whether or not this is simply a result of the criticism of the student body centered around its lack of interest in the victims or of the students’ authentic empathy remains unknown. This interest in the children led to a candlelight vigil held on campus two nights after the firing of Pater-

no and Spanier, which was held in support of the alleged abuse victims. The studentorganized vigil was the result of informal discussions among students who planned to begin the healing process and try to prevent the reputation of Penn State and its student body being ruined. “What I really want to focus on is the victims right now,” Penn State senior Jessica Sever said. This is, in a sense, a student saying that it was about time that people gave their fullest attention to the victimized children of the abuse rather than what everyone thought and knew most students were worried about: the condition of their former coach and football team. Putting it all together, it seems as if while not as bad as what is being portrayed by the media, the student body at Penn State has given people a reason to think that it cares more about the football program than the appalling, alleged crimes against former defensive coordinator Jerry Sandusky. As mentioned before, this may or may not be the case in other successful Division-I football schools across the country, but one could only hope that the students would want to be more like Jessica Sever and concentrate on the victims of the crime, who, putting everything else aside, are simply more important than the illustrious football program. HMR

Domestic

THE ANTI-ENVIRONMENT PRESIDENT

reddogreport.com

The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXI

Domestic CATHERINE ENGELMANN

hen President Obama flirted with the idea of installing a pipeline from Alaska to Nebraska, his environmentally conscious democratic supporters feared he had finally hit rock bottom. The pipeline, called the Keystone XL project, would be the largest oil pipeline outside of Russia and China and would connect Canada’s oil sands to refineries around Houston and the Gulf of Mexico. Its supporters believe that the project will create more jobs and relieve the country of its dependence on Middle Eastern oil. The pipeline would threaten fragile regions in Canada and add to the problem of climate change. It would also cause a greater dependence on fossil fuels, leading the country in a direction which environmentally conscious Americans do not want to take. Obama has let down his democratic supporters by delaying a decision until after the next election for fear that he will anger the Republicans if he doesn’t. At the same time, however, he is disappointing his current fan base. Obama entered office promising a greener future for America. In his campaign in 2008, he said regarding the environment, “It is critical that we understand this is not just a challenge, it’s an opportunity, because if we create a new energy economy, we can create five million new jobs, easily. It can be an engine that drives us into the future the same way the computer was the engine for economic growth over the last couple of decades. We can do it, but we’re going to have to make an investment.” If what he said is true, then he should find a way to create more jobs without compromising the environment.

In fact, there are many renewable energy programs that could, as Obama said, create five million new jobs. Some of these include solar energy, wind power, and nuclear power industries. These programs would benefit both the economy and the environment, pleasing both sides of the argument. These solutions would far outride the detrimental economical effects of raising emission standards. Instead, he has proposed more offshore drilling in the Gulf of Mexico and in large tracts of the Chukchi Sea and Beaufort Sea in the Arc-

President Obama is letting economic issues override vital environmental concerns. tic Ocean north of Alaska, a very fragile region. These decisions prove that Obama is willing to disregard irreplaceable natural sites in the U.S. in order to increase our supply of oil. Obama is letting economic initiatives override environmental issues by making irrevocable decisions that could be detrimental to America’s natural beauty. He humiliated Lisa Jackson, the president of the E.P.A., by refusing her request for a tougher ozone standard which would reduce the emission standard of 75 parts per billion to 60 to 70. He feared the decision would impact local industries which would not be able to manufacture their goods as efficiently as in the past. Opponents to the suggested rule say that it would have cost

$1 trillion and millions of jobs in an economy plagued by unemployment, but there are other ways to increase jobs—ways that won’t destroy the ephemeral natural beauty of our country. Instead, he feared the decreased profit that would result from the new rule for companies which choose not to limit their toxin emissions, but what he is not considering is the decreased amount of money the government would need to spend on healthcare if fewer people were subjected to unhealthy working environments created by pollution. Obama has shown that he has greater interest in the economy, which has an ability to fluctuate, than the environment, which is permanently affected by everything we do. Obama has lost and will continue to lose supporters by trying to please the Republicans. By dismissing one of Lisa Jackson’s first initiatives in her new position, he is attempting to put off all environmental decisions until after the 2012 election. Although he may think that this move is a clever way of avoiding conflict with Republican voters, they will not be swayed by such indecisiveness. On top of that, Democrats will lose faith in his commitment to the environment and notice his acquiescence to the wishes of the Republicans. Overall, Obama’s chances of re-election next fall are diminishing as he continues to make decisions he knows are not right in order to half-please Republican voters. He is diminishing his support among voters who would otherwise be guaranteed to vote for him. Back in 2008, so many Americans supported Obama because he was a pioneer—a man for hope and change. Obama should stay true to his mantra and think about how long term benefits would make up for short-term losses. HMR

farm1.static.flickr.com

The Horace Mann Review | Issue 3

Domestic

mildlyrelevantthoughts.com

State of the Unions

ISAIAH NEWMAN

n Election Day this November, Ohioans voted to repeal a law, limiting the collective bargaining rights of public-sector unions, that had passed in the Ohio legislature the previous March. The bill failed with Ohio voters by a landslide margin of 24% of the vote, undoing one of the major legislative initiatives of Ohio’s Republican governor, John Kasich, since he took office last year. The law, had it remained in effect, would have effectively ended collective bargaining rights for public employees in Ohio over healthcare and pensions, and would have nullified the effect of a strike for these workers. The bill passed quite easily through the Ohio state legislature, along with a number of similar anti-collective bargaining measures

passed in other states around the country. Supporters of the bill, and of antiunion measures around the country, argue that it’s necessary to curb the collective bargaining rights of workers in order to help decrease states’ payrolls,

While taking away the rights of unions to negotiate over healthcare and pensions might reduce state spending, it will not fix fiscal problems. and curb the debt of state governments. Supposedly, limiting the rights of unions would curb the power they have in regulating the wages of public work-

ers, and would help states cut down on increasingly high payrolls for their employees. Parts of this argument are certainly true. Many states have sizable deficits, and are in need of new laws and legislative measures that will help to shrink them. Public employees do have bloated payrolls that continue to increase and take up large portions of a state’s budget, adding to its deficit. Unions often make it harder for states to lower public wages, however, so one might conclude that it’s necessary to curb the rights of unions, so that state and local governments can lower wages and economically benefit in the process. This last idea is entirely false, however. Eliminating collective bargaining rights for public unions will not fix the problems states are having with their

Washingyton Independant

The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXI

Domestic budgets, nor will it be economically beneficial in the long run. Furthermore, it will limit the rights of workers far too much, and take away from them vital rights and tools that they have the ability to use when they disagree with the decisions of their employers. While taking away the rights of unions to negotiate over healthcare and pensions might reduce state spending, it will not fix fiscal problems. It will not help solve the issues at the root of our current economic downturn, and in fact does very little to address them at all. It does not address the laxness of economic regulations in the United States, nor does it address financial institutions’ recklessness and power, which are two of the main problems that led to our current economic slump. Reducing collective bargaining rights will also hurt a state’s workforce, and in no way can that be construed as economically beneficial to the people or government of that state. These workers would no longer be able to ask for better healthcare if the care they receive is unsatisfactory, which would make it much harder for state employees to get good medical treatment and effectively pay for it when they do. These measures would also make it

harder for public workers to retire, as they would be unable to negotiate for higher pensions of those they receive are too low. This could force state laborers to work for longer than might be efficient or reasonable. Thus, measures that reduce collective bargaining rights would make a state’s workers less efficient and happy, which would hinder a state’s economic growth, if anything.

Eliminating collective bargaining rights for public unions will not fix the problems states are having with their budgets, nor will it be economically beneficial in the long run. Aside from making public workers’ lives more difficult, the Ohio law and measures like it take away vital rights. If workers cannot negotiate with their employer for higher wages and better

benefits, it will be impossible for them to protest if their employers give them terrible salaries and benefits. Government employees need the ability to participate in collective bargaining with states; otherwise, legislators could drastically slash their pay, rendering them unable to support themselves. State workers, and laborers around the country, are entitled to certain basic provisions from their employer. The laws that are passing in Republican-dominated legislatures around the country will inhibit them from obtaining these provisions if they are robbed of them. As previously mentioned, Ohio voters seem to largely agree. Their vote to repeal Ohio’s anti-union law on Election Day signifies an important and necessary victory for the rights of public unions and workers. Hopefully, this anger and disagreement with state governments’ attempts to cut their workers’ rights will carry over into other states where similar measures have been passed, and these will get repealed. If not, then government employees everywhere could continue to suffer an unacceptable violation of their labor rights, and this country will continue to suffer because of it. HMR

Weareohio.com

The Horace Mann Review | Issue 3

Domestic

Mississippi’sLegislative War

jonah wexler

Mississippi voters recently defeated a ballot initiative that would have defined a person as a “human being from the moment of fertilization, cloning, or the equivalent thereof.” While it was a sweeping defeat for the “personhood” movement, the vote was a victory for those who believe in Federalism and the rights of individual States to determine those powers not specifically granted to the Federal Government, as delineated in the Constitution. About 56% of Mississippians decided that they did not want to define a person’s conception as the start of life for a variety of reasons. Many were strong abortion advocates. Some were either pro-life, except in the event of rape or incest, or believed that abortion could be utilized in order to save a woman’s life. An additional few thought that medical procedures, such as in-vitro fertilization, could be complicated by the redefinition of life. In other words, the opponents of the measure were more than simply abortion advocates, rather they were concerned about the unintended consequences that such a redefinition could have on medical

and fertility procedures. The initiative was poorly drafted and subsequently defeated, even being described as “ambiguous” by the pro-life Governor Haley Barbour. Over the past few years, many progressives have used abortion in order to scare voters away from voting for pro-life candidates. However, abortion has been the “law of the land” since Roe v. Wade stretched the reach of the Constitution as the Supreme Court declared abortion a “right.” Even in one of the most conservative states in America, Initiative 26 was rejected. What’s even more significant is that the vote wasn’t even close. Around 56% of the voters rejected the initiative, coming very short of passing it. The American democratic system worked, just as it was designed, and democracy and states’ rights prevailed. Despite attempts on the part of organizations like Planned Parenthood to block the law from coming to fruition, the voters of Mississippi, not the courts and not the politicians, were given the chance to register their opinion and did. For a conservative, results of the vote must be re-

spected, as every citizen should have the right to have their vote on any matter that is not controlled by the constitution at a federal level. The American people can now assume that either the “personhood” advocates will redraft an initiative that they think will win at the ballot box, similar to Issue 26, or they will drop the issue overall. The former or latter is exactly what they should do. Many people in the United States are against abortion, except in the case of incest, rape, or a mother’s health. States should have the right to determine if they want to offer abortions and use taxpayer’s money to help fund them. It is possible that some States will have abortion and others will not. It is possible that a better-drafted initiative will pass in Mississippi, but it would probably never pass in a more progressive state like New York. Each is a cause for celebration, not because of the outcome of the vote, but because the citizens of each State are able to exercise their right to vote and determine their own state’s policy. HMR

The TheHorace HoraceMann MannReview Review| |Vol. Vol.XXI XXI

Domestic

Abortion:

two perspectives

R henry luo

ecently, there has been much controversy and debate over a bill that could have changed abortion and its practice in the United States forever. On November 8, citizens in Mississippi voted and rejected Initiative 26, with 56% of voters voting against. The bill declares that fertilized eggs are human beings and, if passed, it would have given fertilized eggs full legal rights, subsequently illegalizing abortion and certain methods of birth control. Such a decision would have tampered with the fundamental right of abortion, a right determined to be legal by the Supreme Court. However, the right to seek abortions, a delicate issue contested by many, is a freedom that should be granted to all women. Initiative 26 first originated from Personhood Mississippi, a group that advocates against abortion. On April 1, 2010, the Mississippi Secretary of State announced that the measure would be placed on the November ballot, having gathered 106,325 signatures, many more than the minimum 89,285 signatories. The state only had one abortion clinic at the time. If Initiative 26 had passed, the Mississippi Constitution would have amended the definition of a person as “every human being from the moment of fertilization, cloning, the functional equivalent thereof.” Full legal rights would be granted to a fertilized egg, thus making abortion an act of murder. Walter Hoye, the spokesperson for Personhood USA, declared that, “Any birth control that ends the life of a human being will be impacted by this measure.” This also would have led to the ban of various The Horace Mann Review | Issue 3

forms of birth control such as the “pill” or the intrauterine device. Such forms of birth control either prevent fertilization from occurring or stop the fertilized egg from being implanted in the uterus. Under Initiative 26, the usage of birth control would have been the equivalent of homicide. Therefore Initiative 26’s passing would not only have led to an end to abortions in Mississippi, but also several types of birth control, an act seen as a bit extreme by many voters. Over the past few months, Initiative 26 was able to gather up quite a bit of support. The governor, Haley Barbour, in clear support of the measure, declared his belief that: “life begins at conception, so I think the right thing to do was to vote for it.” Despite the governor’s endorsement, the Mississippi voters defeated this measure, leaving the right of abortions in Mississippi intact. Throughout contemporary history, questions have been raised over the legality of and justification for abortion. Many protest against abortion due to their belief that it is essentially murder. Concern for a fetus is understandable, but to value a fertilized egg or an unborn, undeveloped fetus over a woman’s life is condemnable and unforgivable. The Personhood Initiative group said that, “A life of the mother exception to any abortion law would be a violation of the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment because other classes of people are not given that same kind of exception.” It is inexcusable to risk an actual life. In addition, government should play no role in a woman’s personal life and should never be given the freedom to ban forms of birth control or abortion. It is the woman’s choice and her decision. Initiative 26 would have

granted excessive control by the government over women’s lives, dictating the way they live. Government has no right to intrude. Unfortunately, even now, despite the Mississippi bill’s defeat, many people in Alabama, Georgia, Montana, and Oklahoma strive for the passing of similar anti-abortion bills. This constitutional right should not be tampered with. The ability to have a choice should always remain intact and should never be taken away. Abortion is a fundamental right for women; they should be the only ones to decide whether or not to have one. To create laws that inhibit this choice is akin to taking away a freedom. Even restricting or forbidding a late-term abortion (in pregnancy’s later stages) should be considered unlawful, and should, once again, be considered for debate. Abortion will always remain a hotly contested issue. It will play a large role in the 2012 Presidential elections, especially in analysis of the Republican candidates’ platforms. Some may argue against abortion because of the need to preserve life. However, on the most basic level, it is more important to be entitled to the right, and also more important for women to be able to decide whether or not they want to get an abortion. To outlaw abortions would be a regression; a complete degeneration of freedom. In Mississippi, Initiative 26 would have changed the practice of abortion and birth control with extremely dire consequences. Even with its defeat, there are still more threats arising in various other states which continue to petition for pro-life laws. They must be stopped. A right this basic must be preserved no matter what. HMR

Domestic OCCUPPY SAN FRANCISCO • Began on September 17th • 13 arrested for constructing tents • 95 arrested for trespassing at the Bank of America

OCCUPPY PORTLAND • Began on October 6th • More than 10,000 protestors • On November 13th, police forcibly destroyed the tent city • 121 arrests

d e i p u c c O n

A OCCUPPY LOS ANGELES • Began on October 1st, 2011 • 373 arrests • Located at Los Angeles City Hall

The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXI

Domestic OCCUPPY WALL STREET • Began on September 17th • 6,000-15,000 protestors • Cost to NYPD: $5 million • Evicted from Zuccotti Park on November 15th

n o i t a dN OCCUPPY D.C. • Began on October 1st • Located at McPherson Square • 63 arrests

The Horace Mann Review | Issue 3

OCCUPY PHILADELIPHIA • Began September 29th • Evicted November 30th • Around 50 arrests

International

B A S TA ! The End of an Era for

Italy

sam henick

s of 2010, Italy had an 8.4% unemployment rate and a 1.6% inflation rate. Italyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s revenue was $958.9 billion yet its expenditures were $1.053 trillion, with a 4.6% budget deficit (percent of Gross Domestic Product [GDP]). To make matters worse, Italian banks have been failing and may need $8.2 billion of additional capital. Italy is $2.6 trillion in debt and $410 billion will mature next year alone. Italy is one of the five PIIGS nations (Portugal, Italy, Ireland, Greece, and Spain), yet saving the Italian economy of $2 trillion would cost twice as much as bailing out Greece, Ireland and Portugal combined because Italy has the eighth the largest economy in the world. Prime minister Berlusconi is to blame for Italyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s dismal economic situation.

The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXI

International

Italy’s borrowing costs over the past year, including a prediction for future costs Silvio Berlusconi, ex-prime minister of Italy, began his political career in 1994 by selling Italians on a dream of prosperity and his own “rags to riches” story. He promised to create jobs and

Christine Lagarde, head of the IMF, has said that Italy is on the right path to getting its finances back in order. improve the country’s infrastructure. He served in office from 1994 to 1995, 2001 to 2006, and 2008 to 2011. In 2003, Berlusconi backed the war in Iraq despite massive protests at home. Due to the failing economy, and to sex scandals, Berlusconi could not maintain the re-

spect he once commanded. His success in business did not translate into global economic insight that could have saved Italy. Withstanding his significant failures he did have few successes: the Italian unemployment rate was around 10.5% in 1994 and 8.6% in December 2011; also the annual deficit as a percentage of GDP went down from 7.48% in 1995 to 4.88% in 2009. Although the economy improved over time, the most noticeable progress in deficit reduction occurred between 1998 and 2001 when Berlusconi was not in office. Berlusconi audaciously told a G-20 summit in Cannes, France, a week before he resigned, that he was the only one who could steer Italy out of its crisis. Still markets took a battering and several key party members defected. A week lat-

wallstreet1928.com

er, on November 12, 2011, he resigned, accompanied by cheers of “Alleluia,” jeers, and heckles from Italians. Berlusconi ensured that Parliament would pass economic reforms: he demanded them before abdicating his seat as prime minister. The reforms were designed to increase in the retirement age by 2026, but did nothing to reform Italy’s inflexible labor market. A week before his resignation, Berlusconi was forced to ask the International Monetary Fund (IMF) to monitor Italy’s finances; this was humiliating prospect for the Eurozone’s third largest economy and the arrogant and long-defiant Berlusconi. Now that Berlusconi has resigned, Christine Lagarde, head of the IMF, said that Italy is on the right path to getting its finances back in order. Mario Monti, Berlusconi’s successor, is a “quality” economist who will understand the economics better and get the country back in the black Lagarde commented. Hopefully, Italy is heading in the right direction and will get out of the economic mess it is in now. HMR

Davis Rittmaster The Horace Mann Review | Issue 3

International

Women in the Middle East

The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXI

International It’s 8 am, and here in New York City a woman stands in line waiting to pay for her morning boost of caffeine. Her Prada pumps tap the floor in a quick rhythm. She glances at her Blackberry as her cheeks puff from annoyance. She’s going to be late. Halfway across the world, in Mecca, Saudi Arabia, a woman dressed from head to toe in black wears the burka as a sign of her responsibility as a woman and a Muslim. She stares as the pot cooking right in front of her, nervous, for if the meal doesn’t turn out perfect, she will be beaten again, lost under the layers of oppression.

The brunette woman steps out of the elevator. She takes off her shoes in the middle of the hallway, as she loses about 4 inches. She tiptoes into her apartment, careful, not to make the door creak. A small gift-bag in hand, she enters. “Happy Birthday, baby,” she exclaims, as she leans over to kiss her boyfriend. Trying to hide her frustration under the black mask that covers her face, the woman hears her husband come home, a little later than usual. “I’m hungry,” he announces. She nervously brings his plate to the wooden table, hoping the food isn’t cold again. She doesn’t want another beating.

ikaasa suri

t’s not fair to say that Middle Eastern States and other Islamdominated countries haven’t fully developed the idea of feminism or “girl power,” as even US hasn’t fully emerged into a socially equal culture. Rather, the Islam law inflicted upon all women exemplifies a sense of eternal masculinity. The fate of women is predetermined according to Islam law and its historical context of a male-dominant religion. That is not to say there is an idea of a weaker sex; rather, it is the idea of an untamed gender in need of supervision at all times. As a result, females are subject to men, and have developed a sense of timidity and fear. They would rather mold themselves to the harsh and rigid religious austerity they have been put under than disobey what has become an overset ideology of rules. The regulations imposed on women under the Taliban, a fundamentalist Islamic body of government, suggest not only moral abuse, but physical exploitation as well. The Muslim religion itself requires total devotion and embracement, where if any implication of non-Islam behavior is displayed, one could be killed. Only recently, in 2009, were a young Afghani woman’s nose and ears cut off for running away from her arranged marriage. Her brother-in-law held her down, as her husband mutilated her. Aisha Bibi was then left to die in the mountains, where she passed out. After gaining consciousness again, but still choking on

her blood, Aisha barely crawled to a U.S. base located near the Afghani mountains, where she had been denied any aid from the community. She was then taken to a shelter run by an Afghan-American organization, Women for Afghan Women. Aisha is still alive and considered a role model for all other Islamic women being suppressed. Taken to the U.S. to undergo cosmetic surgery, Aisha is one of the few

I personally see the Arab woman as strong and beautiful. women who were able to start their lives over again. She was able to stand up to her authority figures, despite the consequences she knew she’d have to face. Women for Afghan Women, the coalition that saved Aisha Bibi’s life, is one of the few organizations fighting for Islamic feminism. Founded in April 2001, it is a women’s human rights group campaigning for the liberty, protection and security of Islamic women across Afghanistan. In 2009, another anti-oppression movement emerged in Malaysia. Men and women from 47 different countries came together for a conference, “Feast of Equals,” to commence what is currently known as the “Musawah” movement.

They discussed the laws imposed universally in Islamic states under the category of Family Law. For women, Family Law is what allows a husband to beat his wife, restricts a woman from owning herself, permits a man to divorce his wife over text message, and accepts what happened to Aisha Bibi. Currently, Musawah is working towards passing legislative movements ensuring equality and justice in Muslim families, rather than an unequal biological and social hierarchy. While some people may look at Islam law as a step back in culture, I see this as a chance to develop what was originally intended to be a basic government. Many countries in the Middle East have chosen to express their religion within their government, asserting severe standards as laws. The Islam religion was founded with the notion of serving under God, Allah, and promoting peace and harmony within oneself through the Qur’an. Unfortunately, though all religions leave room for unanswered questions, unquestioned answers, reformists and extremists, the Islam religion has received the spotlight as a fundamentalist religion. I personally see the Arab woman as strong and beautiful. This woman has dealt with abuse, dealt with oppression, dealt with one identity, dealt with suppression against who she would like to be, to live in the society she does. It is people like her, people like Aisha Bibi that make me understand truly how strong a woman is. HMR

She turned around, covered head to toe in black, to see her husband enter the door. “I’m hungry,” he announced. She set his plate on the table confidently. “I’m leaving,” she told him. “I’m initiating a divorce.” The Horace Mann Review | Issue 3

International

laszlo herwitz

Addressing Our Greatest Fear

he International Atomic Agency recently released a report on the status of Iran’s nuclear program stating that Iran had been enriching Uranium up to a point where a nuclear weapon could be created. This revelation poses the problem of how we will react to Iran. Many countries have advocated for sanctions against Iran but this, as we have seen before, would be ineffective in suppressing Iran’s jihadist agenda. I believe that after one more round of sanctions, quick and decisive military action should be taken against Iran in the form of fighter jets firing missiles into the nuclear plants, Israel currently uses F-161 fighter jets that are capable of delivering air to surface radar guided missiles. The Israelis also have developed a bunker buster; this bomb has a thin nuclear shell, which allows it to penetrate deep underground. Israel has used military action in this circumstance before on a nuclear reactor in Syria in September of 2007. This would be the best course of action against a country that has declared its wish to destroy Israel by any means possible, which is worrying due to the recent discovery of its developing nuclear arsenal. Israel has been advocating for military intervention. On a radio station in Israel defense minister Ehud Barak stated, “I say to you with responsibility… let’s say we get into a war against our will. There will not be 100,000 dead, or 10,000 dead, or 1000 dead. The state of Israel will not be destroyed.” Israel is clearly ready and willing to strike Iran’s nuclear plants if necessary. In the case of a country whose leaders have stated their intent to destroy

Israel, this sort of action is justified. An attack of this sort would have to be a joint measure due to the fact that if a single country, such as Israel, solely bombed the Iranian plants then the fallout would be devastating due to the fact that Iran would not be hesitant to retaliate they way it would be if other major powers. Iran would use its force to strike back at Israel with more conventional weapons. Israel would then attempt a

land invasion against Iran, which would cause the Middle East to descend into chaos. If the U.S. participated in the strike, however, the outcome would be very different because of the great size of the U.S. military and the ever-present fear with which even the most extremist Arab countries would live if they contemplated retaliation measures. The best, but highly unlikely outcome, would be that NATO as well as Israel conducted the strikes. This would be ideal because it would signify that a large chunk of Europe also stood behind Israel and that would be the high-

est level of deterrent for the rest of the Middle East. The international community, either through NATO, the United Nations, or other alliances, must act quickly, lest Israel take the responsibility upon itself. Recently there was an explosion at a Revolutionary Guards base in Iran that killed the head of Iran’s missile program, General Hasan Moghaddam. Iran has insisted that this resulted from experiment malfunction, but this has been passed off as an attempt to hide what actually happened. Israel’s Defense Minister Ehud Barak has said that he does not know if it was his country’s work but he added, rather suspiciously, “There may be more like it.” This confirms the reality that Israel either carried out this blast or has been inspired to do so in the near future. There are many people who doubt Iran’s story including one anonymous Western official who said, “Don’t believe the Iranians that it was an accident.” Nonetheless, many people doubt that further military intervention would help, and in fact say that it would be disastrous. Should the international community not do as I have outlined, and refuse to take swift military action opting instead for more rounds of sanctions, Iran’s nuclear program will continue to grow, thus exacerbating the inevitable future crisis. When the next round of sanctions against Iran fails, Israel and its allies ought to band together to remove the Iranian threat and ensure that the Middle East is not further destabilized for years to come. HMR

The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXI

International Israel and Iran: A Not So Friendly Relationship

A Nuclear History of Our World

1960s - Iran and Israel engage

1930s - Key discoveries made about the fissioning of atoms by Enrico Fermi, Otto Hahn, Fitz Strassman, and Lise Meitner.

in friendly trade relations and work on projects together, such as the joint missile creation program Project Flower.

1943 - The Manhattan Project determines to use the atomic bomb on Japan rather than Germany.

1979 - Ayatollah Khomeni seizes power from Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, an ally of Israel. Khomeni declares his desire to wipe Israel off the map.

1945 - President Truman autho-

rizes the use of atomic bombs.

1997 - Mohammad Khatami

elected president of Iran; relations expected to improve.

2005 - Mahmoud Ahmadinejad

elected president of Iran; vows to eliminate Israel at his first conferences after rising to power, creating a “World Without Zionism.”

2009 - Israel Defense Minister

Ehud Barak warns Iran that a strike on their nuclear facilities was being considered.

2011 - U.S. Intelligence Community claims to foil an international terrorist plot against many Israeli embassies, allegedly planned by the Iranian government.

President of the Islamic Republic of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, seen here addressing disgruntled members of the United Nations

The Horace Mann Review | Issue 3

“[Military action] would be the best course of action against a country that has declared its wish to destroy Israel by any means possible.”

1960s - French and China join the United States, the Soviet Union, and the United Kingdom as nucleararmed weapons. 1979 - Israel reportedly becomes a nuclear-armed nation, but remains undeclared. 1998 - India and Pakistan test their nuclear weapons. 2006 - Democratic People’s Republic of North Korea test their first nuclear weapon. 2009 - U.S. Intelligence Com-

munity estimates that Iran’s nuclear program will be completed by 2013.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has vowed never to allow his people to be vulnerable to the anti-Zionist wrath of his newly nuclear-armed neighbor, Iran

Mahmoud El-Baradei, Director General of The International Atomic Energy Agency, has devoted much of the agency’s time to the Iranian Nuclear Program

International

Influence from an Unlikely Source

How Argentina Righted its Ship and why Greece Should Take Notice

matthew harpe

ith the 10-year anniversary of the Argentine debt crisis approaching, and the global economic struggle in the forefront of everyone’s minds, reflecting on Argentina’s past decade is suddenly becoming more relevant. It was December of 2001, when the shock of the events of 9/11 was still lingering in the air, the War in

considering the country’s failure to survive its first 20 years as a democratic nation. Furthermore, with more than 55% of the country’s population living below the poverty line, things were not looking up for Argentina. The IMF created a few small bailout packages, all of which coming with requirements demanding Argentina make aggressive reforms in economic policy and steep spending cuts. The elections in 2003

that year. Kirchner’s shrewd policy, both domestic and international, led the real GDP to grow by a phenomenal 45% in the almost five years he was in office. In 2007, Mr. Kirchner declined to run for a second term, instead backing his wife of over 20 years, Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner. The former senator and first lady won in a landslide victory that gave her double the number of votes as her closest competitor. As the first female Argentinian president was also the wife of the former president, the situation was called the presidential marriage, and was especially warranted considering the uniformity in the couples’ views. Although Mrs. Kirchner’s presidency was expected to be very similar to her husband’s, with some even claiming that she was merely a figurehead, she proved these accusations false. Kirchner created a series of laws addressing many social issues, as well as adding to the economic foundation her husband had installed. She made Argentina the first Latin American country to allow same-sex marriage, as well as strongly advocating for human rights. During the first term of her presidency she guided Argentina through the 2008 global economic crisis and to a total of over 22% real GDP growth. Furthermore, the unemployment rate for 2010 was 7.5%, down 70% from the heart

The remarkable success of Argentina would seem to be extremely useful in the economic crisis in Europe, where debt defaults threaten to shake the global economy. Afghanistan had just begun with the first U.S. invasion, Enron had just filed for bankruptcy, and George Harrison had just died at age 58. In Argentina, tensions had been brewing for the past couple of years. The economic situation was only deteriorating; many were speculating that Argentina would have great difficulty paying off its bonds, the gross domestic product was rapidly decreasing, unemployment was at almost 25%, and each austerity measure was met with mass violent rioting. To make matters worse, inflation rate was peaking at over 10% per month for a number of months surrounding the core of the crisis. In the last week of 2001, Argentina defaulted on around $100 billion of debt, the largest default in history. All remaining confidence in the government was lost, especially

brought president Nestor Kirchner into office. A major endorser of mercantilism, Kirchner capitalized on the cheap peso and encouraged exports, which allowed for Argentina to become a competitive global exporter, especially for soy and other agricultural products. The exponential cost of imported items helped domestic companies prosper once again, and the cost advantage they had overseas further helped. With the additional help of debt restructuring overseas, along with improved economic policy back home, Kirchner set Argentina and its economy back on track, and rapid growth began. In fact, in 2003 alone, Argentina’s GDP grew by almost 9%, a large feat when compared to the OECD average of approximately 1.75% or the world average of approximately 2.5% for

The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXI

International

of the crisis and in the top 45% percentile in the world. As Argentina’s economic and social conditions were on the rise, Kirchner’s biggest test came in October 2010 with the death of closest advisor: her husband. There was much speculation as to Mrs. Kirchner’s ability to run the country on her own. Nevertheless, she once again came through and rallied for a landslide victory (the largest ever in Argentina’s history) in the presidential elections one year later. The remarkable success of Argentina would seem to be extremely useful in the economic crisis in Europe, where debt defaults threaten to shake the global economy. Global attention is turned primarily to Greece, whose troubled and irresponsibly managed economy has caused the Greek government to amass great sums of debt. As a more developed country than Argentina was at the time of its crisis, Greece has an in-

crisis Argentina, an overhaul of the Greek government and policy and a restructuring of its debt seems far less daunting. In spite of that, there are still a number of factors that first must be considered. First, Argentina’s luck, especially economically, has been enormous. In the ten years since the beginning of the crisis, its largest export, soybeans, has witnessed more than 250% in price increases, setting numerous record highs. Furthermore, its biggest trading counterpart, neighboring country Brazil, has experienced an explosive economy, moving from the world’s 13th largest economy in 2003 to the 6th largest just last year. This boom in neighboring Brazil has resulted in higher demands, meaning more exports for Argentina, and a rising Brazilian currency, creating even more profits for Argentinian companies. Second, although Argentina’s economic accomplishments seem great, many economists argue that they aren’t as impressive as they look on paper. They advocate that a high inflation rate, not acknowledged by the government, still plagues Argentina, which, if accounted for, would significantly taint its economic accomplishments. Third, Greece is renowned for its extensive bureaucracy, making it hard to start businesses, pass laws, or get ordinary things done. This environment consequently stifles the econby slowIn essence, the many parallels between omy ing economic the issues facing the two countries growth, and mean the solutions from the Argentina creating a large crisis aren’t irrelevant, as its principals shadow econare still valuable. omy. Greece’s underground flation adjusted GDP per capita of more economy makes up for than 3.5 times that of pre-crisis Argenti- more than a quarter of its na, a poverty rate 65% lower than what it GDP, causing a loss in tax was in Argentina in 2002, and an unem- dollars and diminishing ployment rate half of Argentina’s compa- the government’s control rable statistic. Additionally, as a country and ability to make change. with a 70% smaller population than preThe greatest challenge

in implementing the Argentine strategy in Greece though, is the difficulty to apply the most effective tactic: mercantilism. In times of economic trouble, exporting is one of the most lucrative ways to jumpstart the economy. This process primarily begins with a devaluation of the currency, increasing the country’s overseas competitiveness, and of course requires products to export. However, as a member of the EU using the euro currency, Greece has no control, and therefore no means, by which to directly change its currency. Furthermore, Greece’s agricultural GDP as a percent of the overall GDP is almost three times smaller than Argentina’s; the situation in the manufacturing sector is similar. Greece’s economy is more largely made up of tourism, shipping and other services, and clearly has much less to export. In essence, the many parallels between the issues facing the two countries mean the solutions from the Argentina crisis aren’t irrelevant, as its principals are still valuable. However, the uniqueness of the situation Greece is in suggests that it’s going to take a whole new set of economic maneuvers to produce results even close to what we’ve seen in Argentina. HMR

The Kirchners, Nestor and Cristina, together in 2005

The Horace Mann Review | Issue 3

International

REVOLT IN SYRIA

THe eruption of the Arab Spring protests has resulted in the deadliest government response in Syria to date. President Bashar al-Assad, the ruthless dictator of Syria, has been responsible for thousands of unlawful killings and torture in order to maintain his position as president. The United Nations recently reported that more than 3,500 citizens have been killed in Syria over the span of eight months. According to a United Nations human rights panel, children have been tortured by security forces in Syria, marking an escalation in the revolution. Many now consider the revolution in Syria to be a civil war between the government and its people. Army defectors and armed civilians have begun to retaliate against the government’s actions, which has in reality given the Syrian government a pretext to apply overwhelming force on the people.

T sahej suri

he Arab League, backed by the United States, has imposed numerous sanctions on the government in order to pressure them to conform to their term: a peace deal. International pressure is necessary in order to stop the human rights abuses in Syria. However, Syria has disregarded the sanctions and messages entirely. Turkey has become important in the attempts to try to subdue the regime. According to the Associated Press, Turkey recently “canceled plans for oil exploration in Syria, while also threatening to cut electricity supplies after a spate of attacks by supporters of

More than 3,500 citizens have been killed in Syria over the span of eight months. Syrian President Bashar Assad on its diplomatic missions.” Turkey provides Syria with energy makes around tenper cent of their power consumption each year. The sanctions imposed by the Arab League have had a crippling effect on the already troubled Syrian economy. Two of the main sectors that have been impaired are

the oil and tourism sectors. It does not seem, however, that Syria will not stop without any military intervention. However much power Turkey has attempted to exercise, Assad remains unfettered. Bulent Arinc, the Turkish deputy prime minister, stated, “We are absolutely opposed to any intervention in Syria and The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXI

International reject any operation that would involve Turkey against this country.” Without supporting any military operations, Turkey has aided the people through another crucial way: safety. Syrian citizens, in fear of their lives, toil to try to reach the Syrian-Turkey border. Once past it, they receive aid and meet other Syrian refugees in the Southern Turkey region. In the past year, Turkey has been welcoming the refuges from the constant human rights abuses they have suffered; over 2,500 Syrians have crossed the border. However, the influx of the refugees has required a greater amount of Turkish troops, which in turn has brought these operations dangerously close to the Syrian military. Turkey has been placed in a threatening situation; if any violence occurs between the borders, the possible repercussions could include Iran militarily allying itself with Syria, a situation that would inevitably lead to war. The international community must be careful in dealing with Syria. We have seen what Assad is capable of doing; however, we must remain cognizant of the fact that thousands of human rights abuses are taking place today in Syria. According to Turkish President Gul, “Defining this democratic struggle along sectarian, religious, and ethnic lines would drag the whole region into turmoil and bloodshed.” Many have suggested that the only solution for the United States is to leave the revolution alone to the people of Syria. On the contrary, arming citizens would only escalate the situation. The sanctions must be increased by the Arab League in order to paralyze the Syrian economy, and the international community should produce tangible change that will not only stop the dictatorship of Assad, but also require Assad to make financial reparations to the victims in Syria. A unification of the Arab community is necessary in order to rectify the situation and ensure that the human rights wabuses in Syria are not a prevalent issue in the future. HMR

The international community must be careful in dealing with Syria. We have seen what Assad is capable of doing.

The Horace Mann Review | Issue 3

International

Public Enemy

N neil ahlawat

ot too long ago, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), a UN watchdog organization, presented the November report on Iranâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s nuclear program to the UN Security Council. The message of the report is clear - Iran is actively engaged in developing nuclear weapons - hardly a surprise when looking at the recent trend of IAEA reports on Iran. The evidence presented in this report is convincing, and there is strong evidence that Tehran is also heavily committed to develop a nuclear bomb as well. Iran claims that its nuclear program is only for peaceful purposes, yet the international commu-

The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXI

International nity, as it should be, is skeptical. Iran’s neighbors in the region, Israel, Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Turkey, are highly suspicious and wary of Iran’s motives with its nuclear weapons program. In particular, Israel perceives Iran’s nuclear program as an existential threat, and debate is raging on how to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon. Intelligence reports suggest that Iran could develop at least one workable nu-

Economic sanctions do not seem to produce their desired effects. clear weapon if it breaks away from the nuclear non-proliferation Treaty (NPT). Politically, Iran’s interest lies in abiding by the NPT to bolster its claim that its nuclear facilities are open to international inspection, and to thus attract some international support rather than suspicion. But Iran may be engaging in the development of a nuclear program, and as a result, the international community has continued to stay distrustful and uncertain of Iran. The question then rises of what other options the U.S., Israel and the international community have. So far, economic

sanctions don’t seem to produce their desired effects, but pushing for further sanctions, such as limiting the import of refined petroleum products and the international financial transactions of Iran may tighten the noose on its regime. Russia and China have both resisted these efforts in the UN Security Council, but the threat of a nuclear-armed Iran may force them to change their minds. If Iran doesn’t halt its nuclear program, then it should expect more serious economic sanctions, and a possible covert campaign to disrupt its nuclear facilities. An opportunity exists in light of the Arab spring to support opposition in Iran, which may lead to regime change. The Obama administration’s strategy in Libya demonstrated that military involvement is not necessary to affect regime change. A similar approach may not work in Iran because of the tighter grip of power by the regime, but diplomacy and a covert support of insurgency appear as reasonable options. The bottom line is that the U.S. and

its international allies have to prepare for a nuclear-armed Iran. In turn, the U.S. would have to stand by its allies such as Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Egypt and other Gulf states. The U.S. must be firm in extending its nuclear deterrence to its allies in case of a nuclear Iran, and should be willing to share its advanced ballistic missile defenses. In addition, the international community ought to craft a convincing argument to make the message clear to Iran that owning nuclear weapons is not in its best interest, and that it could possibly ignite a nuclear arms race in Middle East. A volatile and unstable Middle East, especially with the recent uprisings in Egypt and Libya, means that a nuclear conflict in the Middle East spells trouble. Israel especially must understand how fragile this situation is. An offensive by Israel on Iran will set off a series of violent and chaotic events in Middle East, which would lead to a serious, deadly, and very costly international involvement. HMR

Iran is actively engaged in developing nuclear weapons. The Horace Mann Review | Issue 3

Features

Features IN

OUT

tengrinews.com

Greeknewsdaily.com

Change We Can Believe In?

mihika kapoor

n November 11, technocratic Prime Minister Lucas Papademos was sworn in as the head of a national unity government for Greece. It is clear that he faces the hard job of leading a country with a deteriorating economy and rising employment rate out of 340 billion euros of debt.

Three of the five political parties in legislature, as well as over 70% of the country, have backed his appointment, securing his position at the head of a country that is in total chaos. He plans to implement several austerity measures in order to escape this pandemonium that has gripped Greece. It is crucial that Papademos enables the country to lower its debt and

most importantly, keep Greece in the euro zone. Greeceâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s economic crisis first became widely publicized in late 2009, when George Papandreou, the previous prime minister, took office and revealed that his predecessor had been understating the countryâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s growing debt. Consequently, he and the ruling socialist party, PASOK, The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXI

Features which he belonged to, lost a lot of support from the country. Since this time, Greece has been operating on a bailout package of 110 billion euros provided by other surrounding European countries in May of 2010. However, this money was only given due to Papandreou’s agreement to implement a series of austerity measures to cap the deficit. Although these measures cut the country’s spending by lowering the salary of public workers by 10%, the economy’s recession did not slow and the economy shrank by 5.5% in 2011. Meanwhile, Papandreou’s popularity continued to deteriorate, as many Greeks did not think that the other countries belonging to the euro zone ought to have had such a great influence and hold over Greece. Many of the austerity measures barely passed through Parliament, and the country came very close to bankruptcy in June this year, until taxes increased and more cuts were made in spending. Citizens felt as though their rights were being violated, and protests broke out everywhere. Out of desperation, Papandreou called for a referendum on October 31st in response to the second bailout package agreed to by the other European countries five days earlier. France and Germany instantly declared that they would not provide money for Greece should they cut their austerity measures. Due to the extreme opposition from both within and outside of the country, Papandreou discarded the plan for this form of direct democracy four days later. The next day, he agreed to set up a unity government and hold elections early, and once Papademos was chosen as leader, he stepped down. As a graduate of MIT and former vice president of European Central Bank, Papademos is more of an economist than a politician, but perhaps that is what Greece needs. Papademos snagged 255 of the 300 votes of Parliament during his elections and has the confidence of a majority of Greece’s population. The coalition cabinet he has set up has members from three of the five political parties in Greece: PASOK, New Democracy and the Popular Orthodox Rally. He is only serving as Prime Minister for three months,

The Horace Mann Review | Issue 3

so he has a lot of pressure on his plate to make the right decisions for the country. In his outlining of his priorities to Parliament, he said the government would translate the deal made on October 26th into a formal loan agreement. It would negotiate the finer details with the IMF, the ECB and the EU. It will be voted on in December so the country can receive its aid sooner. Papademos will adopt the austerity measures needed to carry out this bailout package. He intends to stimu-

“As a graduate of MIT and former Vice President of European Central Bank, Papademos is more of an economist than a politician, but perhaps that is what Greece needs. Papademos snagged 255 of the 300 votes of Parliament during his elections and has the confidence of a majority of Greece’s population.” late growth and increase jobs with capital from international markets. He also looks to invest in the energy and agricultural sectors. Papademos is basically looking to lay a foundation for Greece’s economic revival that can be built upon once a new leader takes office in February. In order to start upholding Greece’s commitments, he must establish unity and cohesion through the country. In terms of national support, around 78% of Greece’s population had faith in Papademos and supported his election. Many people are looking to see how Papademos’ experience abroad helps him in carrying out reforms and gaining international support. It also certainly helps that Papademos is a non-political leader and is more likely to take a technocratic approach to the situation than to get too involved in the politics. He is not tied to

any particular political party, unlike Papandreou, and so has more flexibility and power to execute reforms. In addition, many people now realize that the alternative to paying for the austerity measures is expulsion from the euro; this spurred more cooperation with the government. Also, as he shares many views and ideas with Papandreou, he will have the support of PASOK in Parliament, a party that holds a slight majority. His notoriety for being a pragmatic thinker and having the ability take decisions based on the country’s economic and political needs has won him a lot of support from the public. This cooperation is crucial to Greece’s staying in the euro zone. Adopting the euro ten years ago was a dream come true for Greece, as the country finally had a strong and dominant currency; however, now there are calls to leave the Euro Zone. Argentina’s success with leaving the dollar in order to boost its economy is often cited by those who want Greece to return to the drachma. Unfortunately, as Greece heavily relies on imports, this plan is unlikely to have much success. In addition, resorting back to the drachma would award those people who have kept their money abroad in other countries, by erasing their debt with the conversion back to a significantly cheaper currency. Leaving the euro is not a light option. Many EU banks have exposure to Greece and should Greece leave, the banks would lose around 50% of its holding’s value. A euro divorce would “take [Greece] back many years,” according to Yannis Stournaras, an economist from Athens. All efforts to join the powerful currency would become pointless and result in a doubling the country’s debt. The key is for Papademos to earn the trust of his people, especially those protesting, and also of other countries. Their support of the measures he implements will aid a lot in the reformation of Greece. It is crucial that he is able to fulfill Greece’s agreements with the rest of the European countries so as to internationally strengthen Greece’s political stance and reclaim its former prestige. HMR

Features

Liberty In

CAROLINE KURITZKES

ith the U.S. 2012 Presidential Election approaching, many Americans have begun to consider which candidate to cast their vote for. The Republican primaries will be in full swing by January; a year from now, Americans will decide whether or not they want to reelect Obama as President of the United States. But as we consider our own elections, it is important that we do not lose sight of the elections happening around us in other countries. Imagine a country where you might be approaching the voting ballot to elect a leader who will serve as President for his fifteenth year. On November 6th, citizens of Nicaragua elected Daniel Ortega as their President for his third term. Though the constitution denies officials from serving for more than two terms, the Supreme Court, controlled by Ortega himself, overruled this voting restriction, proclaiming that this limit undermined human rights. tsteinkolk.com

However, there is a point where a society must be willing to sacrifice the liberties of its leaders for the justice of its citizens. Having faced a history of devastating civil war, extreme government corruption, and the utmost political instability only thirty years ago, Nicaragua’s citizens need their government’s support; they need a democratic justice system that will provide national unity and promote trust between the government and its people. It’s time that the Nicaraguan government creates a fair, representative democracy in order to gain trust from its people, secure foreign aid, and ultimately rebuild a country broken by its government in the first place. It is imperative that the Nicaraguan government instills democracy into its society, not only to improve Nicaragua’s international relations but also to help Nicaraguans restore their faith in the government, and the faith that Nicaragua can succeed as a country. The U.S. Bureau of Public Affairs released a press statement on October 31st expressing concern about “appar-

ent irregularities” in Nicaragua’s electoral process. Prior to the press statement, Nicaragua had already been criticized of withholding identification cards from certain citizens who oppose Daniel Ortega’s government, thus preventing these citizens from voting. The press release calls upon terms of the Inter American Democratic Charter, created to promote and defend democratic institutions in American countries, ; the terms include the government’s obligation to promote freedom of expression of political views, authorize the participation of all political parties in elections, safeguard campaigns, and protect the people’s human rights to vote freely, free of intimidation or violence. However, the U.S.’s concern about Nicaragua’s election irregularities can only be disastrous for Nicaragua’s international relations and its citizens’ welfare. Nicaragua’s undemocratic political policies could lead to strained relations between Nicaragua and the United States. Because the U.S. does not support governments that undermine the people’s The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXI

Features

Nicaragua

rights to representative democracy, fraud in Nicaragua’s general elections could potentially result in the U.S. cutting Nicaragua’s economic aid in the future; the U.S. already slashed $62 million of aid to Nicaragua in 2008. Being the second-poorest country in the Western Hemisphere with 48 percent of its population living under the poverty line, Nicaragua is in dire need of the economic aid it could be receiving from the U.S. As a result, it is in Nicaragua’s best political and economic interests for the government to restructure its electoral process and encourage representative democracy. Perhaps Nicaragua could stick to the voting restrictions in its constitution, limiting each President to serve for a maximum of two terms and grant identification cards to all citizens. Nicaragua’s people are also desperate for a government that they can believe in, having recently suffered through a civil war and extreme government corruption. Just thirty years ago, rebel groups in Nicaragua overthrew a dictatorship ran by Anastasio Samoza Debayle in the Nicaraguan Revolution. Even though the The Horace Mann Review | Issue 3

revolution ultimately terminated 43 years of rule by the Samoza family, the civil war brought devastating consequences to Nicaraguan society that still survive today. Many Nicaraguans have still not recovered from the emotional effects that the war has generated. Kids could only watch as their parents, neighbors, and friends were kidnapped, tortured, or killed by the Nicaraguan military at torture camps established by their own government. Children who are younger than I am now were expected, if not forced, to pick up a gun and pick a side, even if they could not understand the cause they were fighting for. These experiences were emotionally scarring for Nicaraguan individuals, and rightfully so; however, many of the citizens who were young and most vulnerable to the horrors of the 1979 revolution are middle aged today and still harbor angry feelings and mistrust towards their government. After fighting to eliminate a dictator, the last thing Nicaraguan individuals want to see is their government resembling dictatorship as it does under Ortega’s three term presidency.

Nicaragua needs a government that can rebuild relations between its people and its citizens after years of tension and animosity, not a government responsible for irregularities in political elections resulting in a president remaining in power for fifteen years. Improving Nicaraguan society can only start from the top down; Nicaraguans need help, and it is the responsibility of Nicaragua’s leader to set an example for the people to follow, launching them out of the aura of emotional despair widely felt in the aftermath of the devastating 1979 revolution ,while eliminating the mistrust that the people bear towards their government. A leader should be able to relinquish his own liberties for the liberties of his people and foster democratic institutions rather than evade them. Moreover, we Americans should bear these qualities in a leader in mind when we walk up to the voting booth and elect our own president next November. HMR

THE WRONG

R I C CHOICE: K

HANNAH DAVIDOFF On November 9, 2011 the republican debate was held in Rochester, Michigan. In the debate, Rick Perry, a contender for Republican candidate in the upcoming 2012 election, made a faux pas that could cost him that election. Perry stood in front of the crowd explaining the departments he would end if he became president. After listing two he realized that he could not list the third department and tried to joke his way around it. This mistake brought into light the question of whether we really want a man this incompetent to be not only a part of our government but also the leader of our country. It is not just that this gaffe, which could be passed off as an honest mistake,

destroy any ounce of hope that we could have of education in America being improved. Destroying the Department of Education would deprive children of a future with the proper resources they will need. Any good points in the education system in America will be destroyed under Rick Perry; instead of destroying it he should be rebuilding it. Rick Perry is against gay marriage, and if he became President any progress on gay marriage and gay rights would be destroyed. Perry has been quoted as saying that homosexuality is like alcoholism. He is committed to imposing a federal marriage amendment on states once he becomes president. Not only does Rick Perry want to destroy any progress our

“We need someone who has a strong plan for our country - someone who has a good idea of what we need.” that is the reason Rick Perry is not fit to be our President, but also his values. In explaining which departments would be closed he included the Department of Education. His reasoning for the Department of Education to be closed is that the government does not have the right to be interfering in education. He also says that the No Child Left Behind program is a monstrous, invasive program. Our education in America is failing already. Stopping the government’s help in ensuring that every child has an education will

country has made in gay rights, but he is also making it one of his top priorities. There are a multitude of problems our country has that he could focus on, but instead he chooses to focus on taking away the rights of people. In this case, Rick Perry chooses his own personal homophobic opinions over the actual important economic and political problems that our country is facing. Under Governor Perry there have been more death penalty sentences than under any other Texan governor. Rick

Perry has been a huge fan of the death penalty and utilizes it to its farthest extent. When asked about the large amount of people that have gone under the death penalty since he has stepped into office as governor he brushed it off saying that he held his trust in Texan government. As president, this nonchalant view of the death penalty would be stretched across the country. More crimes would be subject to the death penalty and fewer pardons from the President would be given. As a country, we need to have a forgiving President and an equal balance between the deaths in our country and the people pardoned. Another negative aspect of Perry’s immense use of the death penalty is that the states that have abolished the death penalty might have to enforce it. Perry’s views toward the death penalty will do nothing but cause uproars in our country. Perry holds an anti-abortion view. He believes that abortion should not be allowed and that women should not have a choice regarding their bodies. Once again, Perry has put his views before other people’s needs and has made a priority of something that should not be one. Rick Perry also wants to prohibit human stem cell research. By prohibiting human stem cell research he would only stop the great products

The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXI

PERRY

of science and their medical applications. Rick Perry would only be hurting our country with these ideas. Rick Perry’s priorities will destroy our country. Our country is currently in a tough place economically and politically, and the plans of Rick Perry would not help us. We need someone who has a strong plan for our country, someone who has an accurate sense of what we need. Rick Perry demonstrated by his views and by the mistake made at the November 9th republican debate that he is a poor choice for our president. HMR. HMR

“Perry’s gaffe is not the most compelling reason not to elect him as the republican presidential candidate. It is his values that make him unfit to be the leader of our country.”

FOXNEWS

The Horace Mann Review | Issue 3

Features

Debating Why Presidential Debates are Hurting Our Democracy

“I can’t, the third one, I can’t, sorry…oops.”—Rick Perry in a G.O.P presidential candidate debate on the economy

david hackel

ure Governor Perry stumbled, as did Ronald Reagan during his early debates. Reagan, whom the liberal media establishment blasted after his early debate performances, later went on to be known as “the great communicator.” How much can we learn about a candidate from his debating prowess? The short answer is that we can’t learn very much at all – a presidential contender’s performance on stage has no bearing on his or her fitness for the Presidency. Style, not substance, dominates the debates; in the next presidential matchup, for example, study how every candidate stands in the same quasi-military manner next to their podium, paying more attention to their posture than what they say. Such image issues are drilled into candidates’

heads by constant preparation and media attention. If you don’t believe me, ask yourself what made the headlines from the most recent debate: is it a silly goof or a serious policy proposal, which, if implemented, would result in real change? When evaluating candidates, emphasis should be placed on philosophy, not poise or beauty—if the latter maters, I suggest the Miss Universe contest. The way we judge debates must get back to the basic ideas of the candidate—how would his or her platform make for a better life—and stop focusing on whether the candidate looks good on a camera, stumbles across some of his or her answers, or is a particularly likable person. Upon watching a debate and seeing a candidate stumble, look online to see what he or she re-

ally believes and how he or she plans to achieve his or her goals. Don’t make the immediate judgment, without practical evidence to support your beliefs, that a bad speaker is stupid or incompetent. Barack Obama is a tremendous debater—he could win an argument against a gardener on how to garden or against a surgeon on how to perform surgery— but it is difficult to claim that he has led America into a new era of prosperity: the unemployment rate has done nothing but shoot up, our troops are still dying in Iraq, and consumer confidence is still lagging. In the case of Barack Obama, at least, debating prowess does not equal leadership skill. In addition, candidates do not have enough time to thoroughly explain their usually complex plans on how to improve our country, so they can only give a basic version of what they The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXI

Features

the Debates And What We Should Do to Reform or Replace Them

plan to do. Mitt Romney, for example, is known for his complicated plans to revive the economy; during these debates, it is beyond possible for him to explain exactly what he plans to do. He is forced to give a general idea of his platform rather than go over the specific details. Other candidates like Ron Paul and Jon Huntsman are in a similar situation. Someone like Rick Perry, meanwhile, cannot explain what he has done in Texas – and he has done great things as Texas governor – in a thirty second sound bite; the situation is simply too complex. As a result, their ideas get sidelined and the country is worse off for it. Many debate topics, also, are irrelevant to what the candidate needs to know to be a good president; we ask candidates about irrelevant issues like gay marriage and abortion when they have more important things to worry about. Just as President Eisenhower’s skills were needed following WWII and the Korean War, today, due to the worldwide credit and sovereign debt crisis, we need a leader skilled in finance and The Horace Mann Review | Issue 3

business, someone who could help create jobs. As the stock market continues to plummet and our economy falls with it, social issues are the least of our concerns. Yet we continue to ask candidates questions on gay marriage, abortion, and other irrelevant issues. A further drawback of debates is that they cater to bias and prejudice. In 1960, Richard Nixon lost the presidential election to John F. Kennedy because Kennedy looked better on television; who knows whether a tall, gangly man like Abraham Lincoln could become president today. The new job requirement that debates create – that the president look good on TV – certainly can’t add to a job that has more important aspects than television performances. All the hype created by certain errors candidates make is certainly not an accurate predictor of the candidates’ aptitude. One cannot presuppose how successful a leader of the free world could be because he or she suffered a momentary lapse; in fact, wise men often wait a few minutes before answering questions. Unlike in real life, where

presidents can confer with advisors for hours or days before making a decision, the candidate is expected to respond immediately and alone during a debate. Imagine what Jay Leno would make of someone who brought an advisor up to the podium with him! Instead of debates, we should try another tactic which would more accurately reflect the competence of the candidate: place the candidates in a classroom, giving them 10 questions and eight hours to answer them, and see what happens. The questions could run the gamut of possible topics, but at least five of them should deal with the most important issue in America today – the economy. Afterwards, their responses should be read on television and published for everyone to see; the name of the author should be placed at the end of the response as to avoid issues of bias. By focusing on the proposal, not the proposer, we can truly discover who is best qualified for the presidency – not merely the candidate who looks the best on TV. HMR

Features

President Gingrich Why Newt Gingrich should be the Republican nominee

zachary landzberg

ewt Gingrich is a promising candidate for the Republican nomination for President. Many politicians attain office based on charisma and not on the combination of education and experience. Newt Gingrich comes with an MA and PhD in modern European history from Tulane and as a professor of history in two Georgia universities. He is a thinker and intellectual who has authored countless books, including political treatises (“A Nation Like No Other”), environmental essays (“Contract with the Earth”) and novels of historical fiction (The Battle of the Crater). Besides his academics and writings, he has a long and distinguished record of political service with twenty years in Congress and four as Speaker of the House. Gingrich is also a self made man, not the son of a governor who becomes a governor, but the child of a military step father, attending school at different military installations. He is not from a patrician family, with a silver spoon in his mouth, and he understands the hardships of the average American. He has a strong work ethic and a gift for expressing himself. This is not a Republican looking out only for the interests of the rich. He has a vision for curing poverty through job opportunities, rather than handouts, and succeeded in pushing through welfare reform in the late 1990s. His 1998 book Lessons Learned the Hard Way, lays out an approach to raise up the poor by encouraging volunteerism, stressing importance of families, making tax incentives and easing regulations for businesses setting up in poor neighborhoods, and helping to increase property ownership by poor families. When he volunteered with Habitat for Humanity, he commented that people felt better about themselves by improving their own lives (constructing their own homes) than by cashing welfare checks from the government. anothermccain

The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXI

Features

newtap.com

He is an independent thinker, not blindly following the Republican line, such as favoring a guest worker program for foreigners, while maintaining a strong border policy and mandating better fuel efficiency for cars sold in the US. He similarly criticized the Republicans’ plans for radically overhauling Medicare, saying such a radical change was no better than Obamacare. Isn’t this a refreshing change for politics? He takes a much more pro-environment stance, even having appeared with Nancy Pelosi in an advertisement to call for bipartisan support of environmental issues. These stances, which to my mind, make him a more appealing presidential candidate may cost him the votes of some arch conservatives and give him a difficult line to walk now in this race. Newt Gingrich began the race as an unlikely winner, because of skeletons in his closet relating to ethics concerns in the 1990s. What are these personal and ethical issues which his critics hold out against him? His personality can sometimes be abrasive, but he calls things as he sees them and Washington needs to feel less comfortable. They refer to his affair with staffer Callista Bisek, in the mid 1990’s and refer to him as a hypocrite because of his pushing for Clinton’s im-

The Horace Mann Review | Issue 3

peachment over the same issue. This is old news. They raise the ethics issues from the 1990’s which arose regarding money from donations funneled to GOPAC, a fund to help elect Republican candidates or speaking and consulting fees from mortgage company, Freddie Mac. He was not removed from his position as House Speaker. Washington is not a utopia. These issues do give one pause, but these kinds of dealings are common and reflect a systemic problem in Washington which needs to be addressed on a policy basis. They are also mistakes he is unlikely to repeat. Over the last few weeks, the American public has begun to see past these skeletons, and he has experienced a huge surge in the polls, making him a leading contender for the GOP nomination. Finally, Gingrich seems to have the ability to beat the Democrats. In polls, an increasing percent of Americans see Gingrich, among the GOP candidates, as having the most experience and ability to be President and the greatest chance of beating Obama. He co-led and authored the “Contract with America” that allowed the Republicans to gain control of the House of Representatives for the first time in 40 years, and is poised to do the same with the presidency. HMR

Economics Economics

Economics

Fixing Europe's Economic Woes vivianna lin

The entire world has looked on as Europe, which houses some of the world’s most powerful countries, struggles desperately to gain control over the financial crisis whose effects are already critical. The crisis emerged in late 2009 as the European Union’s weakest economies faced ever-growing debts. The series of bailouts and negotiations have failed to ameliorate the decrease in consumer confidence and get European countries back on their feet. In order to understand where to go from here, we need an understanding of how Europe got itself into such a mess. The Euro zone is a conglomeration of developed countries. Developed countries have all kinds of advantages over undeveloped countries, the foremost of which is that they are able to cheaply borrow money. Because developed countries can borrow money more easily, it often makes sense to run a deficit. Normally, the economy can grow faster than the deficit can, so debt is not inherently bad for the economy. The most famous example of this is the U.S. in 1945, where the debt was

economic power, out-producing all other countries combined during World War II. The assumption that comes with borrowing money and accumulating a deficit is that the country can repay its debt and the economy will continually grow. When Greece was found to be unable to pay its debts in 2010, the market reacted negatively, thus making borrowing much more expensive. The bond yields reflect the market’s sliding confidence in the country’s ability to pay off its debt. The market fluctuates depending on the investors’ judgment of whether they will get their returns or not. If he thinks the bond is risky, he will demand a higher interest rate. The hiked up borrowing interest rates made it all the more difficult for Greece to pay off its debt. Here the vicious cycle of more debt and higher interest rates began. Developed countries must continue to loan each other money in order to survive, and loan confidently. The crisis lies in the fact that European countries like Britain, France, and Gerhave lent vast amounts of money to Normally, the economy can grow many other European economies like Greece, faster than the deficit can, and debt Italy, and Spain that can’t possibly pay them back. The short-term solution to is not inherently bad for the econ- this is a bailout. It all began in October of 2009, when omy. . .[such as] the US in 1945, Greece was discovered to have masked where the debt was nearly 100% of its ballooning deficits by paying banks like Goldman Sachs millions of dollars to the GDP. disguise its true level of borrowing since nearly 100% of the GDP. America then 2001. This cover-up allowed Greece to proceeded to become the world’s leading continue spending as it amassed more

debt. Markets reacted to this announcement by a sharp increase in interest rates for Greece, Spain, Ireland, and Portugal. Former President George Papandreou and his government issued vague promises and deep budget cuts for months, but he finally requested a bailout package by Greece’s fellow EU members in April 2010

[Italy’s] problem is a 10-year bond yield at 7% and a debt that is 120% of GDP and growing. as interest rates continued to rise steadily. A €110 billion package was prepared and Papandreou pushed through some austerity measures, but Greece continued to sag in its debt. The austerity package actually sent Greece deeper into the recession, and the economic slowdown caused its public debt soared to 142% of its GDP. By the summer of 2011, it was clear that Greece once again needed a bailout. Fears of financial contagion returned as interest rates for Italy and Spain began to rise as well. A second bailout package of $157 billion was agreed on, but the response to it was not what leaders hoped: interest rates were driven up in Italy and Spain, whose economies were too large to be bailed out by the new arrangements. The prospect of Italy defaulting is even worse than Greece. Italy’s economy, the third largest in Europe, is now stagnant as investors’ fears continue to pile up. While its finances are not as precariThe TheHorace HoraceMann MannReview Review| |Vol. Vol.XXI XXI

Economics ous as those of Greece, Portugal or Ireland, because it is so much larger, its troubles are more frightening. As described in a recent report by UniCredit, a European banking group, Italy is “the largest of the vulnerable countries, and most vulnerable of the large.” Italy’s ingrained political and patronage system is often seen as the primary culprit in its miserable economic record. The country is defined, to a degree, by the people’s deep-seated mistrust, not just of their government, but also of foreign governments, as well as a widespread aversion to risk and to growth. In the midst of this financial crisis, economists are worried not so much about the imminent repercussions as a more gradual decline of Italy’s economy. After Italy’s borrowing costs rose sharply in July 2011, the government scrambled to fend off a crisis, approving a $65 billion in additional emergency austerity measures over the next two years, including tax increases and cuts in order to balance the budget. The plan became subject to much backtracking and political bickering as European leaders raised the pressure on Italy to deliver. Following the oust of Silvio Berlusconi, Mario Monti, the interim president of Italy, has gathered a cabinet of technocrats to lead the ailing country. The real problem in Italy, however, is not leadership. Berlusconi’s resignation is in no way a resolution to Italy’s troubles. Its problem is a 10-year bond yield at 7% and a debt at 120% of GDP and growing. Italy is likely to be in recession soon,

which will only make the problem worse. A drop in GDP while deficits rise means that debt-to-GDP rises faster; interestrate costs will rise faster than growth in the economy. For years, Italy has gotten away with borrowing to finance its debts. Since June, however, markets have been shunning Italian debt, thereby causing

Italy’s ingrained political and patronage system is often seen as the primary culprit in its miserable economic record. its interest rates to shoot up. Here the problem for an economic model that was predicated on the guarantee that the country could borrow and roll over its debt at low interest rates ad infinitum manifested itself when it no longer grew faster than it amassed debt. A country that has to pay high interest will eventually go broke. The high yield for debt demonstrates the market’s loss of trust in Italian bonds. Investors don’t believe Italy will be able to pay off its debt, they don’t believe the new government can lead Italy out of its crisis, and they don’t believe the European Financial Stability Facility can save Italy, Greece, Spain, and Portugal by itself. So how do we deal with this debt? The best way is to encourage economic growth according to the model. If the economy grows faster than debt, then the country can once again start borrowing based on the guarantee that it can pay off its debt. This solution, however, is not

applicable to countries in Southern Europe as they are falling into a recession. Germany is currently encouraging all countries to implement austerity measures. Austerity, however, will cut spending back, causing the economy to shrink. In times of a recession, this form of recovery is never appealing to the people or the government. Although Germany will champion austerity to its dying days, there are other options. One is for the Eurozone to forgive enough debt for the various countries that are near defaulting to get back on track (or just enough so that they can function properly). Another is for these few defaulting countries to leave the Eurozone. All of these solutions, however, would lead to long-term recessions and general misery. Economist John Maudlin champions a logical solution that seems to have better prospects. He suggests bringing in the ECB “printing press.” The only way to find the money to help solve the crisis is to print enough money to lower the value of the euro, thereby making exports cheaper, and thus giving Southern Europe a chance. And although Germany vehemently opposes this method, it makes sense and seems easier to swallow than massive austerity measures that would result in years of recession. Of course, this solution has its downfalls: a lower euro means more competition from Europeans, leading to a series of trade issues and currency wars. But whether the solution is printing or austerity or leaving the Eurozone, it’s going to be a long, hard journey out of this devastating crisis. HMR

Interim Prime Minister Monti of Italy, the man now responsible for dealing with Italy’s economic woes.

directe.cat

The Horace Mann Review | Issue 3

Economics ima gej uic y

.com

Taming the Economic Contagion

W jennifer heon

e have witnessed the economic crisis in Greece, but economic crisis as a whole appear to be spreading fast through Europe. Italy is the next target of this economic contagion, and after Italy, economic crisis could spread to even more European countries and the United States. With this in mind, it is crucial for Italy to recover from economic debt as quickly as possible. Currently, Italy has a debt of 2.6 trillion dollars, causing Italy to have the second highest debt in the euro-region. Furthermore, interest rates in Italy have reached soaring percentages of 6.5% on a new issue of six-month bills. Such high interest rates have not occurred in Italy since the debt crisis in 1997. Increased borrowing rates on Italian bonds have caused other euro zone countries to seek bailouts. Italy’s economic situation is clearly in turmoil, but the situation could worsen very easily. If the government does not take action, Italy’s economy could easily continue its downward spiral. Italy’s larger economic influence compared to Greece’s would result in the Euro being more greatly affected if Italy’s economy were to plummet. Furthermore, the Eu-

ropean Union is struggling from the debt crisis in Greece, and the addition of a debt crisis in Italy would overwhelm the European Union. Not only would the Euro-zone be greatly affected if Italy’s economy worsened, but Italy’s economy would also affect the United States. The United States is slowly recovering from the recession, but a blow like Italy’s plummeting economy could reverse all the efforts America has made to improve its economic situation. Although the unreliable European

It is evident why Italy’s economy must not fall, but the question still remains: How do we fix Italy’s poor economic situation before it becomes contagious? economies have temporarily made the dollar a more reliable investment, if Italy’s economic situation worsens, there is a definite possibility that the United States’ economy could deteriorate as well. The stock prices could start falling, resulting in consumers cutting back on their spending. Furthermore, the United States exports many goods to Europe, but with European countries in poor economic

situations, less people will be buying American goods. As a result, the American dollar may become less valuable due to Italy’s economic situation. It is evident why Italy’s economy must not fail, but the question still remains: How do we fix Italy’s poor economic situation before it becomes contagious? There is not a clear-cut answer because no one thing can bring an entire country out of debt. I believe that the way to fix the Italian economy lies in implementing a multitude of different tactics. A great way for Mario Monti, the new Prime Minister of Italy, and the Italian government to obtain money is to sell some of Italy’s land. Many regions of Italy are run-down and swamp-like. They serve hardly any economic purpose for Italy and have very few inhabitants. These places include army barracks surrounding Lake Garda, a long-standing mine located on Tuscan island, and many residential buildings. If Mario Monti and the Italian government invested some money into cleaning these places up, their retail price would greatly increase. It is estimated that all the land can be sold for 25 to 30 billion Euros by 2020. Although I think this plan is a wise course of action, with an already declining retail market, the addition of so many plots of land could The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXI

Economics cause the retail market to decline further. Therefore, the land would be sold for less, and Italy would not obtain as much money. The way to avoid this problem is by slowly putting the plots of land on the market, so there will not be an excess of available land. However, slowly selling the land will take a long time. Consequently, selling land will not bring in immediate money, so Mario Monti must implement other ways to help the economy. Mario Monti should also adjust pension rules in order to help the economy. Although these cutbacks would result in public unrest, the people living in Italy must accept at some point that certain adjustments are necessary for the good of their country. Furthermore, Mario Monti should promote the production of high quality goods. Although China and India produce goods in more bulk, Italy can make great amounts of money by producing high quality goods. Clearly, Mario Monti and the Italian government can do much to help the Italian economy, but Italy needs additional support to truly free itself of national debt. The most obvious candidate to turn to is the European Central Bank. It is the European Central Bank’s job to help European countries and debt, and they must assist Italy. If the European Central Bank bought large quantities of Italy’s bonds, the borrowing costs would decrease and Italy’s economic situation would improve. Also, the European Central Bank should circulate more money into the Italian economy. Finally, as it is established that Europe’s poor economic condition could negatively affect the United States, the United States should also help the Italian economy. Following similar tactics as the European Central Bank, the United States should buy Italian bonds to decrease borrowing costs. Many of these ideas are already in circulation, but the implementation of them is what will fix Italy’s economic crisis. However, between Monti and the Italian government, the European Central Bank, and the United States’ help, I am confident Italy can recover from its poor economic situation. By fixing Italy’s economic crisis, we may be able to bring an end to this economic contagion. HMR

The Horace Mann Review | Issue 3

Steps To Improve Italy Reach out to the ECB

pragueinsider.org

Sell Underdeveloped Land

mastermarf.com

Reduce Pension Plans

walthall.com

Economics resident shall, at stated Times, receive for his Services, a pensation, which shall neither be increased nor diminished g the Period for which he shall have been elected, and he shall ceive within that Period any other Emolument from the United s, or any of them.

President

Obama’s

e he enter on the Execution of his Office, he shall take the wing Oath or Affirmation:--”I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that aithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the itution of the United States.”

Class Act T

on. 2.

resident shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when into the actual Service of the United States; he may require th on, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive rtments, upon any Subject relating to the Duties of their ctive Offices, and he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and ns for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of achment.

Jonathan Slifkin he passage of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA), or “ObamaCare,” in March 2010, has incited furious disagreements over the structure of the health care system, the appropriate role of government in health care, and the constitutional limits of government. Most of the focus has

been placed on the “individual mandate” and its constitutional implications, but recently another provision of the PPACA has received media attention: Section 8002, known as the Community Living Assistance Services and Supports (CLASS) Act. The Act, championed by Senator Edward Kennedy (D-Massachusetts), would have established a voluntary long-term care in-

surance (LTCI) program administered by the government. On October 14, 2011, the Department of Health and Human Services announced that the CLASS Act was financially unworkable and would be suspended indefinitely. LTCI is a product designed to help provide non-medical services, such as home health care, adult day care, assistive

The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXI

l d

Economics technology, personal assistance services, respite care, accessible transportation, and nursing homes, to the elderly and the disabled. The Department of Health and Human Services has estimated that over 60 percent of Americans over the age of 65 will at some point require long-term care services, but at this point, only about 10% of seniors own long-term care coverage, and because long-term care is non-medical, it is not provided by social insurance programs such as Medicare. Basically, the CLASS Act would have set up a system whereby premiums of around $120 a month (lower for students and people in poverty) would be automatically added to workers’ payroll taxes (unless they were to opt out), and after as few as five years of paying premiums, workers who met eligibility criteria would receive lifetime benefits of around $50 a day for home health care or around $75 a day for institutional care, such as nursing homes. (Estimates of premiums and benefits vary because they would be set by the Secretary of Health and Human Services and indexed to inflation.) The goal of the program would be to massively expand access to LTCI and to support more care options for the elderly and disabled. Additionally, Medicaid, the government health program for the poor, currently does cover and in fact spends more than $100 billion per year, about a third of its budget, on long-term care. Thus, another goal of the CLASS Act would be to offset costs to Medicaid and thereby reduce government spending by around $2 billion in the first ten years (as estimated by the Congressional Budget Office). The unceremonious end to the CLASS program is not surprising. After all, if such a program were financially viable, there would be no reason for the private sector not to already be providing it. Of course, the reason no private company offers this sort of insurance is that it is completely actuarially unsound. The basic (and rather obvious) problem is the effect known as “adverse selection,” by which people with higher associated risks are more likely to buy insurance. The entire concept of insurance is only workable if more people pay into the system than will ultimately require benefits. Under the current CLASS Act, few people other than those who already require long-term care and the subsidized poor would sign up. The American AcadThe Horace Mann Review | Issue 3

emy of Actuaries has reported that “given the way the program is structured, severe adverse selection would result in very high premiums that are likely to be unaffordable for much of the intended population, threatening the viability of the program.” The health care industry and the government can offer very different solutions to the problem of adverse selection in health insurance. The health care industry’s solutions include exclusions on pre-existing conditions, limits on benefits, and premium discrimination. If health care companies can exclude sick people, limit outlays, and charge higher premiums to people who are more likely to need health care, they can lower their risk and ensure that they have enough money to cover benefits. The government has the additional option of mandating insurance coverage. Indeed, such an insurance mandate was an important part of the PPACA—because the law specifically bans pre-existing condition exclusions in

the program a traditional social insurance entitlement in the style of Medicare and Social Security (and, if Medicare and Social Security can offer any example, would still fail to address the viability problem). Alternatively, the government could use taxpayer money to help fund the program, thus deepening our budget deficit and undermining the supposedly voluntary and self-funding aspects of the plan. Moreover, the CLASS Act was a budgetary gimmick from the very beginning. According to the Congressional Budget Office, the CLASS Act was expected to take in around $81 billion in the first decade, which would have accounted for about 40% of the PPACA’s projected deficit reduction. But because of the required five-year waiting period before benefits could be received, the CLASS program would take in money from premiums for five years before paying out any benefits. So the $81 billion in deficit reduction would be easy to explain:

“The CLASS Act was financially nonsensical and destined to do more harm than good, whether by benefit cuts, mandatory enrollment, or taxpayer bailout.” health insurance policies, the government had to offer another solution to adverse selection. Clearly, if no exclusions are allowed, healthy people will have no incentive to purchase insurance until they fall ill: in other words, only sick people will ever buy insurance. Such a ban would destroy the health care industry without the solution of the inwdividual mandate, whereby everyon e is compelled either to pay into the insurance system (to increase the risk pool and to lower premiums) or to pay a fine (to prevent free riding off emergency rooms). So to make the CLASS program viable, the government would have to implement either: 1) some kind of exclusions on pre-existing conditions or future cuts in benefits, which would make the program indistinguishable from private plans; or 2) mandatory enrollment, which would make

the government would have been taking in money for ten years, but only paying out money for five. The Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services has estimated that the premiums received into the program would have exceeded the benefits paid out only until 2025. The CLASS Act was financially nonsensical and destined to do more harm than good, whether by benefit cuts, mandatory enrollment, or taxpayer bailout. As it is, we should feel greatly relieved that the Obama administration recognized the inevitable failure of the CLASS Act and postponed it before it could become politically entrenched as part of the entitlement third rail. Now certainly the extremely low long-term care coverage in this country is a problem that political action may help to remedy. But not like this. HMR

Economics

They Are Me Nathaniel Tillinghast-Raby

h, Europe: home to beautiful cities, luxuri-

needed to postpone a summit that was called to solve the

ous countryside, and, in the past two years,

euro crisis in order to reach a comprehensive solution;

an economy at the verge of collapse. The pre-

the summit was delayed from the 10th to the 23rd. While

carious economic situation led to the rise of

an agreement was reached, it unfortunately included too

“Merkozy,” the duo of German Chancellor

little fiscal stimulus and nothing about the European

Angela Merkel and French President Nicolas

Central Bank (ECB). It was a wasted opportunity that

Sarkozy, and the not-so-secret power behind the euro.

Sarkozy, but especially Merkel, could have used to make a

Germany and France account for 50% of the euro zone

truly effective financial plan to stop the euro crisis.

output, so the nations hold a great deal of clout, yet their

Merkel has her weaknesses, though. Germans act

never-ending bickering is killing the euro zone. From

more hostile to the thought of bailing out weaker Euro-

matters of France’s credit rating to the preservation of

pean countries every day, making it difficult for the chan-

the euro, these two countries disagree on much and re-

cellor of Germany to enact the reforms Europe so des-

solve very little. For the good of Europe, they must settle

perately needs. These domestic situations have strained

their differences.

the relationship between the two leaders, as their voters

In this past year, Merkel has emerged as the true

demand very different methods to appease them. Unfor-

ruler of the euro, even among the oligarchy of France

tunately for Merkel and Sarkozy, they cannot pander to

and Germany that already dominates the euro. Germa-

voters anymore if they wish the euro to live.

ny has the largest economy in Europe, topping France’s

Sarkozy and Merkel’s response to Greece reflects

last year. This has caused Sarkozy to desperately try to

their constituents’ opinions; however, neither of them has

maintain the illusion of equal partnership between the

been brave or persistent enough to enact the reforms nec-

two. He does this by constantly disagreeing with Merkel.

essary. The doubt cast on France’s banks has worried Sar-

Since the other countries look to them for a unified front,

kozy enough to persuade him that no bank should pay for

this lack of one has caused gridlock in every attempt at

the economic problems of the euro and that instead the

a solution to the euro crisis. Merkel, as the stronger of

average taxpayer should take the hit. On the other side

the two, must take the first step in resolving this grave

of the Rhine, Germany’s angry population has convinced

problem by approaching Sarkozy to talk about how they

Merkel that no citizen should pay and that bondholders

can present a more unified front.

of Greek debt should take the fall. In the end, both the

Provided that agreement can be reached on any-

banks and the citizens must bear the pain, as neither is

thing, however, Europe quickly falls in line to support it.

strong enough to do it on their own. But in order to truly

Germany and France, in October, announced that they

save Greece, Sarkozy and Merkel must both wield their

The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXI

Economics

erkozy combined power in ways they are both uncomfortable

deadlock in the political system. It seems they think that

with: with boldness and against their country’s wishes.

creditor countries like France and Germany should just

First and foremost, Germany and France must get

give them money with no guarantees of financial reform.

the ECB to act as a lender of last resort. This will calm the

Their demands’ partially explain why the ECB is reluc-

markets concerning troubled countries’ debt. Currently

tant to lend. The fear with the ECB as a lender of last

the ECB’s main involvement in the euro crisis is buy-

resort is that countries will use the ECB as a free ride to

ing bonds of troubled countries in order to keep down

unlimited money. With no financial reform to accompa-

interest rates. Germany fears that unrestricted lending

ny the ECB’s lending, the ECB will become the iron lung

by the ECB will lead to hyperinflation. This is a risk that

for Europe. The gridlock the protestors’ cause, however,

must be taken, though. The stability of the euro should

is causing further problems within the European politi-

be of top priority right now. The European Financial

cal system and causes Merkel and Sarkozy to play a game

Stability Foundation (EFSF) isn’t a viable option for fi-

of chicken with the Greek government every time a new

nancial salvation anymore. The solvency of its funders

bailout agreement is required.

is growing more uncertain by the day, and it no longer

Currently, Germany and France have more

has the financial firepower to resolve the euro crisis, es-

power to resolve this crisis than any other country, and

pecially with Italy and Spain now looking shaky. Finally,

they must use it effectively or risk the collapse of the euro

Sarkozy and Merkel must rescind their suggestion that

system. They must increase their own credibility by pro-

Greece is free to leave the euro zone if it wants. All this

posing a genuine solution to the Greek problem through

does is further undermine confidence in the financial

the ECB. Furthermore, they need to reaffirm their com-

markets. Though this is a bold stand for them to take, it

mitment to Greece and rescind their comment about

is necessary. What bank, citizen, or country is going to

other countries being free to leave the euro zone. There

back a troubled euro economy if there is the possibility

must also be measures to increase economic activity,

of it defaulting and leaving the euro?

such as reducing the time it takes to open a small busi-

Merkozy’s imposition of austerity on countries re-

ness and other bureaucracy. Right now, Europe stands

nowned for their paid holiday time and incredibly long

at a crossroads, and only Merkel and Sarkozy have the

lunch breaks, such as Greece, has the citizens of those

ability to set it on the right path. HMR

countries feeling that the strings attached to the bailout deals offered by France and Germany violate their sovereignty. Their ridiculous protesting over the conditions presented by Merkel and Sarkozy have caused Photo from http://pierluca-birindelli.blogspot.com/2011/10/merkozy-berlusconi-and-bella-vita.html

The Horace Mann Review | Issue 3

Economics

Gree

ce in

As G ond reece prep m a ares Gree ssive ce's to b a ther i l acce out, eof, future pt t h has a e begu nd its conc its sec ern n to o p t ions mou over , nt. or l ack

By B

en D

Crisi s

avid o

y Sa

on b arto

ick

en mH

The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXI

Economics

s Greece prepares to accept its second massive bailout the concern over Greece's future and their options, or lack thereof, has begun to mount. To begin to understand the Greek crisis one must examine its origins. For starters Greece has had a severe problem for revenue streams. Tax evasion, according to the New York Times, costs Greece 20 billion dollars a year. Yet this was not the worst of Greece’s missteps. It was also revealed that Greece consistently lied to European Union Officials in order to keep Greece within European Union monetary guidelines such as those on maximum debt thresholds. These two examples show a clear and flagrant financial mismanagement. Economically, their biggest misstep was ballooning debt. A result of low interest rates on bonds that also coincided with the 2008 financial meltdown. There are two main problems with a ballooning debt. In countries like the United States that are not part of a monetary union it is easy to combat financial burdens. The U.S is able to devalue its currency and print more money. . The U.S is able to control its own financial future. In a monetary union such as the E.U this is impossible because the Greek government does not control the value of the Euro. The biggest problem though is the risk of default and the possible side effects or “contagion” of that default. Why does it matter that Greece’s economy is in crisis? Greece in itself only makes up 2.5% of the entire E.U economy. However, a default would be cataclysmic. It is less about Greece then it is about exposure to Greek debt. Unlike struggling economies like Japan, debt in Greece is not held by the people, but by institutions. In particular, three large and influential banks, Societe Generale, BNP Paribas, and Credit Agricole, have extremely large exposure to Greek debt. If Greece defaults it is entirely possible that one of these three banking giants will collapse, mirroring the collapse of Lehman Brothers in 2008. If such a collapse were to happen, it will set off a world wide financial crisis. Compounded the crisis is the a vicious “debt cycle.” The qualification given to Greece by the E.U to receive further bailouts involves sever austerity measures. They include heavy tax increases and a sharp decrease in spending. Stimulation of economic growth results from the direct opposite of austerity measures. While cutting exuberant spending is necessary to lower debt government spending on infrastructure, housing stimulates and other sectors stimulate economic growth that

could help create jobs. This cycle continues because after austerity measures are introduced, the economy shrinks, causing the need for new bailouts and new austerity measures. It is a never ending cycle that can only result in default. In comparison to possible defaults of other countries like Italy; the global impact of a Greek default will be relatively minimal. With Greece, there will be huge economic ramifications-a possible repeat of the 2008 recession. Italy is another story. Italy is one the world’s largest economies and exposure to Italy is widespread. Italy’s default would cause a global depression, perhaps worse then that of 1929. This fact makes it crucial that Greece defaults in an “orderly” manner. If Greece defaults suddenly it could set off contagion causing other European countries such as Italy, Spain, or Portugal to default. This would be cataclysmic. These possible cataclysmic ramifications make Greece’s steps towards economic recovery extremely crucial. Greece essentially has two options. The option that they are following is one where they continue to impose severe austerity measures and receive bailouts. This option has resulted in political turmoil as evidenced by Prime Minister George Papandreou’s recent ouster and will eventually lead to a Greek default. This option leaves open the door to a sudden default that would threaten to destroy the global economy. The other option is to return to their old currency, the Drachma. This option would consist of two unpopular notions. Firstly, it will consist of a departure from the European Union. Secondly it will assure a default. However, the default would be “controlled.” The Greek government will have to give time for institutions to limit their exposure to Greek debt. This allotted time period will coincide with the time period needed to change the Greek currency from the Euro to the Drachma. By “controlling” the default, Greece will be able to put itself in a better financial situation and would be able to lessen the impact of default. Once they return to the Drachma they would be able to debase their currency, and allow themselves to reestablish sure financial footing. This is the only option that would allow Greece’s economy to grow without being bogged down by austerity measures and a large debt burden. To return to the Drachma, Greece would have to tread very lightly. They cannot risk uncontrolled default nor can the world. Greece’s only option is a return to the Drachma. For such a return to be successful, Greece must be clear about how such a return will be conducted. Additionally, they must act now to prevent financial collapse. Tomorrow could be a day too late. HMR

flag photo from http://flagpedia.net/greece

The Horace Mann Review | Issue 3

Science & Tech.

Net Neutrality

Mohit Mookim 48

The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXI

Science & Tech.

he Internet has always provided the world with an outlet of presenting abundant creative content for users to consume at their own will. Internet laws and protocols in America borrow from the same ideas of freedom and liberty that this country has prided itself with for over a few centuries. Because of these protocols, the Internet is fortunately not of an inherently restricted or censored nature. Recently, however, the United States government has attempted to remove the protections that ensure these freedoms. The media conventionally uses the umbrella terms “net neutrality” or “Internet censorship” to reference this issue maintaining equality within the Internet. In early November of 2011, the House of Representatives considered a Republican-backed bill that would repeal FCC protocols protecting net neutrality. Despite heavy lobbying from Internet Service Providers (ISPs) such as Comcast, Time Warner Cable, and AT&T, the bill failed with only a slight margin of six votes. These ISPs argued that they somehow “own” the Internet, and the power to edit or delete content from the Internet simply exercises power over their own property. Essentially, these repeals would have given ISPs the right to block any given website or application at their convenience. Additionally, ISPs have been urging Congress to pass legislature that would create a tiered Internet system. A user who chooses not to pay a hefty fee to these telecommunications companies would receive significantly slower Internet speeds. Also, in the case that this user happens to produce Internet content, the content’s stream of data would slow down

The Horace Mann Review | Issue 3

as well when accessed by any networked computer. Before judging these policies any further, we must familiarize ourselves with the technical structures involved in how exactly the Internet works. Users sign contracts with Internet Service Providers so their devices can join much larger networks that are owned by these ISPs. Throughout the country, these national ISPs have localized Point of Presences (POPs) by which we connect to these networks. In turn, all of these POPs join still larger networks via Network Access Points. Finally, all of these networks coalesce in the highest level of Internet operations, the Internet Backbones. Typically, Backbones consist of a trunk of fiber optic cables that connect all the Network Access Points together. Notably, every single device is connected to every other device on the network. In fact, Congress’s role in this issue should be to give the Internet an owner; Congress must choose between giving ownership to ISPs, which manage Network Access Points, and the backbone, and the average American. Of course, there are complexities in the infrastructure, but each and every byte of information that comprises the Internet originated from an end user. Not only are ISPs attempting to censor the Internet, but they are also pushing for the right to discriminate Internet speeds. Subverting our most fundamental beliefs of freedom and equality, the less fortunate would be limited in their ability to exercise their freedom of speech through the Internet. In doing so, these same multinational corporations would be destroying the very fabric of the Internet: fairness, equality, and democracy. Removing the level playing field and freedom of speech

that led to the Internet’s rise would necessarily lead to its demise. Again, Congress must preserve the policies protecting net neutrality that have chosen the people over the ISPs over and over since the dawn of the Internet. The role of Internet Service Providers is simply to tap into this vast array of user-created content that it should have no right to judge. ISPs are not the owners or the judges of the Internet, but merely its messengers. In my eyes, to give ownership to anyone other than the end user would be an injustice. It’s a service that users themselves create. Congress must ensure that ownership lies in the hands of the people, the true innovators that drive the Internet. When dealing with issues regarding the Congress and government’s lawmaking stance, we must consider the constitution. In this nation, we pride ourselves on the right to the freedom of speech. Just as the government cannot censor the newspaper, Congress should not allow, in any circumstance, Verizon, AT&T, Comcast, and the like to censor the Internet or discriminate against certain voices on the Internet. The Congress has the power to change the nature of the Internet: either a free and open environment that represents this country’s values or a censored, restricted place that follows the same values and ethical standards our Founding Father appalled. Currently, the right choice is being made, but the future looks uncertain. If and when this issue arises again, the right decision is clear: Congress must, as it so boldly has done, put censorship and the opinions of large multinational corporations after the ideals of freedom and the power of the people. HMR

Science & Tech.

An Uncertain Future The Bitter Lot of Nicaraguaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Plantation Workers Julia Prestfelder

The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXI

n Chichigalpa, Nicaragua, thousands of sugarcane plantation workers have died from Chronic Renal Insufficiency, a disease that causes lack of apetite, increased blood pressure, anemia, fatigue, pericarditis, insomnia, poor blood clotting, and swelling of arms and legs. Itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s imperative that the plight of the sugar plantation workers gets more international attention. Countries around the world, including America, must stop supporting the sugar companies that are mistreating their workers. The Nicaragua Sugar Estates Limited, the sugar company that owns the San Antonio Sugar Mill in Chichigalpa, has monopolized the region. Working on the plantation is essentially the only

Science & Tech. Chronic Kidney Disease to the toxic pesticides, but Nicaraguan companies claim that there is no correlation between the pesticides and the diseases their workers contract. Nicaragua Sugar Estates has a website dedicated to proving that they are not responsible for the ubiquity of CRI, claiming that the cause of CRI is not pesticides but rather excessive drinking, diabetes, hypertension, diabetes, and a poor diet. It is beneficial to both parties that the workers now have support from organizations like La Isla and ASOCHIVIDA to work on finding a solution, getting assistance from volunteer work and donations, and gaining international attention. However, the fact that the company continues to deny responsibility for a disease that affects sugar plantation workers

fect examples of how people who did not have the opportunity to receive a good education still have a chance of making an honest living. They also demonstrate that when given the monetary means, Nicaraguans have potential to create more small and uncorrupted businesses that are not harmful to workers. In order for Nicaragua to reach its full potential, it is critical that the government penalize corruption, the youth create a more diverse labor force, and companies treat their workers with respect in a safe environment. Although corruption exists all across the world, in the past and currently certain members of the Nicaraguan government have been persuaded by wealthy members of society through bribery. If the government was harsher in

â&#x20AC;&#x153;In a nation where 2% of the population holds 98% of the wealth, it is difficult for the voice of the largely impoverished majority to have a huge impact.â&#x20AC;? source of income in the Chichigalpa. In order to support their families, the sons of the workers that were affected by this disease are forced to work at the same place where their fathers and neighbors contracted the chronic illness. The fact that nearly 50% of the country lives below the poverty line and 80% live on less than $2 a day compels the impoverished to work for bad companies. As a result, these workers can contract chronic illnesses from working at the sugar plantations. In a nation where 2% of the population holds 98% of the wealth, it is difficult for the voice of the impoverished to have a huge impact. Boston University and the World Bank have conducted studies about sugar plantations and CRI. Although these organizations have not yet found conclusive results, the most likely source of the disease is the pesticides that the workers use and are essentially immersed in every day. Studies have been conducted in the United States that link The Horace Mann Review | Issue 3

shows their disregard for the wellbeing of their employees. One of the problems relating to employment is that for educated young people there is unhealthy competition, For example, because hospitals and law firms want only the oldest and most qualified individuals, many doctors and lawyers have difficulty finding a job. Instead, the youth need to turn to engineering and science. This is important not only for find new sources of jobs, but also for creating new small businesses that have the potential to displace the sugar plantations. For example, there have been many successful endeavors in creating new small businesses including, weavers, co-ops and papaya plantations, using micro-loans and grants. Micro-grants are small loans given by charitable organizations to people who apply and want to start small businesses, and these loans are paid back after the business is stable. Although these businesses are not necessarily related to the sciences or engineering, they are per-

its punishment of companies who endanger their workers, like the Nicaragua Sugar Estate Limited, the working environment for laborers could be considerably safer. Through diversifying its work force, Nicaragua could become recognized on the international front for a greater variety of products. This could be achieved through students pursuing a greater variety of careers instead of creating too much competition for a nearly unattainable job. Nicaragua could develop more technologically if the youth began to look for jobs in the engineering and science fields. Although these resoltuions may be easier said then done, countries that have supported corruption, like America purchasing sugar from the San Antonio Mill, could help support Nicaraguan people through charity and micro-grants. The countries that have supported tyrannical corporations can also help provide solutions. HMR