Issue 5 - Infrastructure by The Horace Mann Review

R eview Review THE HORACE MANN

The Horace Mann Volume XXII - Issue 5

INFRASTRUCTURE

Review THE HORACE MANN

Letter From the Editor

Daniel Elkind Editor-in-Chief

Spencer Cohen Executive Editor

Jacob Gladysz-Morawski Alex Posner Nicholas McCombe Stephen Paduano Managing Editors - Design

Managing Editors - Content

Ben Davidoff

Head of Middle Division

Charles Scherr

Senior Editor - Features

Treshauxn Dennis-Brown Senior Editor - Domestic

Lizzy Rosenblatt

Senior Editor - International

fter having focused on globalization for our fourth issue of the year, it seemed only natural that we should publish an issue on infrastructure. Throughout history, infrastructure has driven the expansion of markets, the creation of new jobs, and the acceleration of progress and innovation. As the world continues to grow more interconnected and interdependent, infrastructure holds tremendous opportunities for nations that are willing to invest and think ahead. Moreover, new technologies have given rise to new forms of infrastructure which the world community must address. Cyberinfrastructure is one such example. How can we capitalize on these developments? When should we be wary of them? How can infrastructure provide security and economic stability? Have we failed to give our national infrastructure the attention it deserves? These are only a few of the questions that our writers have addressed.

Daniel Elkind Editor-in-Chief Volume XXII

Nathan Raab

Senior Editor - Economics

This issue features a wide range of articles that capture the scope and complexity of infrastructure’s role in the modern world; our writers examine the role of infrastructure in North Korea and the Middle East, the elevation of the internet to the status of “infrastructure,” and the problem of under-developed infrastructure in thirdworld nations. Also discussed are the ways in which infrastructure programs can ameliorate poverty. Once again, the number of writers who signed up to write for this issue was extraordinary. We have had a record turnout for this year’s volume of The Review, and the quality of articles has been phenomenal. I would like to briefly thank and acknowledge both our hard-working editors; the excellent class of writers that has risen to the challenge of writing thorough and engaging articles on current events; our superb faculty advisor, Mr. Donadio; and Dr. Kelly and the administration for their support.

Vivianna Lin

Senior Editor - Science and Technology

Maurice Farber Philip Perl Sam Rahmin Senior Contibuter

Will Ellison Catherine Engelmann Ben Greene David Hackel Sam Henick Jennifer Heon Caroline Kuritzkes Isaiah Newman Sahej Suri Jonah Wexler Junior Editors

Daniel Baudoin Hannah Davidoff Mihika Kapoor Mohit Mookim Kelvin Rhee Associate Editors

Jacob Haberman Hana Krijestorac Henry Luo Namit Satara Jacob Zurita Junior Contibutors

Gregory Donadio Faculty Advisor

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.

Domestic Nathan Raab Nathaniel Tillinghast Eric Stein Andew Cogut Laszlo Herwitz Brett Silverstein Jacob Haberman

Four Key Supreme Court Cases 4 Immigration in the U.S.: A Call for Reform 6 Bus Strikes in NYC 9 The Injustice of Citizens United 10 After Sandy Hook 12 Debt: The Downfall of America 14 Women in the Military 16

Mitchell Troyanovsky James McCarthy Caroline Kuritzkes Emma Brossman Matthew Harpe Adam Shaw Sam Stern Neil Ahlawat Gabriel Broshy

French Intervention in Mali (Pro) 18 French Intervention in Mali (Con) 19 Venezuela, Post-Chavez 20 Egypt vs. Iran 22 How to Succeed in China 24 The War on Drugs 26 Life Behind Bars in Syria 28 North Africa: The Newest Haven for Terrorism 30 Spain Makes Amends for the Inquisition 32

Sam Henick Ikaasa Suri Jenna Barancik Adam Resheff Elizabeth Xiong Charles Cotton Anna Kuritzkes & Daniel Rosenblatt Ethan Gelfer

All You Need to Know About Infrastructure 34 To Feed or Not to Feed: North Korea 36 Development Infrastructure 38 Cyber-Infrastructure 40 National Infrastructure Bank 42 Infrastructure Ablaze 44 Infrastructure and Public-Private Partnerships 46 in the Middle East Russia’s Infrastructure and the Threat It Poses 49

International

Features

Economics

Natasha Moolji Why Now is the Time to Buy 50 Robert Hefter AIG: In Greed We Trust 52 Spencer Slagowitz Saving Social Security 54 Lauren Futter Solutions in Small Projects 56

Science and Technology

Anne Rosenblatt What Do They See? Government Snooping 58 Samuel Fisch Spread Awarness! Celiac Disease 60 Emily Kramer Detection of Chromosomal Abnormalities 62 Jacob Zurita Illuminating Apple’s Stocks 64 Harry Seavey NASA Must Live On 66

Domestic

Four Supreme Court Cases to Watch By Nathan Raab The Marriage Cases

he Supreme Court’s decisions in the Marriage Cases – Hollingsworth v. Perry and United States v. Windsor – could prove the Court’s most notable and divisive since Roe v. Wade in 1973. In both cases, proponents of gay marriage argue that State (in Perry) and Federal (in Windsor) laws against homosexual marriage violate the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment, which guarantees all Americans “equal protection of the laws.” Opponents argue that the 14th Amendment has never been understood to require that governments extend the benefits of marriage to all who may want them. If the Supreme Court were to side with the former, the laws of forty-one states, plus those of the United States as a whole, would fall. It’s unlikely that the first case will cause such a sweeping ruling; the defenders of the state ban, who are ordinary citizens that campaigned for the law, may lack the personal stake in the conflict necessary for the Supreme Court to decide the case. At least six justices indicated at oral argument in March that they might take this route. Doing so would allow the court to avoid making a ruling that, no matter who won the case, would be politically unpopular. But this approach won’t let the court avoid the second case, concerning federal restrictions on gay marriage. Here, the appellant is the House of Representatives, and there is significant precedent that the House may defend its laws when the President, as is the case here, has refused to do so. It’s unknown what the Court will rule, and it’s likely that the decision will be split 5-4. This magazine hopes that the Supreme Court, recognizing this Nation’s history of discrimination against gays and lesbians, will strike down what is fundamentally the kind of irrational distinction harming a disadvantaged group that the Equal Protection Clause was written to prevent.

Bond v. United States

hile it hasn’t turned as many heads or garnered as much media attention as some other cases before the Supreme Court, Bond v. United States is equally important and maybe more interesting. The facts of the case alone make it worthy of discussion; I quote directly from the lower court’s decision: “Carol Anne Bond lived outside Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. After discovering that her close friend was pregnant and that the father was Bond’s husband, Bond…subjected the woman to a campaign of harassing telephone calls and letters, and plac[ed] caustic substances on objects the woman was likely to touch, including her mailbox, car door handle, and front doorknob. Bond’s victim suffered a minor burn on her hand and contacted federal investigators, who identified Bond as the perpetrator.” To make a weird case weirder, the local prosecutor did not charge Bond with simple or aggravated assault or battery – that would have been too easy. Instead, he claimed that Bond had violated a federal statute implementing the Chemical Weapons Convention, which “forbids knowing possession or use of any chemical that “can cause death, temporary incapacitation or permanent harm to humans or animals.” Bond claimed that such a statute was beyond the delegated powers of the federal government and violated the 10th Amendment. Her case went before the Supreme Court once in 2011 on a technical matter, and the Court ruled that she could proceed with her case. (Incidentally, Ms. Bond is the first person in at least one hundred years to successfully bring the same litigation to the Supreme Court more than once.) Coming in the wake of the Court’s decision in NFIB v. Sibelius and other cases regarding the enumerated powers of Congress, Bond represents a major signal as to the Court’s approach to federalism. A decision in favor of Bond would demonstrate that at least five Justices are prepared to place real checks on the powers of the federal government, giving impetus to challenges not only in the field of treaty-law (itself significant), but also to statutes ranging from drug laws to tort reform. If Bond loses, on the other hand, defenders of a large federal government can gain confidence that the Roberts Court will continue previous jurists’ lax approach towards federalism. Either way, the consequences would be significant.

The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXII

Domestic

Fisher v. University of Texas

n another equal protection case, the Supreme Court will consider – for the second time in ten years – the constitutionality of affirmative action. Abigail Fisher, a white Texan, argues that she was denied admission to the University of Texas because the school had given preference to less-qualified African Americans and Latino applicants. The University does not contest the claim. Instead, it argues that such racial preferences are justified under the Supreme Court’s decision in 2003’s Grutter v. Bollinger, which held that a university’s interest in creating a diverse educational environment is an acceptable basis for State distinctions between persons. It also is not arguing that the government has a legitimate interest in giving preference to certain racial or ethnic groups in compensation for historic wrongs; such claims were rejected in Grutter. Fisher makes two arguments. First, she says that any university’s use of the diversity rationale as a justification for affirmative action programs requires a “firm basis in evidence” that the affirmative action is necessary to produce diversity; in other words, a university using affirmative action must demonstrate clearly that campus diversity would not exist but for the affirmative action. Various evidentiary concerns would then cut against the University of Texas, and in all likelihood such a standard would make it impossible for the University to win the case.

Second, she claims that the University of Texas’ use of race in admissions decisions must be, and is not, “narrowly tailored,” meaning that it must not be used to promote diversity only inconsistently. Fisher argues that the evidence indicates that the University’s race-based system is not narrowly tailored. Asian applicants, for example, do not receive benefits under the system, while Hispanic applicants do; both groups are about equally represented in the University community. Barring evidence to the contrary, one would assume that if “diversity” required the University to boost Hispanic enrollment, it would also require the University to boost similar rates of Asian enrollment as well. The University’s failure to consistently work towards levels of diversity it claimed were necessary would undermine its diversity claim, and Fisher would win her case. Victory for Fisher on either of her arguments would mean dramatic changes in the many university affirmative action programs modeled on that of the University of Texas. While it is unlikely that the Supreme Court will do away with affirmative action entirely, it is altogether possible that the Court’s decision will greatly narrow its scope, which in turn would greatly alter the racial composition of America’s universities. In the words of Justice Sonia Sotomayor, while Fisher might not “overturn” racial preferences in education, it could absolutely “gut” them.

The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXII

Domestic

Immigration in the United States: A Call For Reform

By Nathaniel Tillinghast

The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXII

Domestic

he United States was founded as a nation of immigrants. At any given point in American History, we can observe integrated cities, population influxes, and culture clashes. First the Native Americans crossed over the ice bridges thousands of years ago, then the Vikings, the European colonists and more; our current situation is not really anything new. But with at least 11 million illegal immigrants in America today, many fervently believe that something has to be done. Today’s politicians have attempted to respond by spending more on federal immigration enforcement than any other principal federal law enforcement agency combined, and there have been more cases about immigration referred to prosecution than anything else. Certain states such as Arizona have enacted laws designed to make illegal immigration next to impossible. For example, it allows police officers to stop and question anyone suspected of being an undocumented immigrant. Yet this flood of illegal immigrants isn’t even the main issue. An antiquated immigration system in the US makes it next to impossible for many people, even the highly skilled, to enter this country. As a result, America is forced to accept the downsides of immigration while receiving close to none of its many benefits. The current immigration system allows a nation no more than 7% of America’s immigration total for that year. Unfortunately, what this leads to inequality between potential immigrants. Those who come from countries with few trying to immigrate can quickly receive a green card, while people from countries like China, India and Mexico can face waiting lists that are decades long. It is no wonder that some try and skip the queue. Not only does this system affect potential immigrants, it is also bad for the economies of receiving nations. Legal immigrants bring with them numerous economic benefits, and we should take advantage of this fact in order to help our struggling financial system. Unfortunately, the minimal action being taken towards inclusion limits the economic benefits receiving nations gain. Firstly, there is the problem with our aging workforce. Right now the ratio of working Americans to retirees is 5:1, but by 2050 this will change to 3:1. This means fewer workers trying to support a very large population of retirees, leading to crippled economies, as shown by Japan’s stagnant economy. Immigration will add millions of new members to our workforce, which will allow us to continue supporting the retirees without overburdening citizens with taxes. Immigrants are also the driving force behind American innovation: 25% of American Nobel laureates over the past 50 years were of foreign birth. Between 1995-2005 more than 25% of US technology and engineering companies had at least one foreign owner and an impressive 50% in Silicon Valley. According to the Hamilton Project, immigrants are 30% more likely to begin businesses and also file patents at a much higher rate than natural-born citizens. In 2005, immigrant-run companies had $52 billion dollars in sales and employed 450,000 workers. The United States is falling behind the rest of the world in its pace of innovation: in 2009, US inventors filed 93,000 patents while non-U.S. inventors filed 96,000, and we are ranked 8th in innovation according to the Boston Consulting Group. America can most definitely use the fresh ideas that immigrants will bring. Another issue that could be helped through immigration is the lack of qualified employees for jobs in several fields. In 2008, the business coalition Tapping America’s Potential announced that the number of graduates in science, technology, engineering and math (STEM) would need to double by 2015, after remaining static for many years. If we started selecting people who are experienced and qualified within their field, then we would be able to meet market demand for these jobs that are vital to the American economy. There is, of course, the question of what benefits immigrants will

A History of Immigration in the United States

1825: Arrival in the United States of the first group of Norwegian immigrants. 1850-1880: First period of massive migration of Mexican immigrants across the border. 1880s : Period of beginnings of notable immigration from Italy.

1891: Establishment of the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS). 1921: First immigration quota system, limiting the number of persons allowed entry. 1945: War Brides Act 1952: Immigration and Naturalization Act 1954: Closing of Ellis Island Immigration Center 1980: The Refugee Act is enacted, largely in response to the arrival of “boat people” fleeing Vietnam

http://www.excelsior.edu

The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXII

1795: The Naturalization Act is passed, restricting U.S. citizenship to “free white persons”. 1849: The California Gold Rush turns a “trickle” of immigration of Chinese citizens into a massive demographic movement. 1870s and 1880s: Beginnings of Japanese immigration to the United States. 1882: The Chinese Exclusion Act is passed by Congress. 1892: Ellis Island opened as an immigration screening center. 1924: Creation of the U.S. Border Patrol and enactment of National Origins Act. 1948: Displaced Persons Act 1953: Refugee Relief Act

1959 :Beginnings of significant immigration of Cubans . 2003: Creation of the Department of Homeland Security. Operating within the department is the Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services (BCIS).

Domestic

A sign that reads “We are all the same” is shown by a group of assumed illegal immigrants. The proponents advocate increasing immigration for the purpose of increasing innovation within the United States and allowing for more specialized workers to come into the country. Photo: www.salon.com bring to the average American. Immigrants pay more in taxes than they get in benefits, and the Congressional Budget Office found that giving the current illegal immigrants a path to citizenship would give us a $25 billion surplus even factoring in the cost of services. In addition, economists have calculated that 90% of Americans with a high school degree have seen wage gains as a result of immigrants. Even those that don’t have a degree will see overall wage gains, according to Heidi Shierholz of the Economic Policy Institute. Additionally, a study by Madeline Zavodny, a professor of economics at Agnes Scott College, found that every 100 foreign-born workers in science or technology fields is associated with 262 additional jobs for natives. And because first-generation immigrants often perform domestic service jobs, they bring down the cost of living for the average American. Despite all these benefits, some still see immigrants as a threat to American

culture and American jobs – but this, too, is misguided. Immigrants usually follow a general pattern where the first generation will speak their native language, the second will be bilingual, the third primarily English-speaking, and the fourth will be almost, if not entirely, English speaking. Furthermore, immigrants are much less likely to wind up in prison or a mental hospital than are native-born Americans. When it comes to jobs, whether low skilled or high skilled, immigrants tend to take positions that complement rather than replace American jobs. The low-skilled immigrants end up farming and doing manual labor that Americans prefer not to do, but are nonetheless extremely vital to the prosperity of the American economy. High-skilled immigrants take positions that not enough Americans are qualified for. The few Americans who would be affected by increased immigration will have these downsides offset by more money for services and a more innovative economy. So what can we do to fix our immi-

The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXII

gration system? Establishing a path to citizenship for the immigrants already established in America will be a necessary step. We should also prioritize the applications of immigrants, preferring those who are highly skilled in their fields and increase the number and duration of the visas given to them in order to allow America to reap the benefits of a larger, more skilled workforce. Adopting digital technology will reduce bureaucratic mistakes and streamline the process of application, making it much easier and more attractive for potential immigrants to apply. Finally, we should make it easier for graduates of our universities to receive a green card, so that they will stay and work in America. After so many years of restrictive immigration policies politicians must show that the United States is serious about immigration reform and creating a more welcoming environment for immigrants. The economics are behind it, and, now more than ever, America needs to try and plan for the future.

Domestic

Bus Strikes in New York City T

he first New York City school bus strike in 34 years began on Wednesday, January 13 when Mayor Bloomberg stated that that when the city renegotiates its contracts with the bus companies, it will not include the job security measures that have made costs unbelievably high. This strike has incapacitated over half of the cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s school buses and left 113,000 children looking for new ways to get to school. Despite this, Mayor Bloomberg was justified in triggering the strike. New York City has one of the most inefficient transportation systems in the country, and reforms will need to be made to return it to its former glory. The government pays about $7,000 a year per passenger in the New York City public school busing system. This is compared to about $5,000 in Chicago, $3,200 in Los Angeles, and $1,000 in Miami. The city now spends $1.1 billion dollars a year on busing, compared to $100 million dollars spent in 1979. Mayor Bloomberg expressed there has always been a need for a new busing system and that he wished he had tackled this problem 10 years ago. In 2007, there was an attempt to make the busing routes more efficient but it had failed to do so because these routes were activated in the

By Eric Stein middle of the school year, leading to lots of confusion. The city eventually had to give up on the plan. The city has encouraged anticompetitive conditions and has kept business alliances with companies that have been implicated in bribery and crime. The simple task of transporting students to and from school has become corrupt and complex. If the city wants to lower costs spent on busing and get real competition for the public school busing routes, it must continue this strike, as painful as it is for many families. Special education students must travel long distances to school and currently it is very common for only 10 students to be put on buses that seat 60. There needs to be revisions made to the unprofessional city bus routes, which can only be done if there is legitimate competition made for the city bus routes. Seniority plays a big role in busing. When drivers are laid-off because their companies have lost city contracts to run bus routes, they are entitled to choose from openings at other companies, with the longest serving drivers having first choice. This process does not promote hard work and does not benefit the exceptional drivers and workers. Thus, there is no need for bus drivers to work arduously because

The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXII

their job is secure. In order for there to be an efficient bus transportation system, drivers must not have as much job security as they have had before. Also, companies that are just starting must pay their workers the same salaries as they are paid in established companies. Trying to compete with the leading bus companies is very burdensome because newly established companies must pay their workers the same wages as are paid in the dominant companies regardless of profit. As a consequence, there is very little competition for larger companies, which allows them to be incompetent. This is a main focus of the mayorâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s reform efforts. Many companies that are bidding for the New York City bus routes do not require the companies to hire laid-off drivers. This is a major reason why city bus routes are ineffective. This strike has caused stress for many families. In most cases, families are paying more now pay for transportation to school than what they have been paying before in order to send their kid to school. Although this strike has caused misery for many families, the city must continue to look for competition and companies that offer effective and efficient routes, and ways to save the city money.

Domestic

CITIZENS UNITED An Injurious Decision By Andrew Cogut

The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXII

“W

At the very least, the ruling causes voters to lose faith in the process. The ruling has increased voter’s bad perceptions of government.

hat did Citizens United do? In essence, it gave corporations the permission to spend unlimited amounts of money on electioneering campaigns. The harm of this is that it means that corporations have a disproportionate amount of influence in politics. The solution will be to reinstitute limits on campaign finance laws, such as the bipartisan campaign reform act. There have been many defenses to Citizens United. The foremost among them is that it protected freedom of speech. However, it is occasionally necessary to limit speech. As Justice Paul Stevens writes of the necessity of occasionally limiting speech, “When such restrictions are justified by a legitimate governmental interest, they do not necessarily raise constitutional problems.” Likewise, a person can’t shout over someone, as he or she would be drowning out their voice; this is exactly what the Citizens United ruling did. The ruling essentially enabled the drowning out of voices in two ways: it hurt labor unions and enabled the rich to drown out the voices of the poor. Labor Unions have harmed hurt by the ruling. According to The Center for Responsive Politics, “The broadest classification of political donors separates them into business, labor, or ideological interests. Whatever slice you look at, business interests dominate, when overall advantage over organized labor of about 15-to-1.” Furthermore, the AFL CIO, the largest labor union in America, has called for the overturning of the case. According to their website, “They are pouring money into our electoral system and threaten to drown out the voices of hard-working Americans.” Labor unions are essential to our election process, as they represent the interests of many lower class Americans. By allowing corporations unlimited spending, labor unions can now not have their voices heard. The ruling gives the wealthy megaphones to drown out the voices of the poor.

” Domestic

“Because of their wealth and the Supreme Court’s equation of money with speech, those mega-donors are able to amplify their voices to more than 3100 times the volume of an average small donor,” noted United States Public Interest Research Group Democracy Advocate Blair Bowie Bowie. The reason for this is simple. Katie Koch of Harvard cites fellow Harvard Law professor Lawrence Lessig, stating that only 26 of 1,000 citizens gave more than $200 in the last election cycle. Only one in 1,000 Americans contributed more than $10,000. Of all the money spent by so-called Super PACs this election cycle, 80 percent came from just 196 individuals, or just 0.0000063% of Americans. Mark C. Alexander of The NYU Law Review writes on the outcome of Citizens United :“The modern concentration of political influence in the hands of wealthy elites dilutes the power of the average voter, denying her equal participation in the electoral process.” The ruling not only allows the drowning out of voices but also brings about a corrupt government. Jill Greenfield of Harvard writes, “Lessig added that the system that has resulted is one in which elected officials must spend 30 to 50 percent of their time fundraising, and thus

political process. People might think that the opinion of someone else doesn’t matter, but there are tremendous impacts to voters perceiving a harm in the election process. According to the Brennan Center, “One in four Americans — 26% — say that they are less likely to vote because big donors to Super PACs have so much more influence over elected officials than average Americans.” Furthermore, many minorities say they are less likely to vote. The Brennan Center further delineates, “A higher number of African-American and Hispanic voters also stated that the disproportionate influence of Super PAC donors will discourage them from voting: 29% of African Americans and 34% of Hispanics said they were less likely to vote because of Super PAC influence.” The second impact of this is that it causes voters to be less informed. A report done by Fu et. Al, explains. “As individuals are integrated into politics, they develop more active information seeking habits and become less likely to distance themselves from political information. From a social capital perspective, lack of trust or cynicism would mean less networking and civic activity, hence less political involvement.”

Essential to our election process are labor unions; by allowing corporations unlimited spending, labor unions’ voices are not heard. make decisions based not on what is best for their constituents, but on what their super PACS and other major donors want to see.” At the very least, the ruling causes voters to lose faith in the process. The ruling has increased voters’ bad perceptions of government. According to a poll done by the Pew Center, 65 % of those aware of the ruling see a negative impact on the

The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXII

There are few modern Supreme rulings in which we will see such a direct impact on our daily lives as Citizens United. Although it is impossible to say for sure, the ruling will be a controversial issue for decades to come. It would certainly not be crazy to expect a re-evaluation of campaign finance law by the Supreme Court at some point. However, for the time being, the ruling clearly has a negative impact.

Domestic

After Sandy Hook By Laszlo Herwitz

s soon as the dust settled on the shootings at Sandy Hook the issue of how to prevent such tragedies in the future became the most talked about one in the country. Many believe that reforms are needed to prevent the repeat of such a horrible tragedy; however, the extent of reforms is highly contentious. While it is important to strengthen the mental health system in our country, the most efficient way to stop these massacres is to enact strict gun control reforms and legislation as soon as possible. These reforms should include a more comprehensive system of background checks, a limit on high capacity magazines, and a total ban assault rifles. The U.S. already has a system of background checks to vet people looking to purchase fire arms, but this system is full of flaws. According to FBI statistics, in 2011 alone, almost 16,500,000 people went through the NICS (National Instant Criminal background Check System) and of those

only .48%, or 79,200, were denied guns. Since there were more than 8,500 gunrelated murders in 2011 alone it is fairly obvious that, even accounting for black market firearms, people are managing to trick the system to gain guns that are then used to perpetrate a crime. No one is saying that we should stop people

Reforms should include a more comprehensive system of background checks, a limit on high capacity magazines, and a total ban on assault rifles. from buying guns all together because of the crimes of a few, however steps must be taken to ensure that fewer people who should not legally own a gun are able to manage to buy one from a legitimate retailer. The first step to take is to close the gun show loophole. This loophole allows private citizens to buy

The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXII

and sell guns at a gun show without having to first pass through the NICS. This means that people who have been denied guns at gun stores because of criminal records or other factors only need to go to a gun show in order to purchase a firearm. Congress needs to pass a bill that either prohibits unlicensed firearms dealers from selling at gun shows or that mandates checks on prospective buyers at gun shows. Secondly, a national registry of firearms must be established. This registry should be partially public and partially private. The public part should include the number of guns in each state as well as a feature that allows a private citizen to find out how many gun owners live near them according to zip code. The private part of the database, which would only be accessible to law enforcement officials, should include information such as the serial numbers of the guns and the names of their owners. This would help law enforcement trace firearms used in violent crimes back to their owners

Domestic while still maintaining the privacy and security of gun owners. The other alternative, touted as a good idea by the NRA, is to instead establish a database of the mentally ill. This however is a clear violation of virtually every antidiscriminatory law on the books and would do nothing to solve the problem. Establishing a national database of gunowners would not violate such laws because gun-owners are not a protected group of people like the mentally ill are. The next step to take in the fight to curb gun violence is to enact a ban on high-capacity magazines; the ban should cover any magazines containing more than 15 rounds. Any magazine with a greater capacity has no use other than in a prolonged firefight. They have no use in hunting as anyone who needs 30 rounds to kill a dear probably poses a greater danger to fellow hunters than to the animal he or she is trying to kill. The death toll of the recent shootings in Newton was so high partially due to the fact that the gunman did not have to stop and reload frequently, allowing him to maintain a deadly hail of bullets. Any ban on high capacity magazines should be focused on stopping the production of such magazines quickly not on destroying the oneâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s currently in the U.S. It would be unfeasible to go door to door and try to take away

such magazines from gun owners. That time would be better spent immediately halting production of high capacity magazines in the U.S. as well as freezing and destroying any already produced magazines that have not been shipped yet, gun dealers and gun stores would be allowed to sell out their inventory of magazines but could not stockpile any more. Finally, after fixing the background check system and banning high capacity magazines, a total ban on assault weapons should be put in place. First it is important to define what would be considered an assault weapon. An assault weapon is defined as a fully or semi-automatic rifle with the ability to accept a detachable magazine, a telescopic sight, or a flash suppressor. The second half of this definition, the part concerning attachments, is especially important to consider when deciding what kind of weapons should fall into the category of an assault weapon. The ability to add a flash suppressor, which is used to hide the flash of the assault rifle as well as to give its user better visibility, is the difference between a hunting rifle used for sport and an assault weapon used to kill. The only viable way to keep assault weapons legal would be to force manufacturers to create models to which such attachments cannot be added. However

The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXII

many people buy assault weapons specifically because they can accommodate those kinds of attachments for purposes of hunting or exhibition, so manufactures would probably refuse to follow such kinds of rules and the opposition they would put up would set back the entire regulation process. As a result, the best possible option is to ban all weapons that fall under the above-mentioned definition of an assault weapon In conclusion, the first three steps to take in the fight to curb gun violence are to reform the criminal background check system, ban high capacity magazines, and enact a ban on assault weapons. In actuality, both anti and pro gun Americans are not so sharply divided as it appears. According to recent polls, Most people believe that the background check system needs fixing and that some sort of restriction on high capacity magazines should be put in place. Since a ban on assault weapons is much more contentious, I believe that it would be better to ban high capacity magazines and reform the background check system first. It would not be wise for Congress to try to pass a bill with all three of these things addressed in it as the issue of banning assault weapons would probably cause the bill, depriving the U.S. and its children of desperately needed reforms.

Domestic

DEBT THE DOWNFALL OF AMERICA

By Brett Silverstein

he federal government’s spending is unsustainable. With gross government debt reaching $16.5 trillion, the national debt has increased to 110% of GDP. This amounts to $52,000 per U.S. citizen. Obviously the government can’t pay off all the debt in a single year. However, the government can and must make necessary spending cuts. The government has a spending problem. Since the height of the economy in 2007, the federal government’s receipts have decreased by almost $100 billion, while the federal government’s expenditures have increased by over a trillion dollars. While about $250 billion of the increase in government expenditures since 2007 came under President Bush, President Obama is responsible for increasing the federal budget by over $800 billon dollars. The $800 billion dollar increase in the federal budget from $2.98 trillion to $3.80 trillion represents a 27.3% increase in federal spending in just four years. As a result, 0 As a percentage of the GDP, the federal government’s expenditures have increased from 20.8% of the GDP in 2008 to 24.3% of the GDP in 2012. Coupled with a 1.6 percentage point decrease in revenue, the federal deficit has increased from 3.2% of GDP in 2008 to 8.5% in 2012 after hitting a high

under President Obama at 10.1% in 2009. The projected budgets for the next few years put us on a path toward Greece’s debt level. As previously mentioned, the deficit for fiscal year 2012 is estimated at

The U.S. will soon carry the burden of a debt-to-GDP ratio that is approaching the current debt-toGDP level of Greece. $1.327 trillion dollars. Next year’s deficit is projected at a little over $900 billion and the deficit for each of the following four years is projected to be over $600 billion, or almost $2.5 trillion over this period. For the six years combined, that is an increase in debt of over $4.7 trillion. As a result, our debt to GDP ratio would increase by almost 28 percentage points to almost 140% of the GDP. To put this in perspective, the debt as a percentage of GDP for Greece, Italy, Portugal, and Ireland is 161, 120, 107, and 105, respectively (note: IMF numbers are as of 2011). In short, the U.S. will soon carry the burden of a debt-to-GDP ratio that is ap-

The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXII

proaching the current debt-to-GDP level of Greece and that well exceeds the level carried by each of the other three countries, all four of which are wrestling with severe fiscal problems resulting from outof-control levels of debt that in turn resulted from a long history of fiscally imprudent expenditures. The immense national debt poses a threat to our nation’s economic health. The likelihood of another U.S. debt downgrade will increase as the size of our debt, in both absolute dollars and as a percentage of GDP, continues to increase. Paying off debt becomes harder and takes longer as a nation accumulates more and more debt. Thus the more debt a nation has the more likely it is that they will default on that debt. A nation’s debt rating is an estimation of how likely the nation will pay off or default on its debt obligations. When the debt rating is downgraded this almost always causes higher interest rates. This makes borrowing money even more expensive for the government, which further contributes to the growth of the debt and/or cuts into the government’s ability to fund social welfare programs, the military, and other government activities. Eventually, if the debt gets so high that there are an insufficient number of people willing to lend the government

Domestic money, the government will be forced to make drastic cuts to all sectors. In addition to addressing the debt, the government needs to address entitlement spending. The Social Security Board of Trustees report estimates that by 2033 there will only be enough money to fund three fourths of Social Security benefits. Last year’s projection had predicted that funds would last until 2036. The report maintained its projection for Medicare from last year, stating that there are sufficient funds to fund Medicare through 2024. According to Public Trustee Charles Blahous, this is the largest

ceipts, by $148 billion from 2012 through 2021… By 2035, Medicare’s net spending would be about 5 percent below what it otherwise would be—4.7 percent of GDP rather than 5.0 percent under current law.” According to Senior Fellow David C. John of the Heritage Foundation, “To keep the proportion of one’s life spent in retirement roughly the same as what it was in the 1940s, the normal retirement age needs to increase to 70 years and five months no later than 2035.” The government should also increase the early retirement age, the age at which one becomes eligible to receive minimum

for the peaks in retirements at ages 62 and 65.…” Between ages 62 and 65, more than 50% of people retire. A higher average age at which one would become eligible to receive retirement benefits would cause more people to remain in the workforce, thereby increasing the government’s tax base, and would cause people to retire having saved more money. A 2008 report by McKinsey & Company found that increasing the median retirement age from 62.1 to 64.1 by 2015 would add $13 trillion to the economy over the next 30 years. Any cuts to spending are going to

The average number of years a person receives benefits has increased from two years in 1950 to over 11 years at present as a result of the increase in life span. An increase in the normal retirement age to 68 for today’s 50-year-olds would reduce by 29% the program’s 75-year funding gap. deficit for Social Security since reforms in 1983. This is due to two trends: the movement of the baby-boomer generation into retirement and the increase in the average life-span. In 1950 the average life-span was 68.2 years while in 2002 the average life expectancy was 77.6 years. While in 1950 only about 8% of people were retired, today about 14% of people are retired. There are about 53 million retired people in the United States and two million more retire every year. Moreover, given that the eligibility age of 66 for full Social Security and Medicare benefits has remained unchanged since 1950, the average number of years a person receives benefits has increased from two years in 1950 to over 11 years at present as a result of the increase in life span. As a result, the costs of Social Security and Medicare have skyrocketed. Raising the normal retirement age, the age at which one becomes eligible to receive full retirement benefits, would bring major benefits to the long term health of Social Security and Medicare. According to estimates from Social Security’s trustees, an increase in the normal retirement age to 68 for today’s 50-yearolds would reduce by 29% the program’s 75-year funding gap. Moreover, according to the CBO, “CBO estimates that raising the Medicare eligibility age… would reduce federal Medicare outlays, net of premiums and other offsetting re-

retirement benefits. While increasing the early retirement age would not cause a large decrease in the costs of the program, as benefits for early retirees are adjusted so that their lifetime benefits are about equal to those of a person receiving normal retirement benefit, increasing the early retirement age would still benefit the economy. Economists John Rust and Christopher Phelan state that their “results suggest that Social Security creates significant disincentives to labor force participation, and is largely responsible

The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXII

hurt. However, the reality is that the United States cannot run these giant deficits and borrow money forever. With effective and smart spending cuts the government can not only decrease the budget deficit but also encourage more people to re-enter the workforce, thereby boosting the economy. The debt ceiling presents America with a choice; we can either take the path towards the even greater economic woes of Europe or we can all cut back and take a step towards long-term fiscal responsibility.

Domestic

A Win For

Women By Jacob Haberman

merican history was re-written on January 24, 2013 when Defense Secretary Leon Panetta officially announced that the United States’ Military had lifted a deep-rooted prohibition of women serving in frontline combat roles. Some politicians have proclaimed it to be a glorious victory, while others have voiced fervent reservations. Nevertheless it is time to put politics aside. This is a step in the right direction for equity, for women, and for our country. This change is recognition that women have been fighting on modern battlefields for the past decade, and that military rules should thus reveal the circumstances of modern war zones.

“Thousands of women in the military have already found themselves in combat situations,” said Senator Patty Murray, “Recent wars such as those in Iraq and Afghanistan have lacked a real front line, and women serving there have come under fire and have had to fight back alongside their male counterparts.” Furthermore, women continue to serve in a number of critical roles on and off the battlefield. “They have become an integral part of our ability to perform our mission,” says Panetta, performing jobs in official, tactical, support, logistic, and maintenance roles. The precedent has clearly already been established for women to enjoy an increase in opportunity, for they have

The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXII

shown courage, integrity, and loyalty only paralleled in their male counterparts. Some, like Senator John McCain, have expressed concern about a potential change in the American Army’s image because of the new opportunities now open to women. “As this new rule is implemented, it is critical that we maintain the same high image of the American military- the most feared and admired fighting force in the world,” McCain said to the press. The Pentagon has accordingly left itself some “wiggle room” in the application of its recent announcement. “Our purpose is to ensure the mission is carried out by the best qualified and most capable service

Domestic

“Our purpose is to ensure the mission is carried out by the best qualified and most capable service members, regardless of gender and regardless of creed and beliefs.”

members, regardless of gender and regardless of creed and beliefs,”  Panetta states. “However, the military’s standards will not be lowered. Rather, any woman serving in the military would still be held to a high standard… If members of our military can’t meet the qualifications for a job, then they should not be allowed to serve,” Panetta declared.  As an extra layer of protection, the Department of Defense has mandated that all the branches of service analyze the physical standards for newly opened combat jobs. A senior defense official said that if, after assessment, any branch finds that “a specific job or unit should not be open, they can go back to the secretary and ask for an exemption to the policy, and to furthermore designate the job or unit as closed.” Although female soldiers possess many of the same intangibles as male soldiers, few can dispute that there are fundamental differences between the male and female physiques. A former Marine infantryman, Ryan Smith, reflects on his time in Iraq, saying that it would have had a different feel if female soldiers were in his unit. “During the American-led invasion of Iraq in 2003, he wrote, his unit went more than a month without showering and then was lined up naked to be pressure-washed… It would be distracting and potentially traumatizing to be forced to be naked in front of the opposite sex, particularly when your body has been ravaged by lack of hygiene. In the reverse, it would be painful to witness a member of the opposite sex in such an uncomfortable and awkward position.” Such violations of societal norms can blatantly harm the relationships among unit members. Females additionally differ from males in their subjection to pregnancy. Major Merideth A. Bucher published research citing that “the percentage of women who are not-deployable because of pregnancy reached 16% in units with a high concentration of female soldiers.”

Pregnancy in these units has a big impact on combat readiness, as well as the experience of the pregnant soldier. These situations also question whether the 1994 DoD assignment policy (as it pertains to restrictions on the assignment of women) should be continue to be favored in place of the recent expansion in the freedoms of female soldiers. The policy states that women should not be allowed to serve in capacities “where the Service Secretary attests that the cost of providing appropriate berthing and privacy arrangements are prohibitive.” How far are we willing to go in order to preserve equity?

“It would be distracting and potentially traumatizing to be forced to be naked in front of the opposite sex, particularly when your body has been ravaged by lack of hygiene. In the reverse, it would be painful to witness a member of the opposite sex in such an uncomfortable and awkward position.” -Ryan Smith The integration of women into certain combat units might also detract from unit combat effectiveness regardless of the physical differences between men and women. Societal conditioning might make men overly protective of women on the battlefield, potentially leading them to take unnecessary risks in attempts to prevent female soldiers

The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXII

from being injured or captured. The traditional perceptions of men and women thus could play a huge role in the mindset of soldiers, and the ultimate success of units. Even though the expansion of female combat roles is still a revolutionary and apt transformation, some work still needs to be done to equate the public’s social attitude and sense of morality with that demanded by the new legislation. Men will need to be able to see women being shot and feel no more nor less responsible for that woman’s safety than for the safety of the man next to him. “They will need to be desensitized to the realities of harm befalling women,” says a writer for the Weekly Standard. Additionally, once the United States begins solidifying the new female roles in combat, other countries will likely follow our example and open an increasing number of frontline combat roles to women. Our male soldiers will need to stand face to face with enemy female soldiers, and deal with them as they would with their male counterparts. The Weekly Standard asks, “Will it fall upon parents to teach boys to stop playing gently with the girls? Will they teach their boys that girls must be treated the same — that it’s now OK to rough the girls up a bit?” Regardless, male soldiers will need to stop protecting women so that they can begin fostering a greater sense of equality between the two sexes. In light of recent events, female soldiers need to be extra professional in both their day-to-day tasks and training, and during their deployments overseas. Only if women act accordingly will the full benefits and opportunities of the recent expansion be felt. In this way, those who are fit may serve, and those who are not be excluded from the enrollment process. I believe that this will create equal opportunity for females while also maximizing combat effectiveness and the general security of the nation.

International

The Debate Over French By Mitchell Troyanovsky (In Favor)

n March 2012, mutinous soldiers in Bamako, the capital of the West African nation of Mali, rose up in a coup, overthrowing the elected government of President Amadou Toumani Touré. The soldiers were angry over the government’s mishandling of a rebellion by nomadic Tuareg rebels in the country’s vast northern desert. But shortly after the coup, the Tuareg rebels first seized much of the north and then were themselves pushed out by Islamist extremists. Since the March 2012 coup, Mali has been ruled by a series of civilian leaders. At the same time, the upheaval in the government and military had left the Malian Army unable to defend Mali’s northern desert region, which had become an enclave and training ground for radical jihadi factions, including Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb, who have imposed a brutal application of Shariah law that includes public whippings, beatings, amputations and stonings. The weak Malian army had retreated south and African nations debated how to obtain money and soldiers to recapture the territory. In January 2013, the Islamists suddenly charged southward with a force of 800 to 900 fighters in 50 to 200 vehicles, taking over a frontier town that had been the main line of government control on the border between the north and south. It seemed as if the Islamic rebels would take the rest of Mali if an outside nation didn’t intervene. On Friday January 11, the French military conducted air strikes on Islamist controlled bases in northern Mali. France soon followed up by putting boots on the ground to contain the Islamists and fight back. The French intervention in Mali was undoubtedly the prudent move at the time. Contrary to what many people believe, Operation Serval was not another Afghanistan. Mali had been pleading for almost a year for outside assistance, to contain the Islamist rebels that were controlling the northern part of their country. On top of that, public opinion in Mali about the French intervention was and still is very high. The Islamists in Mali that have ties to Al Qaeda want a completely Islamic Mali. With violence they were able to gain control of the northern part of the country and were attempting to take the rest of the country as well. Looking back a couple of months, foreign intervention seemed

imminent; the only question was when. The Islamists surprised the world by rapidly building up a formidable force and seizing Malian land with ease. At one point the Islamists were within 200 miles of Bamako the capital of Mali. This finally forced France’s hand and they intervened. There is absolutely no reason that anyone should disagree with the very prudent and sagacious move by the French. The French weren’t just looking out for their old colony, they were looking out for the thousands of French nationals that live in Mali. It is vital to the French to keep their citizens out of harms way and they understood that such a large concentration of French nationals in danger required French intervention. Another reason that the French were right to intervene in Mali is because their military initiative is working. They’ve successfully pushed back the Islamists farther and farther into the north. The Malians support the French intervention; the international community supports the French intervention, and obviously the French support the intervention. All major parties in the conflict except the rebels approve of France’s intervention. Problems arise when the French overstay their welcome. The international community doesn’t want the Mali crisis to turn into another Afghanistan. French has to tread carefully in this regard because the international community will not look favorably upon a prolonged French presence in Mali. Another reason that France’s leave must be expedited is because of the nature of the situation. Mali was a French colony that only gained independence 50 years. If France lengthens their stay in Mali, Malians and critics all over the globe will start to question what France’s real intentions are. France must quickly assist the Malian military with training and other forms of assistance. They then have to leave and allow the Malian military to handle the situation from there. Fortunately many of the African nations around Mali already have troops assisting the Malian army. Fortunately, the French defense minister has hinted in a recent interview that French troops will be out of Mali by the end of March. This is a perfect time frame because French troops won’t stay long enough to turn the Mali crisis into another Afghanistan, yet they’ll stay long enough to insure the stability of the Malian State.

The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXII

It is vital to the French to keep their citizens out of harms way, and they understood that such a large concentration of French nationals in danger required French intervention.

International

Intervention in Mali By James McCarthy (Against)

If nations continue to neglect the national autonomy endowed African nations the continent will constantly experience perpetual violence, economic stagnation, and political destabilization.

t is undoubtedly true that the population of the war torn Mali has met the recent French intervention with much fervor and joy. While such a greeting, does at its surface indicate success, it is essential that we place the long-term possibilities and risks of colonialism’s reinstitution and the dearth of national selfdependence in Central African nations in perspective. France has a long history of African imperialism, centered in West Africa and, unlike Britain (for which a commercially driven system encouraged colonial development), France annexed large amounts of infertile land and deserts with little to no practical use in order to perpetuate the notion of the “French Empire.” The prestige found in empire caused great competition between European powers, as it became a necessity in recognizing any legitimacy a nation may claim. With such a concept in place we may trace the roots of colonialism in Mali back to the Muslim conquests in Africa circa 700 AD. The Muslim Caliphate began trading with the Malians in order to acquire their natural resources (primarily gold and precious metals) in return for technology. This system of trade contributed to the influence of Muslim society and culture on the Malian people. and occasional exploitation, until the arrival of Europeans Mali’s capacity for providing slaves and luxury resources, such as gold, cotton, and salt, and with its geographical proximity to Western European trade routes, Mali became a desirable territory. Mali gained its independence from France in 1960, during which the Republic of Mali was established. Mali, along with most of Central Africa, has been locked in a millennia old struggle between Muslim “Arabized” Africans from the North and the local Bambara population. This battle has been fought most famously in Sudan, in which “Arabized” Africans supported by a ruthless militia have dominated the government. In the case of Mali, Islamic Extremists rapidly advanced from the North, conquering a number of significant towns and cities. Their goals were clear: to establish Mali as an Islamic state and to use it as a center for insurgency throughout the region. France, observing the escalating conflict, successfully intervened, saving the Malian government and routing the rebels out of the

The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXII

country. While it seems impossible to criticize such action, the use of foreign intervention in both national and regional affairs has long been a destabilizing factor in long-term political development. As previously discussed, the rise of Islamic radicalism is growing at an everfaster rate in Africa, and without a strong regional political infrastructure will remain unattended to. It is imperative the global community prioritize Northern and Central Africa in their “war on terror.” However, it must be remembered such prioritization should only consist of intergovernmental communication, as the sovereign nations of Africa must stabilize themselves through self-initiated projects rather than foreign-based interventions. Additionally, while it may appear counter-intuitive, if the Malian government engages and emerges victorious from a prolonged struggle with the Islamists, the resolve of the government will be strengthened and the goal of self-sufficiency will become a reality. There have also been many suspected nonstated objectives of the French intervention in Mali. Mali, for the past decade, has been the third largest gold producer in Africa. Foreign interests in Mali have also developed since the realization of Mali’s resource potential, with 150 foreign mining charters given between 1994-2007, and with 50 tonnes of gold produced annually, compared to the half a ton produced annually in the late 1980’s. Mali also has proven itself a vital producer of agricultural commodities such as cotton, rice, and livestock. Given Mali’s growing foreign privatized industry, it would be sensible for France to act in securing those interests. France understood that, with an anti-western government in power, trade with and foreign access to Mali’s economy would decline rapidly, with most foreign assets either being destroyed or confiscated. Therefore, the self-interested incentive of protecting one’s own industries in a foreign nation through military action would certainly qualify as neoimperialism. If nations, like France, continue to neglect the national autonomy endowed African nations the continent will never truly see its independence and will constantly experience perpetual violence, economic stagnation, and political destabilization.

International

A Fading Façade of Prominence

hile Venezuelan President Hugo Chavéz rests on a hospital bed healing from his fourth cancer operation since 2011, the people of Venezuela wait, apprehensively and fervently, for their leader’s recovery. But an unmistakable uncertainty is cutting through the heartfelt Chavismo and permeating Venezuela as the populace wonders, what will become of Venezuela in the event that their beloved Chávez grows unfit to rule? The future of Venezuela is certainly bleak. Chávez has left behind myriad economic issues: a fiscal deficit of 20%, a debt increase tenfold over the past decade, and a 26% rate of currency inflation (the highest in Latin America). Despite the economic calamity, there’s no doubt that Chávez is the people’s man; his fan base pivots around the cult of personality his regime has been crafting since his first election in 1998. His propaganda operative rallies mass support, even reverence, from Venezuelans as they declare, “We are all Chávez.” Chavismo, the anti-American “socialism for the 21st century” powering Chavéz’s political action is so deeply rooted within the people of Venezuela that the country’s floundering

Venezuela Post-Chavéz

By Caroline Kuritzkes economy seems to take a backseat. But without Chávez, there is no impassioned Chavismo to cloud over Venezuela’s economic fiasco. On December 9th, the president departed for Cuba, where he remained for over two months receiving his fourth cancer treatment. Though he was finally transferred to a military hospital in Venezuela on February 18th, Chávez has disappeared from public sight and has since remained absent from all live broadcasting and public events, including his very own inauguration on January 10th. Even when Chávez’s plane landed in Venezuela, there was no media coverage to greet him and document his return home from Cuba. Given that Venezuelans are so accustomed to viewing Chávez in the public eye, his sudden absence is felt deeply by the Venezuelan people. Whether Chávez’s Vice President Maduro or Diosdado Cabello, the President of Venezuela’s National Assembly, assumes control after Chávez’s death, neither candidate will be able to fill the void Chávez leaves behind in the public mindset. For that very reason, in an effort to maintain the national unity Chavismo preserves, the Venezuelan government has

The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXII

been trying to draw out Chávez’s rule for as long as possible. While remaining vague about Chávez’s recovery progress, government officials assure the public that Chávez “is in charge and making political deci-

Chávez has left behind myriad economic issues: a fiscal deficit of 20%, a debt increase tenfold than a decade prior, and a 26% rate of currency inflation. sions” from his hospital bed, including the naming of Elías Jaua as foreign minister and orders for a devaluation of Venezuela’s currency by 32%. Vice President Maduro maintains that though Chávez is having trouble speaking because of a tube inserted in his trachea, the leader has still been present at and participating in all political meetings, communicating through writing notes and signing off on all executive orders. These

International

http://lacpress.com

dubious claims, along with the exposure of a fake photograph of Chávez in a hospital bed that appeared in a Spanish newspaper, have launched international speculation about his actual whereabouts, as well as his regime’s motives for covering up his state of health. Members of the opposition, and even some of his own supporters, wonder if Chávez is even alive. It’s time for the Venezuelan government to stop living in Chávez’s shadow and start looking toward the future. Chávez’s absence from the public eye is an ideal opportunity for his cabinet to clean up the mess he’s created, not to trudge through it. After all, how will Venezuelans be able to move past Chávez’s memory if the state is still fastened to it? Plus, Venezuela has inherited more than just economic problems from Chávez; the country has been bestowed with 296 billion barrels of oil, and the wrong hands to manage it. Throughout the course of his presidency, Chávez has forged a precarious Bolivarian alliance with Cuba, Ecuador, Bolivia, Dominica, and Nicaragua, an agreement that stands as a replacement for the United States proposed Free Trade Area

of the Americas. But the alliance appears to be nothing more than an unequal trade relationship; Chávez has been exporting almost 100,000 barrels of oil per day to Cuba at 50% of the market value, and in return Cuba has transferred 20,000 doctors and thousands of teachers to Venezuela. It is clear that the trading partnership has practically no monetary benefit for Venezuela: Cuba is simply depleting Venezuela’s oil supply at a ludicrously subsidized cost. Still, Chávez defends the alliance through a shared political and cultural affinity with Cuba and Fidel Castro’s socialist influence framing Venezuela’s own Chavismo ideology. There are a few Venezuelans, however, who are critical of the oddly weighted trade relationship Chávez has established, fearing Castro’s sway on Venezuelan political action. Marina Corina Machado, an opposition legislator, asserted, “Never in 200 years of our history as a republic has the future of Venezuela been decided outside Venezuela…how can they talk about independence when our security and intelligence agencies, our notaries and registries…are being infiltrated by the Cuban government?”

The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXII

Cuba has become so dependent on Venezuelan oil that if the trade agreement came to a halt, the country would be forced to spend $4 billion for the amount of oil it is receiving now. Venezuela has the privilege to take advantage of such a valuable commodity, especially given its soaring deficit. If Venezuela harnessed this precious resource, instead of blindly yielding to Cuba’s draining of it, it could set high oil prices and reap profits that would slash its looming debt and quell its economic crisis. Paradoxically, Chávez has fallen short of the reputation he has spent decades trying to cultivate. “The people’s man” is ironically pandering towards Cuba’s interests, rather than safeguarding the interests of his own people. Even so, the Venezuelan populace turns a blind eye to Chávez’s abandonment of Venezuela’s economic tribulation. Still, the people idolize him, mourn his absence, and chant, “We are all Chávez.” The fact that they do so is a testimony to Chávez’s shrewd political propaganda and skill in fabricating an image he does not deserve. Now, it is up to Chávez’s administration to make Chávez worthy of his own name.

International

Egypt vs Iran: Tensions I

By Emma Brossman

ranian leader President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad recently visited Cairo, six months after a ground breaking trip by Egyptian president Morsi to Tehran. This is the first time in over three decades that an Iranian leader has visited Egypt, since their countries foreign ties ended in 1979. Before the ties were ended and when Iran was ruled by a shah, Iran and Egypt were close allies. But the two nations ended relations in 1979 when Iran’s Islamic revolution began. During the revolution Egypt even offered refuge to the deposed shah. Egypt and Iran’s ties further deteriorated after Egypt’s historic 1979 peace treaty with Israel. Tehran even named a street after an Egyptian Islamist militant who led the 1981 assassination of Egyptian president Anwar Sadat, who signed the treaty with Israel. The tensions between Egypt and Iran are exacerbated by tension between the Shi’ite and Sunni religious factions. Issues between the two Muslim communities include warnings against each other spreading their faiths around the Gulf Arab States, and meddling in each other’s affairs. Egyptian Islamist leader Morsi has been causing a lot of tensions within his own country since his election last summer, after overthrowing former Egyptian leader Hosni Mubarak during the Arab Spring. Thousands of Egyptians marched across the country in protest to denounce his and the Muslim Brotherhood’s rule. Many are worried about the upcoming parliamentary elections, since the outcome of the last elections have not lived up to the promises of the Arab Spring. Incidents of violence that have been occurring throughout Egypt, such as abduction, torture, and killings of activists, have raised concerns of excessive use of police force which during the Arab Spring was one of the main concerns and reasons for the 2011 uprisings. Also many Egyptians want the right to amend the Constitution set forth by Morsi, that was drafted by an Islamist- led panel and approved last December in a rushed referendum that only 32 percent of eligible voters took part in. The people want to amend the Constitution because it gives Morsi excessive power. Hopefully a the elections will bring a upwards turn in leadership for the Egyptian people.

Even though Ahmadinejad’s visit is a significant event, Egypt’s foreign minister has played down the visits, stating it as only regular procedure for the Summit of Islamic nations. Ahmadinejad’s visit, however, has not been without controversy in Egypt. For example, three men have been taken into custody for throwing a shoe at Ahmadinejad. In the Arab world this is considered a serious insult, because a shoe represents all of the filth and dirt touched by the shoe. Throwing a shoe at a person represents that they are no better filth and dirt. President Ahmadinejad also offered to lend money to and invest in Egypt, even though Iran is still under economic sanctions due to its nuclear program. The sanctions have caused the economy of Iran to drop and Iran’s people to protest against the nuclear program due to the effects of the sanctions. Oil revenue and the currency are both down more than 40% as a result of the sanctions. If Iran does lend money to Egypt it could further harm the Iranian economy, but would change their relationship. If their ties improve following this visit it could cause re-

The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXII

International

Rise in the Middle East percussions for the United States, and its gulf allies. Egypt would have the potential to influence allies of Iran, such as Syria, and take advantage of Iran’s economic benefits. Morsi has made the conflict in Syria his own foreign policy project, hoping that it will help establish him as a stronger leader and regional player. Last year he designed a working group of Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Turkey to aid in the ending of the Syrian civil war. Iran would also benefit from an alliance with Egypt by gaining the power to spread its influence in Egypt. Also, in the long run, Egypt may be able to help Iran cope with the international sanctions over its nuclear program. A better relationship with Egypt could allow the Sunni nation to view Iran in a positive way because it would show that Iran, a Shiite country, could have beneficial relations with a country that contains the world’s leading seat of Sunni learning, Al-Azhar. Moreover, in his attempt to woo Egypt, Ahmadinejad said his government intended to lift visa requirements for Egyptian tourists and businessman. These actions might

benefit Egypt and Iran, but will the international community allow for such alliances to come? Since Iran and Egypt’s relationship seems to be improving, many have been asking if Iran would share their nuclear technology with Egypt, but Ahmadinejad has deftly avoided this question. Iran ignored the idea that the main reason they wanted to create ties with Egypt was to beak its isolation. Egyptian representatives have been insisting that their relationship with Iran is mainly to influence Tehran to decrease its support for the embattled regime of Syrian President Bashar Assad. It is unclear at this time if the ties between Iran and Egypt will continue to improve due to the deep religious tensions of the two countries. Though it is certain that there is an opportunity for the two regional heavyweights to create a relationship due to the possible benefits for each nation. It is unclear, however, whether a closer relationship with Iran is what the Egyptian people want for the future of their country. Egypt’s recent history has shown that they are a strong nation, and the upcoming elections can help to change many of the actions taken by Morsi, and the Muslim Brotherhood. If there is a change in the government for Egypt, the current Egyptian, Iranian relationship could diminish. Which would be good news for other international powers, who are worried about these two powerhouses coming together. Also the international worry on Iran’s oil, and nuclear power continues to grow. Recently their president stated “We (Iran) plan to get to the point where we would not need to export crude oil anymore. The number of our oil refineries should double in such a case, and it would be of great benefit to our country.” Showing Iran, even though their economy has been sloping downwards ever since the sanctions were placed upon them, is planning on large-scale projects that could greatly affect oil trade all over the world. Which means they most likely will need allies such as Egypt to help support, and protect them during these projects. Overall Egypt will continue to dramatically change according to not only the Muslim Brotherhood, but the wants and needs of the nations people.

The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXII

http://www.softpedia.com/ http://www.cord.edu/

International

A Glance into the Future: How to succeed in China

By Mathew Harpe www.matthewmuller.com

o most American high school students, little is considered more academically important than the SAT. Lasting four hours, and seemingly a substantial aspect of a student’s resume, many American teenagers spend a significant amount of time studying and preparing for the daunting exam. While it is frightening to many, the SAT is nothing compared to its Chinese equivalent: the gao kao. The gao kao, which literally translates to “high test,” but is also know as the National College Entrance Examination or NCEE for short, is a multi-day exam administered to Chinese high-school students who are applying to college. Since it is the only criterion on a college application, the gao kao is of paramount importance. Colleges in China are rated in a tiered system, and your gao kao score singlehandedly dictates which tier of colleges you can enroll in and which ones specifically you will get into. Though it varies from

province to province, colleges set a range of scores that is required to be admitted, and a score in this range is all that determines enrollment. Since it holds so much importance in the college application process, parents are willing to go leaps and bounds to give their children any advantage. Schools often devote lots of time to preparing for the test, and wealthy parents often enroll their children in boarding schools whose express purpose is to prepare students for the exam. A recent New York Times article interviewed Liu Qichao, a Chinese student, who reported studying fourteen to sixteen hours everyday in the year leading up to the exam, with only a day of break every three weeks, which doesn’t seem to be to uncommon among many high school students. Furthermore, some parents even try hooking their children up to oxygen tanks or amino acid drips when studying, to increase concentration, or give their daughters contraceptives to deter

The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXII

menstruation. In addition, since the gao kao is only offered on one day every year, there is immense pressure to start preparing early and to perform well on your first try. If students receive unsatisfactory results, they are forced to continue studying for another whole year, in anticipation of the next year’s exam. Unlike the SAT, the gao kao is far more about memorization and factual-knowledge, as opposed to comprehension and logic. It covers all material from kindergarten and onwards and is so difficult that Mr. Qichao, despite studying so intensely, received a score of 432 out of 750, not even sufficient for a second tier school. Last year almost 10 million students took the exam, competing for approximately 7 million university spots. While this is an improvement over the 5.3 million spots available in 2006, the test is still extremely competitive. For students from some provinces, the acceptance rate for one of China’s top colleges, Peking University, is thirteen thousandths

International of a percent (0.013%). Additionally, the percent of exam takers who get into the top five colleges is 0.2%, a shot in the dark compared to Harvard’s generous 5.9% acceptance rate (though this is misleading as the acceptance rate to the top Chinese universities is as a percent of all gao kao applicants). The gao kao is a demonstration of the ubiquitous cultural value in China (and many other Asian countries, like South Korea and Japan) of working and studying hard. The gao kao, and the focus on working endlessly and performing well, prepares Chinese students with a relentless work ethic, and teaches them to be competitive. The rigid and strict factual nature of the gao kao, however, reveals something more about the Chinese education system and the future of the nation, for that matter. As Professor He of Tsinghua University (one of China’s very best colleges), reveals, the test trains students for “the studying and answering of tests,” while failing to teach independent learning, as well as discussion or social skills. Students are not selected because of school grades, which can often represent more than just testing skills, or because of involvement in extra-curricular activities, which can display other student interests or skills not displayed through school work, but are chosen based on their ability to cram for and take one single test. What is created, as Mr. He describes, is “the survival of the fittest, but not of the best.” What the Chinese education system really lacks, especially when compared to its American counterpart, is an emphasis on creativity and thoughtful, logical, and critical thinking. Education is one of the most important factors in developing a powerful, efficient, and world-class nation, and in China’s case it may play an even larger role than normal in shaping the country’s future. In China, your college, as well as your gao kao score, are extremely influential in what jobs are open to you. The types of jobs open to you are often very representative of what college you attended. Essentially, this one test has the ability to shape students’ futures, providing with a clear yet predetermined path that they will follow. Not only do certain fields of jobs require degrees from top colleges, but as very smart, yet poor testers, are rejected from the best universities, they fall behind

news.echinacities.com

others who are offered a superior education (something that economists like Malcolm Gladwell have demonstrated time and time again). The gao kao is not purely detrimental, as it has been made out to seem; it provides social mobility, by allowing determined students from any background to be admitted to top colleges, and is an efficient method of vetting almost 10 million students per year. Whether or not it is a bad thing for China’s education system, it can provide insight into China’s future, especially from an American perspective. The focus on rote learning, which ultimately establishes how successful someone will be in society, makes clear how innovation and entrepreneurship are being discouraged in the Chinese education system. In a recent study by Thomas Reuters, which recognized the 100 most innovative companies in the world, not a single company was from China. Furthermore, a mere 1.6% of Chinese college graduates started a business last year. China is producing millions of mathematicians and scientists with rigorous work ethics, but it is failing to produce what has proved to be the most important factor in growing economies in other nations, including the U.S.: revolu-

The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXII

tionary, and innovative entrepreneurs. So while China will certainly continue to grow, it will most likely not achieve its potential in terms of non-manufacturing domestic industry. Without its smartest dedicated to creating revolutionary new products, it will still be reliant on America for much of its manufacturing industry, and American and European products will, for the most part, continue to dominate world markets. The United States has always thrived on the principle that anyone with an idea can start a company and become successful, yet this is not yet true for China. In some ways, China’s situation can be likened to Japan. In Japan, it is considered far more prestigious to work for an established company than to start a new one, and corporate hierarchy is well established and formal. This is by no means to say that Japan has not been a successful nation, but it has thrived at engineering and efficient production, not in producing the most groundbreaking technologies. There is much speculation that China will soon rise above the United States as the world’s preeminent economic power, however, at least in terms of an entrepreneurial economy, America still holds a sizeable advantage.

International

The War on Drugs By Adam Shaw

or decades, Latin American cartels have smuggled illegal drugs such as cocaine into the United States of America. In recent years, the violence associated with and caused by these cartels has only increased, especially in areas along the Mexico–United States border. Today, with tens of thousands of lives claimed by drug violence, politicians and law enforcement officials on both sides of the border look for solutions in solving this critical issue. They hope to put an end to the trade of these harmful substances and the violence associated with them. What many of them fail to realize, though, is that if more funding were to go towards Latin American infrastructure, and stricter gun laws were adopted in the United States of America, this problem could be much more effectively solved. Since Richard Nixon declared a “war on drugs” in the early 1970s, the United States has attempted to do everything in its power to stop illegal

If more funding were to go towards Latin American infrastructure, and stricter gun laws were adopted in the United States of America, the problem of drugs could be much more effectively solved.

drugs from being brought into its’ territory by Latin American drug cartels. Drugs such as cocaine are produced in Latin American countries including Colombia and Mexico. They are smuggled across the Mexico–United States border by Mexican drug traffickers heading for

The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXII

the United States. Often in this smuggling, rival gangs engage in violence, sometimes killing innocent bystanders in either country. As the war on drugs continues, law enforcement agencies such as the American FBI and DEA, and newly formed Mexican Policía Federal Ministerial, or PFM, continue to crack down on drug traffickers. Leaders of both nations, among others in the Americas, are beginning to reconsider their positions in order to find more long-term and effective solutions in our war on drugs. In recent debates regarding drug trafficking from Latin America to the United States, many new solutions are being considered. Among them, the decriminalization of possession and distribution of small quantities of drugs such as cocaine has been suggested by many Latin American politicians. Many of them feel that if cocaine were decriminalized, prices would drop drastically, as the price would no lon-

International ger accommodate the smuggling costs. This would make selling cocaine a significantly less profitable business. The assumption would be that the cartelsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; business would no longer be economically feasible, and would collapse from a lack of revenue. At first glance, this might appear as a logical argument for decriminalization and partial legalization, yet when one truly examines this proposed solution, it is obvious that it is an unreliable one. By the same logic of this argument, one could argue that decriminalizing murder would take away employment from mob hitmen. Obviously, this would not be a viable solution to lower murder rates. Decriminalization would only lower the cost of assassination. Cheaper and more accessible, legal hitmen would only encourage more people to result to murder to solve their problems, only increasing murder rates. Similarly, if cocaine were to be decriminalized, this could only have dramatic negative effects, sending the number of cocaine users through the roof. As cocaine users are also known to be prone to violence, decriminalization could even have the potential to increase, not decrease violence, as originally intended. While decriminalization would certainly not be a viable solution to these problems, other ideas to prevent this drug trade have yet to be implemented. For example, funding infrastructure in countries where these

lions of dollars to the armed forces of Latin American countries such as Colombia, with the funding going towards combating drug cartels. If the United States were instead to direct these funds toward improving Latin American nationsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; infrastructure, a significantly more effective solution could be found. If this money were to fund public works projects, such as schools, and go toward helping small businesses, a wider range of education and employment would be

There is no single way to end this terrible issue, yet improvements in infrastructure and stricter gun control laws are the beginnings of a permanent solution and victory in our war on drugs. drugs are produced could be a realistic solution. In many Latin American nations today, poor and uneducated citizens, driven by a need to survive and feed themselves and their families, are compelled to work for cartels in the region, producing drugs for exportation to the United States. It is important to recognize that it is not their choice to work for international drug smugglers; often, they simply have no other options for employment. The United States already gives hundreds of mil-

available to these Latin American lower classes. With more available economic opportunity, these citizens would not need to depend on drugs cartels for employment, and would quit working for them. Without these workers producing their drugs, cartels would not have an economical production system for the drugs they smuggle, and as a result their business would collapse from a lack of drug producers. Another solution to this issue would be to adopt stricter regula-

The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXII

tions on firearms in the United States of America. Already a heated topic of debate in the United States due to the recent Sandy Hook School shooting, many feel stricter gun control laws in the US could have a positive impact on the war on drugs. Surprisingly enough, more than 40% of the weapons used by Mexican Drug cartels were originally purchased, and legally, in the United States of America. In 2004, the USA allowed its ban on automatic weapons to expire. Since then, Mexican drug cartels have only grown stronger due to the increased accessibility to automatic weapons in North America. Countless prominent Mexican politicians, including Felipe CalderĂłn, former president of Mexico, feel that if the United States were to increase gun control laws in the US, this would make it more difficult for Mexican cartels to acquire weapons. Ending our war on drugs is no simple task, and will not be easy. Violence between cartels continues, claiming the lives of innocent citizens. As this happens, dangerous and illegal narcotics are brought into the United States, ruining lives and destroying families. There is no single way to end this terrible issue, yet improvements in infrastructure and stricter gun control laws are the beginnings of a permanent solution and victory in our war on drugs.

International

www.nepalmountainnews.com

Life Behind Bars By Sam Stern

f a group of school children in the United States drew graffiti on a wall, what would happen? Well, kids in the US vandalize property so frequently, that the penalty, a minor fine, is rarely enforced. However, the punishment for a similar offense in Syria is much more severe. In Syria, in March of 2011, a group of fourteen children expressed their political voices through writing on a wall in the local town: â&#x20AC;&#x153;The people want the downfall of the regime.â&#x20AC;? The result of venting their beliefs was imprisonment and torture. Following the arrest of the children, a group of locals from Deraa demanded their release

through protestâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;which was interrupted by government firing. From this firing, events spiraled out of control and the Syrian Revolution began. Following the incident with the school children, the government increased the scope of its actions to end the rebellion, and the fighting reached Damascus and Aleppo by early 2012. In order to crush protesters, the government began using rockets to explode homes in rebel strongholds. Among the specific acts of terror are: executions of blindfolded men at football stadiums, firing from helicopters at demonstrators, and the killing of injured protesters in hospi-

The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXII

tals. In one grotesque incident, breathing individuals were locked inside morgue refrigerators, to their death. While the Revolution quieted down in the news, it is still rampant. Most recently, in Aleppo, 65 men were shot by loyalists to the President. The bodies were strewn down by a river that separates the eastern part of the city, controlled by the opposition, and the Western half of the city, controlled by the regime. Incidents like this, though, have been a common occurrence in Syria. As a result, many have fled the country, seeking refuge. As of now, approximately 700,000 people have fled the coun-

International try, seeking home elsewhere—181,793 have taken refuge in Jordan, 165,003 in Lebanon, 163,161 in Turkey, and many more in Iraq, Egypt, and other Middle Eastern countries. The appalling massacres of innocent people by President Bashar al-Assad’s government are clearly genocide according to the United Nations’ definition, and like any other genocide in history, will continue until a mediator steps in and defines clear goals that both parties will adhere to. However, the United Nations, has not taken the appropriate steps to stop the fighting, exemplifying its unreliability to solve major problems. If the United Nations, the United States, or another first world country does not intervene, Syria will follow the path of past nations who have wiped out a sect of their population without just cause. In this case, President Bashar al-Assad will annihilate the large percentage of the Sunni Muslims in Syria, and in doing so, will reinforce the anti-democratic principles of government that he currently enforces. There are two primary groups who are participating in what has now been two years of brutal fighting, and a considered 59,648 deaths. The first of these two groups is the regime, Syrian president, Bashar al-Assad and his military; the other is a compilation of adversaries to the president, commonly referred to as the rebels, primarily consisting of four major consortia. One, the National Coalition for Syrian Revolutionary and Opposition Forces, is led by the Sunni Muslim cleric Moaz alKhatib. The stated goals of his following are to preserve the independence of decisions, preserve geographic unity, preserve the people’s unity, emphasize the importance of a democratic state, and bring to trial those responsible for the “spilling of Syrian blood.” The National Coordination Committee, is an alternative, which encourages nations not to become involved militarily, but rather to economically and diplomatically stifle the Syrian president. This faction is made up of 13 left leaning political parties, three Kurdish parties, and numerous youth activists. The Free Syrian Army is the last of these major opposition groups. Their mission is “to work hand in hand with the people to achieve freedom and dignity, topple the regime, protect the revolution and the country’s resources and stand up to the irresponsible military machine which is protecting the regime.” And

yet, which of these four groups of “rebels” can be blamed for the battle, the bloodshed, and the deaths? None. President Bashar al Assad alone is the chief cause of the Syrian Revolution. In regard to the populaces’ cry to terminate the mass murders, Assad has rejected the allegations that his forces have committed the killings, torture, rape, and imprisonment, which is downright outrageous. Instead of an agreement or solution, Assad has a “willingness to kill” and has brutally hurt his own people, wiping out not only protesters, but innocent civilians as well. Additionally, when compared to the

The result of the Muslim Brotherhood’s gaining political control would be more catastrophic than Bashar al-Assad’s regime.

well-known Rwandan genocide of 1994, the Syrian Revolution has followed the exact same path. The Rwandan genocide occurred between two groups, the Tutsis and the Hutus. Both of these ethnic groups had always had disagreements, though they shared many of the same ideas, and are the equivalents of the Alawites (Shiities) and the Sunnis of the Syrian Revolution. If then, the president has committed brutally egregious crimes, and committed hundreds of thousands of crimes against a specific religious group, there is nothing to stop the UN from calling the crisis a genocide and taking the resulting measures including trial by a tribunal of the state or by the international penal tribunal as declared in Resolution 260 (III) of the UN. The problem that arises, though, is who should step in and how. However, with the fall of one regime comes the rise of another, and the new government likely to emerge an extremist regime, such as the Muslim brotherhood. Organizations like the brotherhood reject Western influences and enforce Jihad. Given the possibility of an extremist regime, what is better, Assad’s slaughter of the innocent or what would be posed by a new regime? How should the

The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXII

Syrian Revolution be dealt with? The result of the Muslim Brotherhood gaining political control would be more catastrophic than the current president’s regime. While the Syrian National Council from the outset appears like a legitimate opposition group fighting for the freedom from a harsh dictator, with more research, one can discover its true goals. While the organization’s mission statement is to “create an all-inclusive representative body for the nation. …to support the Syrian people’s Revolution and their struggle for freedom, dignity, and democracy,” the organization does not boast its true radical intentions. The Syrian National Council is actually funded and made up primarily of members of the Muslim Brotherhood, an organization which wishes to convert all to Islam, believes in jihad, and would torment Syrians while enforcing strict Islamic law. In addition, the brotherhood’s emergence would prove another terrorist threat to Western and non-Muslim countries. While the organization’s statement includes the creation of a council which could potentially take over the government and which “establishes standards for representing the Syrian people on the Council in a manner that reflects the diverse nature of Syria socially, ideologically, and politically, with reasonable ratios,” this statement does not mention a diverse religious nature, simply because the organization does not want diverse religious ratios. According to a geopolitical analyst on the subject, “the organization [the Muslim Brotherhood] has come to permeate every aspect of what we in the West conveniently refer to as the ‘rebels’.” If they take over, they will implement an extremist, jihadist government. A representative of the Syrian Muslim brotherhood, declared that the organization wants to “build a civil country but with an Islamic base. We are trying to raise awareness for Islam and for jihad.” Someone needs to step in, to stop the killings of the Assad regime. Yet we must remember that this will not be the end to the problems in Syria. If we step in, we must ensure that a democratic process takes place, and must ensure that a terrorist organization does not take power. If no one intervenes, there are two possible consequences—either the killing of more innocents or the implementation of a terrorist run government.

International

The Newest Haven for Terrorism:

NORTH AFRICA By Neil Ahlawat

The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXII

hink al-Qaeda is dead? Think again. Last fall, President Obama’s stump speeches often featured phrases such as al-Qaeda is “is on the path to defeat” which, looking back, is only wishful thinking. Obama was correct to a certain degree in that Al-Qaeda was on the run. However, after the controversial embassy attack in Benghazi, the recent terrorist attack in Algeria, and the militant occupation of Mali, it is time to admit what is apparent: al-Qaeda is shape shifting, not dead. Shifting location, that is, to Islamic North-Africa, including Libya, Algeria, and Mali. Not only is al-Qaeda alive and well in North Africa, they have the ability to become a much more dangerous threat. Two years ago, President Obama referred to the now 12 year “War on Terror” as the War on al-Qaeda. The disturbing paradox of Obama’s war on Al-Qaeda is that the more success it appears to achieve in hampering al-Qaeda, the more al-Qaeda continues to spread. Proving that Al-Qaeda’s brand and jihadist outfits exist abundantly in North Africa is the first step and quite evident, but the second is the question of what to do about it. Exemplifying the threat of al-Qaeda in North Africa was the attack on an Algerian gas facility, two months ago. According to Algerian Prime Minister Abdelmalek Sellal, an attack in an Amenas, Algeria gas facility left 37 foreign workers dead. The mastermind of this attack was Moktar Belmoktar, the leader of a group called the AlMulathameen Brigade (The Brigade of the Masked Ones), which is closely associated with Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (or A.Q.I.M). A.Q.I.M is an Al-Qaeda linked group which has a reach extending across the Sahel region south of the Sahara Desert; thus attracting members from Mauritania, Morocco, Niger, Senegal as well as Mali. In order to fully understand the scope of terrorism in North Africa, one must first recognize the players involved, primarily, A.Q.I.M. Before A.Q.I.M emerged, its members were a part of a brutal civil war in Algeria, resulting from tensions between political factions. Although A.Q.I.M officially formed in 2007, its roots are deep. In September 2006, the Salafist Group for Preaching and Combat (GSPC) said it had joined forces with al-Qaeda, and this alliance would later create the A.Q.I.M. At the time of this allegiance of forces, there had been much debate as to the significance of the move. Some saw it as an act of despera-

International tion, to ally with Osama Bin Laden and his group in order to attract new recruits. However, it truly was a far more worrying development. The move proved that al-Qaeda had succeeded in taking a more global approach. Ever since this allegiance, the group has succeeded in a number of terror attacks across Algeria and the region. A.Q.I.M is especially dangerous as a result of the money it makes from smuggling cigarettes, drugs, and kidnapping Westerners for ransom. The revenue generated as a result has given the militants easy access to heavy weaponry. What could be even more worrisome is the fact that A.Q.I.M is not acting alone; in 2012 the head of the US Africa Command said he believed that A.Q.I.M, Nigeria’s Boko Haram and the Somali Islamist group al-Shabaab were coordinating their efforts. Now that we have proven the existence of al-Qaeda’s brand in the region,

“As CNN terrorism analyst Paul Cruickshank puts it, ‘last month’s attack in Algeria showed that al Qaeda-linked groups now have the resources to reconnoiter and launch complex attacks against places far from their strongholds, using a network of camps and intermediaries throughout the desert.’” the question becomes, just how much of a threat is al-Qaeda in North Africa? Before the attacks in Algeria and occupation of Mali, counterterrorism experts did not see A.Q.I.M and its Islamist outfits as serious threats. With the death of numerous al-Qaeda operatives, it was conceivable to think that as al-Qaeda crumbled in the Middle East, it wouldn’t rise again. It hasn’t necessarily “risen,” rather, shifted its focus. As CNN terrorism analyst Paul Cruickshank puts it, “last month’s attack in Algeria showed that al Qaeda-linked groups

The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXII

now have the resources to reconnoiter and launch complex attacks against places far from their strongholds, using a network of camps and intermediaries throughout the desert.” In a 28-minute video that appeared on jihadist forums last month, Belmoktar (the mastermind behind the attack in Algeria) warned that the Al-Mulathameen would soon take actions against Western interests in the region. “This is a promise from us that we will fight you in the midst of your countries and we will attack your interests,” he said. While the attack in Algeria serves as a red flag, the situation in Mali is much more volatile and dangerous. The reason behind the attack in Algeria was as a result of Algerian support for France’s campaign against Malian rebel groups, some with links to al-Qaeda. Mali gained its independence from France in 1960, and the landlocked West African nation went through growing pains after gaining its independence including droughts, years of military dictatorship and rebellions. In 1992 Mali held its first democratic elections, which were a success for the most part, that is, until this past March. The roots of the rebellion in Mali can be traced back to the 2011 civil war in nearby Libya. To save his collapsing regime, Moammar Gadhafi used Tuareg mercenaries to bolster government forces. An ethnic tribe of Mali, the Tuareg has always wanted independence, and has staged a number of rebellions in the country since 1960. After Gadhafi was killed in 2011 and Libya plunged into chaos, his weapons became available and the Tuareg who fought for him seized his them, and took up arms against the Malian government. The returning mercenaries formed the backbone of the main Tuareg rebel group, and several Islamist groups with ties to A.Q.I.M fought alongside the Tuareg rebels. Essentially, the Malian army failed to stop the advance, which would ultimately trigger a coup in March, overthrowing President Amadou Toumani Toure. Months later however, ties between the Tuareg rebels and the Islamist groups broke apart, and the jihadists seized control of the northern two-thirds of the country, and imposed a strict form of Sharia law. This is where we are at today. Northern Mali is now controlled by three Islamist groups: A.Q.I.M, Ansar Dine, and Movement for Oneness and Jihad in West Africa. So, what’s the big deal? We can start with location. Mali is hardly a regional powerhouse; it lacks oil, is landlocked, and desperately poor. How-

International ever, it has nearly seven neighbors, whose long and poorly guarded borders provide militants with supply and escape routes. As far back as 2009, senior Algerian official Abdelmalek Guenaizia was quoted saying “the nexus of arms, drug and contraband smuggling in northern Mali created an enabling environment” for terrorists, who would “use any means available to finance their activities, including corruption and hostage-taking.” Guenaizia also warned that A.Q.I.M was becoming increasingly capable. They “use the best explosives, have honed their bomb-making expertise and use sophisticated means to deploy explosives against their targets,” he said. As of last spring, Mali had become the largest territory controlled by Islamic extremists in the world according to the Sen. Christopher Coons, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations subcommittee on Africa. The greatest risk of the Mali campaign is that it can serve as a recruiting center for jihadists, and represents al-Qaeda’s “last chance” for a country. Al-Qaeda wants Mali to be their next haven, similar to what Afghanistan was before this. Just few weeks ago, the AP found a nine page “manifesto” left behind by al-Qaeda militants in Mali. This manifesto sheds light upon exactly what al-Qaeda plans to do in the region- to use it as its base of operations. With threequarters of the country now controlled by terrorists, Mali is in a state of chaos. No government, no law, no enforcement, puts Mali in a completely vulnerable situation. The scariest aspect of al-Qaeda in

North Africa is the fact that these radical Islamists are now under a common umbrella, with an alliance that facilitates an exchange of personnel, technology, and financing. Just to name a few, allies such as the al-Shabab, A.Q.I.M, and Ansar Dine have explicitly and publicly voiced intent to target Westerners, and the U.S. specifically. Their collaborative attacks in the region have already demonstrated their ability to do just that. Of all Western nations, France has taken the threat especially seriously, rushing 4,000 troops into Mali this past January. However ironic this move may be, the influx of soldiers could seriously help push back al-Qaeda militants out of Mali, and can nip the situation in the bud. However, there are possible consequences to France’s intervention, as history has shown in Iraq and Afghanistan. France’s motives in Mali have not yet been revealed. Taking a closer look at the situation shows that Northern Mali offered the perfect and rather easy opportunity for a president [Francois Hollande], deemed dull and soft, to re-create his image as a leader willing and able to preserve France’s rank among the countries in the world. It really is unclear as to whether or not France sees al-Qaeda in North Africa as a serious threat, or is in Mali to pursue ulterior motives. As of now, American Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta has promised to provide intelligence and logistical support, such as airlifts for French soldiers. Soon enough, a time may come that the U.S. and NATO will have to intervene. Similar to what Chairman of the

The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXII

House Intelligence Committee Mike Rogers has said, the U.S. government needs a more aggressive and comprehensive strategy to deal with the threat to American national security interests in North Africa. The key to dealing with al-Qaeda in the region is to work with African nations to enhance counterterrorism capabilities, and help regional governments to deal with the influx of weapons acquired from Libya. The bottom line is that A.Q.I.M and al-Qaeda must be removed from Northern Mali, before it becomes the center of operations for al-Qaeda in Africa. We cannot see a situation similar to that of Iraq or Afghanistan, and it is a time to treat the situation with the urgency necessary. Al-Qaeda is alive and thriving.

“The scariest aspect of al-Qaeda in North Africa is the fact that these radical Islamists are now under a common umbrella, with an alliance that facilitates an exchange of personnel, technology, and financing. Just to name a few, allies such as the al-Shabab, A.Q.I.M, and Ansar Dine have explicitly and publicly voiced intent to target Westerners, and the U.S. specifically. Their collaborative attacks in the region have already demonstrated their ability to do just that.”

International

Spain’s Quest to Make Amends for the Inquisition BY GABRIEL BROSHY

pain recently announced the passage of a law that would grant automatic citizenship to Sephardic Jews who can trace their lineage to Spain at the time of the violent conversion, persecution, and even exile of Jews in the Spanish Inquisition in 1492. Although the citizenship may assist some Jews, many believe the law was passed for symbolic purposes as a sign of apology and reconciliation. “More than just the citizenship, history or damage is being corrected” said Tzivia Kusminsky, who works at Shavei Israel, an Israeli-based organization that helps “lost” or “hidden” Jews reconnect with and rediscover Judaism. “It’s a way of saying ‘I’m sorry,’” she said. Even Spain’s foreign minister José Manuel GaríaMargallo said it was time “to recover Spain’s lost memory.” Although a similar law existed previously, it required the potential citizens to live in Spain for two years, prove their financial resources, and renounce all other citizenships. However, this new one may not turn out to be the welcoming, apologetic notion it was intended to be. Restrictions on the granting of citizenship to the descendants of the persecuted or exiled Jews who have converted out of the religion have made the law unreasonable and unacceptable in its current form. It is surprising that Spain would encourage more people to live there with an unbelievable 26% national unemployment rate, which is higher than the unemployment rate at the peak of the Great Depression in the U.S., and one of the highest among

developed countries. Therefore, it is unsurprising Spain is regulating who receives citizenship, but the issue is the lengths that it seems people will have to go in order to obtain this citizenship. Since Spain forced Jews to convert to Christianity or be exiled during the Inquisition, many either did so completely or practiced Judaism in secrecy. These people are called anousim, which means “forced ones” in Hebrew. Since the anousim practiced their religion in secrecy, there were no strong records for them, and so proving Judaism could potentially be an issue, especially considering that this is a large part of the population that the law would influence. Furthermore, according to Isaac Querub, the president of the Federation of Jewish Communities of Spain, the law actually applies to “the Sephardic descendants [of the Jews exiled and persecuted during the Inquisition] who are members of the Jewish community.” The anousim must participate in religious training and have a formal conversion in order to qualify for the law. This means that after taking so much from their descendants for believing in and practic-

ing their religion, the Spanish government is rewarding them for either maintaining those beliefs or reverting back to them. Those that the law impacts the most must undergo long and complex processes in order to be able to take advantage of it. The purpose of the law was “to recover Spain’s lost memory” according to Garía-Margallo. How can it be recovered when its potential beneficiaries are forced to undergo a formal religious conversion in order to reap its benefits? Finding a way to remember the Inquisition and make amends for all it did is certainly a positive course of action, but as presently constructed, this law makes little sense. If Spain truly wants to apologize and make up for its actions, making those that it harmed the most bend over backward for this law is both in poor taste and completely nonsensical. If Spain doesn’t have the ability, with the current state of its economy, to create a system that allows anousim to maintain their current faith and find an efficient and sensible way to test those who are Jewish and apply for this law, it makes no sense for it to be in place at all.

Finding a way to remember the Inquisition and make amends for all it did is certainly a positive course of action, but as presently constructed, this law makes little sense.

The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXII

Features

EVERYTHING YOU NEED TO KNOW ABOUT

I N F R A S T R U C T U R E By Sam Henick

hy have an entire section dedicated to infrastructure? More importantly, what is infrastructure and why does it matter? The Merriam Webster Dictionary defines infrastructure as “1. the underlying foundation or basic framework (as of a system or organization); 2. the permanent installations required for military purposes; and 3. the system of public works of a country, state, or region; the resources (as personnel, buildings, or equipment) required for an activity.” In other words, infrastructure is the physical manifestation of a country or an abstract notion such as “nation” or “state.” Infrastructure is what terrorists seek to destroy in powerful nations (such as the US) because it is damageable by weapons and is the source of all prosperity. Buildings, roadways, sewage systems,

cyber space, etc. are largely taken for granted. Yet it is these components upon which our country is built. Without solid infrastructure, a country cannot expect to prosper and develop to its fullest potential. Similarly, the United States General Accounting Office found that, “a sound public infrastructure plays a vital role in the nation’s capacity to produce goods and services in the future. Public facilities, such as transportation systems and water supplies, are vital to meeting the immediate as well as long-term public demands for safety, health, and improved quality of life.” Infrastructure is both a long-term and short-term investment. It heightens a country’s productivity over time by increasing the wellbeing of its people and providing new tools to increase efficiency. Simultaneously, infrastructure allows governments to create jobs for the build-

The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXII

ing of these projects. President Franklin D. Roosevelt is largely remembered for his New Deal, which included many projects such as the Public Works Association, Tennessee Valley Authority, and the Civilian Conservation Corps. These large-scale projects provided employment for many Americans struggling to find work while building an infrastructure program that allowed the United States to increase its efficiency and improve the lives of its citizens. President Eisenhower also greatly changed the course of American history with his 1956 Interstate Highway System, the “great road program,” which greatly influenced where Americans chose to live, vacation and work. So why not put all of our resources towards improved infrastructure? Firstly, infrastructure investment is expensive. According to the American Society of

Features

Civil Engineers in 2009, the U.S. would have to spend $2.2 trillion dollars over the next five years to repair its infrastructure and get it into “good condition,” because “the nation’s infrastructure faces some very real problems” that could “threaten our way of life if they are not addressed.” This report also gave the United States an average grade of a D (graded in terms of—including but not limited to—aviation, dams, energy, roads, wastewater). The American Society of Civil Engineers estimates that this underinvestment will end up costing each family in the country about $10,600 between 2010 and 2020. The Global Competitiveness Report of 2012-2013—edited by Klaus Schwab of the World Economic Forum—ranked the U.S. 25th in overall infrastructure globally. According to the Economist, “Deficiencies in roads, bridges and transport systems alone cost households and businesses nearly $130 billion in

2010, mostly because of higher running costs and travel delays. The calculated underinvestment in transport infrastructure alone runs to about $94 billion a year.” Though investment in infrastructure would bring clear gains in efficiency, there is little money to spend, and all levels of government are reluctant or unable to pile up more debt. Traditional sources of funding, such as the (flat) tax on petrol, have delivered a dwindling amount of revenue as soaring prices at the pump have persuaded people to drive less. The federal government has been unable to get Congress to agree on other ways to generate new sources of funding for transport, to the point where money for new highways has almost dried up. Furthermore, experience with publicprivate partnerships (PPPs) shows that cost-benefit estimates can sometimes prove wildly optimistic. When projects go bad—leaving half-built roads and

schools—they become a larger public problem. Imagine if thousands or more dollars were poured into a project to build a new street, but the project was never finished. The unfinished road would be hazardous for drivers and useless for transportation. Plus, taxpayers would resent the fact that they paid to subsidize a failed venture. However promising the PPPs may seem, the actuality of delays and extra costs can present a problem sometimes even greater than an initial lack of infrastructure. So yes, infrastructure is good. In the long term, it can save money, improve the lives of citizens, and be a successful investment. But it comes with costs. If improperly handled, infrastructure can be an expensive, consuming public and even private burden. So, if a country is interested in improving its infrastructure, it must be prepared and flexible to make extra investments. Otherwise it shouldn’t bother at all.

According to the American Society of Civil Engineers in 2009, the U.S. would have to spend $2.2 trillion dollars over the next five years to repair its infrastructure and get it into “good condition.”

www.cybernations.wikia.com

The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXII

Features

www.lens.blogs.nytimes.com

To Feed or Not to Feed The Link Between Denuclearization and Infrastructure in North Korea By Ikaasa Suri

o feed or not to feed: the question the entire Obama administration is facing right now. The nation that threatened to bomb the United States just a short two weeks ago unfortunately still proves to be a violent threat to the entire international community. Despite its economic instability and social disorder, North Korea’s highly advanced nuclear program has aimed its target at us. While some may look at this as a blatant threat, others see it as a way to denuclearize. Spending nearly 25% of its GDP on military expenditures, North Korea is in charge of one of the most developed nuclear programs on this planet and has put the U.S. on its number one blacklist, yet we still want to provide the nation with humanitarian aid? Several diplomats, including Selig Harrison who writes for The National Interest, claim that “a long-term food aid commitment…in exchange for denuclearization concession” could potentially solve the issue at hand. What North Korea really needs, despite its fortified military and intimidating position, is support and aid for its people. The majority of the people living outside the political circle of the North Korean gov-

ernment live in poverty, without proper shelter or the basic necessities to survive. Under a totalitarian rule, most of the North Korean people are deprived of the basic rights considered fundamental by every United States Citizen. Ranging from human rights violations, to economic restrictions, to common civil bias, the social infrastructure of North Korea is in ruins. According to the United Nations, “the right to live as the common owner of one’s society” is considered a principal human right. Furthermore, each citizen must be guaranteed the basic condition to feed, clothe, house, and support his or herself. Unfortunately, North Korea’s civil infrastructure is so rudimentary that only its military and government are allowed to exercise these rights. The living conditions the Kim regime supplies for its people are so minimal that a majority of Korean citizens starve and work themselves to death. The autocratic system of North Korea extends past its political sphere and into the industrial networks of the state. The government monopolizes all means of production, restricting the amount of organizational facilities throughout the nation. On average,

The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXII

North Korea is ranked one of the lowest countries when assessing telecommunication structures, railways, roadways, and other basic means of infrastructure. For example, compared to the 6.5 million kilometers of roadways in the United States, North Korea claims 25, 554 kilometers, 97% of which are unpaved. Unlike other nations around the world, Kim Jong-Un, the supreme ruler of North Korea, would rather spend his state’s income on investing in the military and indulging government officials than providing his state and his people with improvements of elemental substructure. Compared to the $49, 601 GDP per capita in the United States, the average citizen in North Korea earns less than $2,000 annually. The problem with providing unconditional humanitarian aid, food subsidies, and medical assistance in the past has been their distribution once within the boundaries of North Korea. If the international community is like a doctor willing to provide aid, North Korea is like a patient abusing its drugs. Food relief is like medical IV’s: they provide a direct infusion into the regime’s leadership and elite, leaving out the rest of

Features

World Bank Statistics: North Korea

data.worldbank.org

In the long term the United States and the United Nations need to come up with a plan as to how to solve both issues: a lack of basic infrastructure and an extremely explosive nuclear program in North Korea. As of now, the United States is setting itself up to be in place of total control within the next couple years. Setting

“The utter corruption in the North Korean government prevents the flow of aid directly to the people in need of it.” sanctions upon the North Korean government freezes diplomatic connections, economic assets, and mismanaged humanitarian aid. Once the nation realizes these implications, the international community will be in a prime position to set its terms. The basic mission of the United Nations is to ensure the security and prosperity of all global citizens. This means disarming a non-peaceful nuclear plant and improving internal infrastructure in regions where necessary. These two matters go hand-in-hand. Forg-

ing immediate relations with North Korea’s enemies and flooding the nation with humanitarian aid are most probably not the best ways to go about diminishing the conflict; instead, a loose notion of the carrot and stick approach should be adopted, realizing two reciprocal disarmament pledges from both parties. While a U.S. trainer most definitely will not be there coaxing North Korean politicians to comply with our terms and receive its rewards, assigning operators to monitor the progress in North Korea may be the United Nation’s last option at this point. As North Korea takes steps towards denuclearization, the international community will recompense the republic with benefits ranging from physical infrastructure like the improvement of roads, bridges, and sewer systems, to economic and trade infrastructure. By opening our arms up to the nation, North Korea will eventually succumb to reciprocation. Not only does this plan ensure step-by-step progress, but it also guarantees the first step from the current rogue state. Of course, every plan has its flaws and this one obviously relies on the eventual cooperation of North Korea, something not commonly seen among the Kim Family regime. Ultimately, the doctor can only do as much as offer the prescription, whether or not the patient exchanges it for medicine is a completely different issue.

Agency base year appropriations, supplemental appropriations, and aid request data of North Korea by Fiscal Year

foreignassistance.gov

the North Korean public. Right now, aid needs to be directly transported to the people of the Democratic People’s Republic, but sadly, like any IV supply, the aid must go to one main area and then circulate throughout the rest of the body. The supply is getting caught up in the North Korean government and being denied to common citizens. Instead of spending it on structural or social improvements, Kim Jong-un distributes the money, medical supplies, and food among his military and political colleagues. The utter corruption in the North Korean government prevents the flow of aid directly to the people in need of it. Wanton mismanagement, near-perfect isolation, and a reckless lack of investment by the government all add to the people’s poverty in a ruthless nation. As citizens and members of the international community, it is our job to protect both the rights and protection of all global citizens. North Korea has had a history of violating its promises and commitments, so how can we be so sure that a “food-for-nukes” system will really work to denuclearize the Korean peninsula as well as build up North Korean infrastructure? How can the international community ensure both the security of the global populace and the North Korean people? So far the United States has chosen not to feed; due to a lack of response from the North Korean government, the United States has decided to halt all aid to the nation. As previously identified as one of the biggest providers of infrastructural aid to North Korea, the U.S.’s suspension in assistance has an intention of hurting the nation politically, socially, and economically. Previously, the United States provided food aid and energy assistance. After the chronically massive food shortages in the mid-1990s, food aid from the U.S. has been essential in filling the gap. Between 1995 and 2009, the United States also provided direct infrastructural intervention by issuing technical and energy assistance over a course of two time periods. Already North Korea is on substandard terms with the United States due to its brazen intentions to bomb one of the cultural capitals of our nation on the West Coast. Setting them off diplomatically, the North Korean state will soon be in shambles if their relief is completely cut off. Whether it is the more than twenty-four million impoverished individuals struggling to hold on to their lives or the silent treatment from the entire international body that will make the Kim Family regime aware, North Korea will soon need the assistance of the United Nations, Non-Governmental Organizations, and individual countries to get its people and government back on their feet. Regardless of their indifference towards their citizens, the North Korean regime needs its people for the nation to exist, let alone prosper.

The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXII

Features

Development Infrastructure And the Role of Foreign Aid By Jenna Berancik

he creation of infrastructure in developing nations is key in spurring the growth of their economies and, subsequently, improving the standard of living for ordinary citizens. However, less-developed nations often lack domestic sources of private investment as well as attractive prospects for foreigners to invest in infrastructure. As a result, developing countries in Africa, Asia, Latin America, and throughout the world depend upon foreign aid to meet their infrastructural needs. While developmental aid of this nature is absolutely necessary in establishing infrastructure, longstanding flaws pervade current systems of distributing aid. The influence of corrupt governments, developing nation’s inability to achieve self-sufficiency, and the common failure to significantly affect the standards of living in afore-

mentioned countries are only some of the many issues the systems face. While some would end foreign aid because of its alleged ineffectiveness, such a radical response would only set developing nations back in their infrastructure-related endeavors. Therefore, the international community should look for innovative solutions when confronting the challenges of creating infrastructure worldwide. “Infrastructure” is a broad term. According to Merriam-Webster, it means “the underlying foundation or basic framework (as of a system or organization).” This can refer to anything from roads to libraries, to bridges and sewer systems. In developing nations, a lack of basic infrastructure such as transport systems, energy, clean water, sanitation, and communication services most greatly limits economic

growth. For example, inaccessibility to means of transport would hinder domestic and foreign enterprises looking to sell their products throughout a developing country. Large-scale examples such as this not only prevent domestic businesses from growing, but discourage foreign investors by making it impossible or far too expensive to operate within a given country. However, issues that affect individuals such as no access to clean water hurt the economy as well. Individuals suffering from diseases related to contaminated water are unable to work and thereby unable to contribute to the GDP, but are also unable to act as consumers who promote domestic business and foreign direct investments (FDIs). Evidently, developing nations require infrastructure in order to grow and someday prosper. But how can foreign aid

U.S. Foreign Aid Since 1977 (billions)

www.nytimes.com

The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXII

http://www.nist.gov/

Features

help satisfy this need in the most efficient way possible? Historically, corrupt government officials in both donor countries and the receiving nations have played roles in severing the link between supplying funds and actually improving ordinary people’s standards of living. Economist Peter Bauer once criticized foreign aid as “an excellent method for transferring money from poor people in rich countries to rich people in poor countries,” as developed nations gave foreign aid to support certain leaders in nations of unrest without providing any tangible benefits for the impoverished people. Even today, United Nations bodies and nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) worry that corrupt governments will steal the aid they send. This kind of corruption is prevalent in sub-Saharan African countries like Zimbabwe, as well as in Iraq and Afghanistan, where funds passed through the government sometimes mysteriously disappear. However, stopping the aid towards infrastructure would be an unnecessary measure, as methods of bypassing governments when supplying aid exist today. Organizations can operate on the local level, directly working in towns and villages to build infrastructure without ever passing money through the governments’ hands. This could involve building schools, thereby working towards ensuring economic prosperity for future generations. It could involve digging wells, thereby mitigating the effects of inadequate or wholly absent sanitation systems. UN organizations and NGOs could also offer microloans to local, infrastructure-focused entrepreneurs. The added infrastructure would create a more nurturing environment for economic growth. Also, by enabling citizens to build infrastructure themselves, the process of creating said infrastructure would provide income for entrepreneurs and workers. Fur-

“Developed nations should diversify their efforts in underdeveloped countries, helping to grow all sectors of the economy.” thermore, citizens would be able to maintain the infrastructure without foreign aid having built it themselves, allowing developing nations to eventually become self-sufficient. Oxfam International, an NGO, has made efforts to help communities attain financial self-sufficiency through programs such as “Saving for Change,” where Oxfam teaches local communities to pool their own savings together and use the funds to give loans to members of the community. Not only does this promote domestic business and homegrown infrastructure, but it also reduces the dependency on foreign aid and the symptoms of Dutch Disease. In all sectors of a nation’s economy (not only in infrastructure), foreign assistance can have negative effects. Sometimes in the case of commodities, foreign goods such as food or mosquito nets given to developing nations are sold at more competitive rates. This can subsequently lessen the demand for domestically produced goods. While this issue commonly associated with foreign assistance and FDIs does not have a major impact on infrastructure, foreign aid and investment in infrastructure contribute to Dutch Disease, which is less widely acknowledged in this context. Dutch Disease often occurs when a nation sees a boom in a new corner of its exports, such as when natural resources are discovered. However, it more generally refers to the rapid appreciation of a country’s currency, which can also be caused by the influx of new wealth from development aid and FDIs. Dutch Disease affects a nation negatively when the appreciation of a country’s currency makes some of its exports less competi-

The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXII

tive in the global market, because all prices of domestic goods have risen. Like with other issues surrounding foreign aid, Dutch Disease is not a reason to abandon international effort to improve infrastructure in developing nations. Three simple ways exist to counteract Dutch Disease are avoidance, mitigation, and growth. We can avoid Dutch Disease by managing how we give foreign aid. Rather than handing a large sum of money to a government to be spent all at once, we can microfinance startups whose growth would gradually add wealth to the national economy. The governments of receiving nations should take measures to mitigate the symptoms of Dutch Disease. Christine Ebrahimzadeh of the International Monetary Fund suggested policymakers artificially keep the foreign exchange rate lower, essentially slowing the appreciation of the currency. In the past, western nations have accused China of “cheating” by artificially keeping the foreign exchange rate of its currency lower. However, developing nations should employ this method much more sparingly than China as to avoid inflation and should abandon the method after achieving steady, long-term growth. This brings us to the final step: growth. While a sudden influx of wealth in a nation may appear to be a sign of general progress, we must stay aware that the growth may only reflect the prosperity of one corner of the economy. For this reason, developed nations should diversify their efforts in underdeveloped countries, helping to grow all sectors of the economy. Infrastructure is an ideal place to start, as industry and the expansion of human capital depend upon it.

Features

http://fc04.deviantart.net/

CYBER-INFRASTRUC By Adam Resheff

veryday, U.S. infrastructure and commerce continue to become more technologically integrated and dependent. The threat of cyber attacks from ever more sophisticated foreign and extreme hackers continues to increase. Going forward, the U.S will need to invest in its cyber infrastructure and defense in order to prevent a cyber attack that could cripple our economy, infringe on our daily lives, and potentially cost us lives. In October of last year, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta emphasized the urgency for the US needs to improve its cyber defense. He said the U.S. could face a “cyberPearl Harbor,” as the threat from foreign hackers and antagonistic foreign nations becomes imminent. Panetta indicated that the power grid, financial markets, transportation systems, and the government were all at risk of a cyber attack. The New York Times reported that in January, as a result of Panetta’s warning, the Pentagon announced that it would bolster the Defense Department’s Cyber Command with 4000 new cyber defense operatives, up from the current 900. The urgency seen in the Pentagon has also spilled over to the White House. According to Bloomberg.com, the White House issued an executive order in February asking companies responsible for operating infrastructure, as well as financial

companies, to meet certain cyber security standards to help prevent future attacks. Despite the resolve of both the White House and the Defense Department to address the issue of cybersecurity, progress on the issue has been limited. President Obama can do no more than ask companies to meet these standards voluntarily, and the Pentagon can only devote so much of its resources to cybersecurity. Congress needs to be the one to support legislation to improve our cyber defenses. However, bills that tackle this pressing issue have not been able to pass through the House or the Senate. Bipartisan legislation to require companies to meet these standards, in addition to increasing spending on our cyber infrastructure, has been blocked in Congress twice. Opponents of the bills, in this case mainly Republicans, cited the financial burden placed on companies to meet the standards asked of them. They also allude to the hypothetical nature of an attack that would actually halt commerce or destroy a sector of US infrastructure, such as our power grids. In breaking down these arguments, any cost associated with revamping cybersecurity is outweighed by the current costs of leaving our computer systems vulnerable and the economic turmoil that could result from a major attack on a financial

The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXII

institution. In looking at the threat to US companies, we’ve already seen multiple US banks come under cyber attack from foreign hackers. Such examples include Bank of America, JPMorgan Chase, Wells Fargo, and PNC, all of which saw their customers denied access to their websites or their websites taken completely offline. According to ABC News, the US Chamber of Commerce, which views the standards as a form of regulation that will hinder business and not work to actually prevent attacks, was itself hacked into and spied. The report goes on to say how hackers connected to the Chinese military hacked into the Chamber of Commerce and conducted economic espionage, stealing information about our trading policies. Economic espionage costs the US $250 billion annually. The Chamber of Commerce’s taking a lax stance on security when an attack on their own systems has contributed to this economic burden is completely irresponsible and only stands to harm our economy. Furthermore, as opponents continue to argue that a major attack on a US company is hypothetical and out of reach, companies have come under fire. One of the largest companies in the world, Armaco, a Saudi Arabian oil company, had 30,000 of its computers shut down in an attack, effectively stopping all operations for the company. With a cyber attack on a

Features

CTURE major company being a definite possibility, security expert David Bodenheimer claims that Congress has to start viewing cybersecurity as a real economic threat. An attack on the financial system he says, could cause a major disruption of our lives and inflict up $700 billion in economic damage. In examining physical infrastructure, companies handling tasks such as providing water, electricity, and oil must become more compliant to cyber security regulations; otherwise, we risk putting lives at risk. 40% of cyber attacks last year were directed against the energy sector, particularly against the control systems of key infrastructures. In the oil business, companies that transport oil through pipelines typically rely on only one software called Scada, which has been cited to have holes in its security. According to environmental columnist Dylan Walsh, foreign hackers can easily break into the Scada software and send false reports about pipeline pressure or increase gas flow, which would cause spills, fires, and explosions. The TSA is in charge of overseeing pipeline safety, but there are not enough regulators to oversee the operations. The proportion of regulators to pipelines is 13 workers to 1.5 million miles of pipelines, leaving the system unattended and vulnerable. Furthermore, many of these companies

handling infrastructure do not upgrade security because they feel their locations are obscure and their systems are remote from the Internet, according to the Washington Post. Researchers have found that six in seven control systems have flaws in them that allow hackers to get around security measures put in place, as some companies, such as GE, have control operating software from the late 1990s. In a study by a security firm called Digital Bond, where they tested the cyber security of control systems of key infrastructure, researcher K. Reid Wightman said, “Most of the guys were able to hack their controllers in a single day. It’s just too easy. If we can do it, imagine what a well-funded foreign power could do.” The article continues that the problem is that many of the systems are connected to the Internet without the operators realizing it, thereby giving hackers access to the machines. Researchers at UC Berkeley found that a nuclear particle accelerator could be accessed with virtually no security measures in place; a foreign hacker used tools available to anyone on the Internet and took control of a Texas water utility plant in 10 minutes. In 2007, the Department of Homeland Security demonstrated the vulnerability of many control systems, as engineers at the Idaho National laboratory hacked into a backup generator of a manu-

The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXII

facturing factory, and by short-circuiting the breakers, caused the machine to tear itself to pieces. With the computer software that controls the machinery and operating systems almost universal in all of our key infrastructures, not investing in manpower and better technology leaves us susceptible to foreign hackers and attacks. Technology is now relied upon in all wakes of life, especially in the areas that ensure our well-being. Not acting to prevent cyber attacks now will be catastrophic. Just like a virus, hackers evolve, becoming more potent and harder to stop. With a weak cyber infrastructure, we’re only making ourselves more vulnerable with every passing day, putting our economy and our livelihoods at risk. We need Congress to act to strengthen our cyber infrastructure against pending attacks, investing in hiring more cyber defense operatives, allocating funds to improve existing cyber defense training, and working with schools and programs to shift a focus to this area of study and better prepare their students for this work. Congress also has to require companies to meet basic cyber security requirements, especially the ones that operate key physical infrastructure and pathways for the movement of our wealth. Congress needs to act now to bolster our cyber infrastructure; if that’s not apparent today, it will be tomorrow.

Features

NATI NAL INRASTRUCTURE BANK By Elizabeth Xiong

stacksbowers.com www.newspinvideoproductions.co.uk

The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXII

Features

idely overlooked, infrastructure is a “key reason America became a superpower,” announces Building America’s Future, a bipartisan coalition, but our current crumbling infrastructure is now hurting American productivity. 145,000 out of 605,000 bridges, one-third of the roads, and 4,000 dams in America are in need of repair as of a 2011 report from the Center of American Progress, currently one of the most influential public policy think tanks. The report also reveals that 36 percent of our highways are congested, and electricity disruptions cost the economy $100 billion in damages annually. Locks and dams along inland waterways transport a sixth of U.S. freight but are over a century old and their frequent breakdowns are indicative of that, writes Paul Davidson for USA Today. We are currently averaging a D in infrastructure, says the American Society of Civil Engineers, due to “delayed maintenance and chronic underfunding” in almost every area of our infrastructure. The American economy also remains lackluster and is in need of jobs. The unemployment rate for the country is 7.8 percent, while 16.1 percent of the labor force, a statistic that has been rising for four months now, is unemployed this January, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. More than twice the percentage points of the unemployment rate, the high unemployment rate in the labor industry suggests a strong need for construction jobs in the country. A National Infrastructure Bank (NIB), a federal lending authority on infrastructure, would be powerful method of solving these problems that rack the country. Proposed by Senator Christopher J. Dodd and Senator Chuck Hagel and endorsed by Obama, the NIB is spending proposal with several Republican supporters and is based on a past bipartisan bill. Both the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and AFLCIO, the largest trade union, back the bill as well. The NIB would spend as much as $50 billion in private investment on longterm improvements in the country’s infrastructure. The bank would be have analysts evaluate infrastructure proposals, considering cost-benefit analyses, the regional or the national significance, and its capacity to reduce greenhouse emissions. The NIB would then loan or give a grant to projects that were deemed acceptable, allocating the capitol to the most beneficial projects.

John Kerry, one of the primary advocates for the NIB says it would “strengthen our competitiveness, be good for businesses, and help lower our staggering unemployment rate.” In 2009, 4.8 billion hours and 3.9 billion gallons of gas were lost in congestion, costing $115 billion in lost fuel and productivity, write Ryan McConaghy and Jim Kessler for Third Way Economic Program, a centrist public policy think tank. They also report that every year freight trucks lose an estimated $8 billion in highway bottlenecks every year, and power disruptions from an overloaded electrical grid cost between $25 and $180 billion. Deficiencies in our infrastructure sap our wealth and waste resources that could be used elsewhere. Delays in freight movement impose real costs on businesses that reduce productivity, impede our competitiveness, and increase prices for consumers. As the economy expands, cargo loads will only increase, and the infrastructure will become increasingly inept at supporting transportation. The NIB could counteract this future by using a mixture of private and public investment to finance more infrastructure projects, including maintenance and repair of existing systems. Projects are judged by benefit to the taxpayers—through increasing efficiency by widening highways or making revenue with toll roads. The NIB will most likely have a focus on surface infrastructure: advancing roads and highways and mass transit. The Department of Transportation lists specific goals such as improving road and rail access to a West Coast port in the Midwest or replacing the current inefficient and overly complex air traffic system with the modern Next Generation Air Transportation System. Kerry notes that the NIB will have a focus on working on “energy, water, roads and rail development.” American infrastructure is severely lacking compared to those of other countries. In a survey by World Economic Forum, America ranked 24th in overall infrastructure quality. While the American government spends 2.4 percent of its GDP on infrastructure, China spends 9 percent, with a slated $9 trillion in infrastructure for the next decade, and Europe spends 5 percent, according to the Department of Treasury. Our weak infrastructure system, resulting from a lack of support towards it, is harming global competitiveness.

The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXII

NIB would start with a relatively small sum of federal funds ($1 billion) for infrastructure projects, but would use it to spur the private sector and local governments into performing most of the heavy lifting, investing from $500 billion to $600 billion. By offering loan guarantees to induce larger private investments or issuing debt instruments and securities, the NIB increases investor confidence and could tap these vast pools of private capital to generate investments much larger than its initial capitalization. The NIB would also be poised to help taxpayers take full advantage of historically low borrowing costs. And in the long run, it would actually save more than it spends, simply by spending at all. Studies have found that spending $5 million on preventive maintenance can save $100 million to $500 million in rehabilitation and reconstruction costs. Kerry says the NIB would actually become “self-sufficient” over time by choosing infrastructure projects with “dedicated revenue streams” to “repay loans.” The NIB’s investment in infrastructure would be a surefire way to create jobs and boost the economy. It has been projected that every $1 billion in highway investment creates 30,000 jobs, and that every dollar invested in infrastructure increases GDP by $1.59. The Department of Treasury reports that the average American family spends more than 30 percent on transportation than food, and 90 percent of the jobs creating by NIB spending would be middleclass jobs. Improving efficiency in transportation, the NIB would keep logistics costs low for businesses and increase economic productivity. Improvements in the U.S. transportation and supply chain infrastructure are critical to enabling exporters to get their goods to ports quickly and inexpensively. Maintaining a globally competitive, user focused U.S. supply chain infrastructure crucial to sustained American economic growth. The NIB could accelerate the transition to a low-carbon economy by investing in green infrastructure. In the short term, the NIB would quickly improve the economy with a surge of jobs and provide incentive for private investment. In the long term, infrastructure investments supported by the NIB will allow the U.S. to meet future demand, reduce the waste currently built into the system, and keep pace with competition from global rivals.

Features

The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXII

Features

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/

he scene was horrific, smoke billowing out of a closed building while hundreds of club-goers, most of them students, desperately tried to escape the heat and flames. As the lucky survivors emerged, the death toll of those still trapped inside grew. When the flames were extinguished, the shocking truth was revealed: a Brazilian country band’s pyrotechnics had ignited the interior of the building. As the attendees rushed to the exits, the doors had been blocked by the club’s employees and the sole fire extinguisher failed to function. What could have been done to prevent a fire killing 233 people and, more importantly, why weren’t there enforceable rules in place to ensure that venues like this one were safe for large gatherings, rather than just giant firetraps? The answer lies in the word “infrastructure.” Infrastructure doesn’t only refer to bridges, tunnels and highways; it can mean many more things like airports, online security (cyber infrastructure) and in this example, fire laws and regulations and emergency preparedness. The possibility of economic growth and improvement has always been the main incentive for spending money improving infrastructure in underdeveloped nations. Now, however, due to the devastating fire in the Kiss nightclub in Santa Maria, Brazil, there is a new argument: infrastructure must be improved in order to save lives and to prevent recurring disasters like this one. Infrastructure is crucial to any country, its operation, and its success. Countries with more advanced, modern infrastructures tend to be the ones that have growing economies and generally good standards of living. If you look at the majority of the struggling, poverty-stricken third world nations, their infrastructures are never in good condition, and this often restricts major economic growth. While sub-par infrastructure is not often the leading cause for a country’s poor economic and social state, it is certainly a necessity for that country’s improvement. The absence of strong infrastructure is accountable for the lack of success in Latin America, specifically Central America and certain poor countries in South America. Infrastructure is directly related to a country’s economy. Take the example of a clothing manufacturer who wants to do business or build a factory in Central

America. More likely than not, he will decide that due to poor infrastructure, it is too difficult to run this factory and so will choose to go look elsewhere. As a result of bad roads, difficulties in getting to to airports or shipping ports, or a general lack of supplies available, the country will lose out on thousands of jobs and a huge sum of money all because this one factory was built somewhere else. In order to fix this, governments must invest vast amounts of money in improving the country’s infrastructure, and while many of them do not necessarily have that money readily available, small changes can make big differences. Money spent on fixing roads and bridges, and the improvement

Infrastructure is crucial to any country’s success; countries with more modern infrastructure tend to be the ones that have growing economies and generally good standards of living. of safety regulations would undoubtedly help the economy. The economy of a third world country could start to rapidly improve because of the construction of one successful factory. This would start a domino effect that would eventually lead to more money coming into the country, more jobs created and ultimately more capital to further improve infrastructure. Most governments should see how investing even a small amount of money in infrastructure can pay off and benefit the individual citizens as well as the country. However, as David Gonzalez of the New York Times wrote regarding this problem, “Every decade there is a lack of continuity and investment in public infrastructure,” and any progress that is made becomes meaningless. There is currently

a lack of overall commitment to improvement in Latin America, but countries must work harder to remain on task by first acquiring necessary funds and then using them to create public works projects. As described before, on January 27th, in Santa Maria, Brazil a nightclub fire left hundreds dead and was an international focus for weeks. Infrastructural issues led to a tremendous amount of damage caused and over two hundred lives lost. Some of the problems included a lack of fire-regulations, infrequent inspections, and faulty evacuation plans. When these issues are all combined, there is no way to evade dire consequences. According to USA Today, one issue was that the club’s fire extinguishers failed to work in early attempts to battle the fire. In the article it states, “Marcelo Arigony, the lead police investigator in the case, said Tuesday that it was clear the fire extinguishers had not been inspected and that they were clearly cheap models that should not be used anywhere.” Another problem was that there was only one fire exit, which was surprisingly allowed under local laws. “Jaime Moncada, a U.S.-based fire-safety consultant with nearly three decades of experience in Latin America including large projects in Brazil, said he was not surprised that one exit was permissible under local law,” USA Today also reported. In a first world country, the fire would have likely started for the same reason, but there would have been more than one exit, there would have been working fire extinguishers, proper protocol would have been in order, and less people would have been killed. For third world countries (which are in abundance in Latin America) these proponents must be put in place and perhaps stricter laws should be proposed, restricting use of pyrotechnics and other dangerous entertainment practices. While some people unfortunately continue to believe a a nation’s economic status trumps the importance of individual safety a tragedy like this should tell Latin American governments that changes and improvements regarding infrastructure must be made. Not only will infrastructural improvements help the economy, but in the end, disasters could be prevented and political leaders must know that the safety of their citizens is at stake.

http://weaponsman.com/

The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXII

45 45

Features

Middle East

A Look at How

Infrastructure and PPPs Can Ensure Prosperity By Anna Kuritzkes and Daniel Rosenblatt

n the Middle East, there is a large gap regarding infrastructure. Wealthy nations enjoy established infrastructural foundations such as national road systems, public transportation, and telecommunications systems as well as constant development, while poorer regions lack both the basis and funds for infrastructure. According to World Bank research, the Middle East as a whole has had the least private participation in infrastructural development in the world over the past thirty years. Today, Middle Eastern projects only make up 3% of the world’s private infrastructural projects. In addition, a World Bank report estimated that $100 billion must to be spent annually on Middle Eastern infrastructure in order to make any significant impact. Nations with high GDP’s such as Saudi Arabia, the

United Arab Emirates, and Qatar have no need to be concerned with this form of infrastructural projects as they have the funds and structure to develop further; however, impoverished and unsettled nations, such as Yemen and Iraq, have not been able to put these plans in place for a variety of reasons. It is essential for the economic future of the Middle East that PPPs are created. A public-private partnership (PPP) is a formalized system of cooperation between a government and a private corporation, often for the purpose of creating large infrastructural projects. This collaboration can be beneficial for nations that lack funds for large-scale projects, and it can be beneficial for the investing corporations, as well because these investments yield great returns. While the specifics

The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXII

of PPP contracts vary, properly executed projects have proved economically valuable to the investing company and the government and helpful to the people of the area. Oil rich countries including Saudi Arabia and Qatar have developed and advanced infrastructure programs, as the governments of these nations invest in their country’s infrastructure. Besides the advantage of government funding, the prosperous nations have a stronger relationship with the private sector, allowing these nations to use PPP investments in the past. While the Middle Eastern countries have historically not used PPPs, the PPPs that have been created have augmented these countries’ infrastructure successfully. The PPPs augment these countries’ infrastructure programs, expanding the

Features

http://media.salon.com/

programs in a way governmental funding alone cannot. Wealthy countries have previously developed relationships with Western countries as well as companies in the petroleum industry. The private sector is not as foreign to them as it is to impoverished nations; this is a key advantage in infrastructure development. It is important, however, that weaker states, such as Yemen and Egypt, change their approach to infrastructure reform. Economic and cultural barriers must be eliminated, and a focus on public-private

investments should arise. The politics, uprisings, and cultural clashes aside, the Middle East needs to rebuild, and they need to start with the basics: infrastructure. Infrastructure development is one of the key factors in determining the success of a nation or region for two reasons. First, a strong infrastructure can aid other sectors of the economy, especially the manufacturing and agricultural industries. Second, infrastructure can improve lives through increase and expansion of many services such as sanitation, health, and education, existing in the forms of roads and transport, energy, communications, water and sanitation, and urban development. Saudi Arabia has an extremely well developed telecommunication system. According to data collected by the United States government and published in the CIA World Factbook, the country’s system uses extensive microwave radio relays, coaxial cables and fiber-optic cables, all advanced components of the modern telecommunication system. Saudi Arabia also has an advanced pipeline system, as pipelines are necessary to transport petroleum, which is the country’s leading export. Past successes within the infrastructure of Saudi Arabia are partially due to the government’s participation in a few PPPs. An expansion project for the Prince Mohammed Bin Abdulaziz International Airport in Medina, Saudi Arabia, managed by the IFC, was funded by a publicprivate investment between TIBAH (an association of firms from Turkey and Saudi Arabia) and the Saudi government. The project is expected to expand the airport’s annual passenger capacity from 5 million to 8 million by 2015. Bank of America Merrill Lynch reports that the infrastructure and construction sub-sectors in Saudi Arabia has grown exponentially, with a 177% growth rate from 2011 to 2012. Saudi Arabia is expected to continue leading the infrastructure development of the Middle East. Conversely, struggling countries such as Yemen and Iraq lack the funds to put towards large, advanced infrastructure

A Public-Private Partnership (PPP): Broadly, a PPP refers to arrangements, typically medium to long term, between the public and private sectors whereby part of the services or works that fall under the responsibilities of the public sector are provided by the private sector, with clear agreement on shared objectives for delivery of public infrastructure and/ or public services. http://ppp.worldbank.org/

projects. Political instability and lack of experience with the private sector prevent these nations from initiating PPPs. As Yemen is the poorest country in the Middle East, poverty discourages potential investors from funding projects. The country also faces the challenge of water scarcity; because few of the people living in Yemen can afford to have water pumped to their homes, public fountains remain the main source of water within the country. This means that women and children spend large portions of their day lugging water jugs to and from their community’s fountain. Yemen would benefit substantially from a sophisticated water drilling and irrigation system, but the country does not have the means to take on such a project. If a private company agreed to provide funds for a Yemeni infrastructure project, a PPP could be a realistic solution to this problem. In the past, Yemen has had some experience with international organizations. For example, the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) has financed agricultural projects for Yemen in an effort to develop the industry within the country and helped improve Yemen’s infrastructure, though this investment is probably more comparable to a donation rather than a publicprivate investment. Yemen still lacks a developed relationship with the private

“It is essential for the economic future of the Middle East that PPPs are created.” The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXII

Features

http://www.emeraldinsight.com/

“Instead of forming a bilateral relationship, many private organizations worked with different parts of the government to ensure specific risks were placed upon the organization that could handle each aspect of the project properly.”

http://www.utilities-me.com/ Yemen is looking to upgrade its power and overall infrastructure

sector, a relationship which would help the country’s infrastructure expand. PPPs with organizations such as TIBAH could investigate such an investment in Yemen’s infrastructure. Investments within the Yemeni infrastructure such as creating a mass irrigation system would lead to profits because the country has no competing systems. Like Yemen, Iraq is a poor and underdeveloped Middle Eastern nation in need of infrastructure reform. The wars that Iraq has been involved in over the last 25 years have devastated the country’s infrastructure. Prior to the Gulf War, Iraq’s infrastructure was one of the most

developed in the region. The 2003 Iraq war only caused further damage to the country. Iraq’s main infrastructural weakness is the country’s under-developed electric system. Baghdad, the Iraqi capital, suffers from frequent power outages, usually due to heat. The war in 2003 interfered with the telecommunication system, causing a major disruption for the Iraqis in regards to national and international communication. Iraq has been receiving help from the United States and US organizations including USAID (Unites States Agency for International Development) because of the countries’ intertwined past, but there is still a lot that needs to be built. Political unrest within Iraq is a substantial problem for potential investors to be weary about funding any Iraqi infrastructure projects; however, these projects will stimulate cooperation within the government and can be carried out successfully if the participants remain cautious of Iraq’s current instability. The circumstances of infrastructure in Africa are similar to those in the Middle East, and therefore Middle Eastern nations can follow an example set by successful projects in Tanzania and Mozambique. In Tanzania, a system of power plants was created to increase the access

The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXII

to electricity. Instead of forming a bilateral relationship, many private organizations worked with different parts of the government to ensure specific risks were placed upon the organization that could handle each aspect of the project properly. In Mozambique, public-private partnerships were used to rebuild the Maputo port, one that had been relatively stagnant due to poor infrastructure. The project spread risk and cost through collaboration between Mozambique and South Africa’s governments. While international projects could create conflict in some situation, they can also, as evident in Mozambique, make a project even more effective. The project as a whole succeeded, improving the capacity and efficiency of the port and city. This stimulated the economy, created many jobs, and allowed for future investment opportunities. Middle Eastern nations, specifically those on the Mediterranean, can follow these examples and implement many of the techniques used in both Tanzania Mozambique. In a time of political unrest, the Middle East looks for stability and growth. These goals can be achieved through the development of strong infrastructure through local and national projects. PPPs have the capacity to allow Middle Eastern countries to prosper.

Features

Russia's Infrastructure and the Threat It Poses By Ethan Gelfer

he Russian Federation is what is left of the former Soviet Union, a Communist state that ruined many sectors of the economy. Since 1992, when the USSR collapsed, the new, democratic, capitalist government of the Russian Federation has been working to rebuild what the USSR destroyed. Russia, the world’s largest country, which covers 1/6 of the landmass on Earth, clearly has great opportunities in the commodity markets. Oil, natural gas, metals, and timber, all natural resource commodities, account for more than 80% of Russian exports abroad. The sheer numbers are staggering. Russia has the world’s largest natural gas reserves, the 8th largest oil reserves (12.5% of the world’s oil) and the second largest coal reserves. Russia has more than 1/5 of the world’s forests, making it the largest forest country in the world. Russian fishing fleets are a major contributor to the world’s fish supply; as of 2005, the total capture of fish was at 3,191,068 tons. To cope with the demands of the commodity market, Russia’s aging infrastructure, inadequate after years of neglecting under the Soviets, is in great need of repair. The government has stated that $1 trillion will be invested in development of infrastructure by 2020, showing their interest in modernization. This intense focus on infrastructure shows Russia’s interest in becoming once again a world power. For the country, work on improving infrastructure is hugely beneficial, because it boosts the economy, creates jobs,

and allows exploitation of the vast Siberian permafrost. It is clear to see why Russia is so focused on infrastructure, because without good, paved, permanent roads, airports, and railways, and efficient port cities with access to the oceans, Russia will surely fall apart. The size of Russia is so immense that many of the commodities have no way of getting to commercial cities and ports for sale without a strong infrastructure. Therefore, for their own economic prosperity, Russia needs to invest in a strong, sound infrastructure that can support the needs of its commodity markets. If their infrastructure becomes such, it will be a great asset to the country and a big boost to their economic and political power. However, the rest of the world can view this as a threat. For the United States especially, the rise of Russia’s infrastructure presents a problem, as Russia has strong ties to China. If Russia should once again rise to superpower status, the US will have formidable challenges in the Far East with the threat of a second Cold War. Even if the possibility is not realized, a strong military, economic, or political alliance with China may also spell doom for the United States. If Russia is not checked, it will gain control over its natural resources, and most certainly it will not be the US to whom the materials shall be sent. Already, there are signs of US influence weakening in China-Russia relations. The US dollar, once the sole hegemon of the oil industry, is now being undercut. Russia has stated that it will ship an unspecified amount

The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXII

of oil to China annually, without using the US dollar as a base. This poses two problems to the United States. First, for the first time, oil is being traded without the involvement of the US. Secondly, the US badly needs that oil. Russia has control of 12.5% of the world’s oil reserves, a very significant amount, and with the US intervening and imposing trade embargos on many of the worlds top oil producers; Iran, Libya, etc., they now need a new source of oil. As such, Russia’s infrastructure (or lack thereof) plays an integral role in its political and economic rise, and although for them it is great, it seems to not be in the interests of the US that Russia should have a strong, solid infrastructure, as it presents more issues than benefits.

Russia's

Infrastructure

Numbers provided by the CIA Factbook

Waterways

102,000 km

Roadways

982,000 km total

Airports

1,218

Merchant Marine

1,143 total

Railways

87,157 km

Economics

WHY NOW IS THE TIME TO BUY By Natasha Moolji

urrently, the housing market is on the rebound after over 5 years of deterioration. The US housing market flourished for over a decade between 1994 and 2006. During this period, the proportion of households that owned their own homes increased steadily from 65% to 69%. The overall economy grew at a healthy clip and credit was readily available. Even the Federal Reserve did not pressure lenders to enforce strict loan standards. As a result, lenders often considered key credit-related metrics such as employment history, income, down payments, credit rating, assets, property loan-to-value ratio, and debt-servicing ability as too overbearing and chose to overlook them when approving mortgages. It was simple for anyone to borrow money from the bank regardless of their credit score; if you had a pulse you could secure a loan! These conditions fueled a speculative bubble in the housing market. Everyone

rushed in either to realize their dream of owning a home or to simply profit from a quick gain on a home purchase that they hoped to sell out within an few months. Unfortunately, the music stopped abruptly in early 2007 and the bubble burst. A weakening economy set off a series of loan defaults as people lost jobs and could no longer afford their monthly mortgage payments. Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers collapse made matters worse when financial markets went into a tailspin and credit became scarce. Total housing unit foreclosures sky-rocketed from 400,000 to 2 million. American dreams of homeownership had turned into nightmares. The housing sector went from being the engine of economic growth to a severe drag on it. Since the onset of the crisis in 2007, the US government and the Federal Reserve have both worked in concert to help stall the weakness in the housing market.

The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXII

The Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 were enacted by the government to help struggling homeowners. Simultaneously, the Federal Reserve started purchasing mortgage-backed securities to help ease credit conditions for borrowers. Despite their efforts, however, home prices in the US continued to fall until recently. There were simply too many foreclosed homes on offer in the market. The overhang of supply out-weighed any modest demand that governmentâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s accommodative policies were able to generate. Finally, in mid 2012 the housing market started showing some signs of recovery. When the second quarter GDP numbers were reported, housing turned out to be a bright spot. Rather than subtracting from overall economic activity, housing actually added 0.2% to it. Other broad measures of housing activity, such as housing starts and building permits, continued to strengthen steadily as the

Economics year progressed. Similarly, both new and existing home sales data also confirmed that the recovery in the housing sector was real. New single family home sales climbed to 400,000 units per year and existing home sales approached 4.5 million units per annum; both nearly 40% higher than their multi-year lows seen in 2010. By the end of 2012, this recovery was even evident in home prices, which showed a 5.5% yearover-year increase as recorded by the S&P Case-Shiller index, the biggest annual jump since 2006. Many, however, question if this rebound in housing is sustainable, despite the many factors driving the turnaround. The balance between demand and supply of homes is key to understanding why this trend is real. Over the last 18 months the US economy has continued to grow steadily. As a result, conditions in the labor market have started improving. After reaching a high of 10% in October 2009, the unemployment rate is now down to 7.9%. It is projected to trend even lower and reach 6.5% by 2015. As people get back to work, they will begin to feel financially secure and will consider purchasing homes. Being employed will also make it easier for them to obtain mortgages from lending companies. With mortgage rates already at all time lows, owning a home today is a more cost-effective option than renting it and this should attract buyers. In fact, the numbers are so compelling that even professional investors are purchasing homes and then renting them out to earn doubledigit returns. Add to this the fact that lenders are also loosening credit, and you have conditions that are extremely supportive of an elevated demand for homes. The story on the supply side looks

equally upbeat. Immediately after the recession in 2008, the majority of homes available for sale were distressed properties - the homeowners were financially strapped and desperate to sell at any price. This drove down home prices dramatically. Since homebuilders could not even recover their cost of construction at these sale prices, they stopped constructing new homes. Even as home prices began to recover, builders had difficulty obtaining bank loans and were unable to resume their construction activities immediately. This delay meant that while homes on the market were being bought out, there was no new inventory ready to replace them. This

Owning a home today is a more cost-effective option than renting one.

of homes. Clearly, these demand and supply dynamics bode well for the US housing market. While there are still skeptics, more people are starting to believe that the rebound is real. Nearly 45% of the respondents to a recent housing survey expected home prices to increase in the next 12 months. A year ago, this same number stood at a dismal 20%. Though the fundamentals look good, caution is in order. The continued recovery in home prices hinges on the economic recovery staying intact while mortgage rates remain low. If for some reason the economy falters, or rates spike up as investors start fretting about inflation, then the housing recovery will get derailed. Similarly, if lenders tighten credit standards they could also forestall the rebound. For now though, after four years of a stop-start recovery, many are simply happy to take heart from the recent positive news and hope that the housing market rebound continues.

situation has continued for a few years and is now at a point where the available supply of homes can be worked off in just 4 1/2 months! Compare this with a peak supply of 12 months reached in 2010, and it is easy to conclude that the housing market is no longer weighed down by an excess supply

The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXII

Economics

How Helping AIG and other Struggling Corporations in 2008 Came Back to Haunt the Federal Government in 2013 By Robert Hefter

n 2008, A.I.G. (American International Group), Bear Stearns, Citigroup, Fannie Mae (The Federal National Mortgage Association), and Freddie Mac (The Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation) nearly collapsed due to increased spending and improper investments. In order to avoid the probable economic catastrophe that would result in the demise of these behemoths of Ameri-

can business, JP Morgan Chase and the federal government made efforts to secure their survival. JP Morgan purchased Bear Stearns for $236 million and the Federal Reserve provided a $30 billion credit line to ensure the sale could move forward. On four different occasions, the federal government provided aid to A.I.G for a total cost of $180 billion. $400 billion was invested into Fannie Mae and Freddie

Mac. Citigroup received $280 billion in aid. Finally, in October 2008, Congress passed the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act, which authorized the Treasury Department to spend $700 billion to combat the financial crisis. However, the federal government continues to feed money to these big businesses, particularly AIG. Millions of taxpayer dollars are being funneled into the “safety net” of these compa-

“Many taxpayers believe that the government has bought these companies out of extinction and moved on. They are wrong. The government continues to feed these companies money so as to avoid another economic emergency.”

The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXII

Economics nies. Specifically, AIG is still receiving federal government money and recently sought to engage the government in a 25 billion dollar lawsuit. These immense sums of money should not be being wasted on AIG executive salaries. Many taxpayers believe that the government has bought these companies out of extinction and moved on. They are wrong. The government continues to feed these companies money so as to avoid another economic emergency. Billions of taxpayer dollars today are invested into the safety net of A.I.G and other big businesses. Many would think that the government would be using this money for something more useful especially after the near economic crash earlier this year. In January, the Republicans and Democrats disagreed with upon raising the federal debt limit. Republicans believed that the federal government should not raise the national debt limit because increased government spending could send the country into an economic crisis. Therefore, the issue of the aiding the already recovered A.I.G should be secondary to the essentials of the federal budget. Just recently, the former CEO and board of A.I.G considered joining in a 25 billion dollar lawsuit against the United States government. The AIG executives are arguing that the action of the US government during the bailout violated the rights granted to them in the Fifth Amendment of the US Constitution. They are asserting that it was unconstitutional for the federal government to take what became a 92 percent stake in the company during the bailout, to administer such high interest rates, and to funnel billions to the insurer’s Wall Street clients (investment bankers, hedge fund managers, etc.). The federal government did impose these conditions upon AIG (setting high interest rates of corporal transactions so that the government would not lose money off of this interaction); but what AIG is looking past is that the government saved its “life.” Without the grand investment of 180 billion dollars, many would be out of work, and even more would lose huge

sums of money. It is ironic how AIG believes it is the right move to join in on a lawsuit against their savior. What is more, AIG has recently run an advertisement campaign on national television thanking the taxpayers for fishing them out of near bankruptcy. The executives/high rolling investors repaid their 180 billion dollar debt to the federal government. Also, the U.S. government has sold their last share of the company. Clearly these are all indications that AIG has reached the point where it can confidently conduct its business independently of the federal government. But, even though the government is not completely involved in the company at this point, taxpayer dollars are being invested. It is reasonable to think that the government needs to provide safety for AIG and other big businesses because

their failure would be detrimental to American society and welfare. But it is clear that AIG does not need the help; all this money is most likely being invested into salaries. Why does an executive have the privilege to go to Hawaii when billions of dollars are being sucked from the masses? What should be happening is that the f low of money from the government to AIG should be used to repay people who lost enormous amounts of money in the crisis of 2008, repair business partnerships that were severed in the bailout era, and invest in long-term stability of the company instead of monthly raises and fancy vacations. They have selfishly turned on the government for even more money, which will eventually lead back to more investments of taxpayer dollars.

“Why does an executive have the privilege to go to Hawaii when billions of dollars are being sucked from the masses?” The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXII

Economics

Saving What Saves Americans

Why the Social Security System Will Go Bankrupt by 2018, and How We Can Prevent It. By Spencer Slagowitz

ocial security, the very system that provides vital benefits for elderly and disabled American citizens, is expected to go bankrupt as early as 2018. If the United States government does not take any action before this point, the elderly and disabled of the US will be deprived of their natural right to social security. The US government must reform the social security system so this situation does not occur; however the reforms must not deprive Americans of their rights or of their benefits. Social security is an insurance program that provides monetary benefits to American citizens. The system is funded through payroll taxes, taxes based upon and taken from an individual’s wage, and is also the largest expenditure of the federal government’s budget. The benefits that social security provides are divided into three categories: old age, disability, and spouse benefits. These benefits are calculated according to the individual’s income. A worker earning over $110,000 pays 3.4% of his

or her payroll, and a worker earning under that amount pays 6.8% of his or her payroll. In theory, the social security system should be tax neutral. Under such a system, the money given to the US government in

“Social security is, fundamentally, a beneficial institution whose positive attributes outweigh its negative ones.” the form of the payroll tax will be the same amount given out in benefits to US citizens. Now, however, the expenditures of the US government exceed its revenues; thus, the US government is effectively losing money. This results in a loss of profit according to a basic principle of economics: profit is revenue minus expenses (P= R-E). If one’s expenses are greater than one’s revenue is,

The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXII

then one’s profit will be a negative one, and one will lose money. This is in fact exactly what is happening to our nation: each year the US government loses money from the social security system. This annual loss is the reason the social security system will go bankrupt as early as 2018. Social security is, fundamentally, a beneficial institution whose positive attributes outweigh its negative ones. Thus, it must not be entirely destroyed despite its causing negative profits. Instead, it must be reformed so that its flaws are eliminated and it becomes economically feasible. There are many criticisms of the social security system other than its fiscal insolvency. For example, many democrats believe that the regressive tax system hurts the poor, who need social security the most. As well, the system is also criticized for its low rate of capital formation. However, despite its flaws, social security’s strengths are much more potent. Social security provides benefits for the elderly, the retired, and the disabled, who may not be able to pay for

Economics various necessary expenses. In this way, social security attempts to give all Americans the benefits that they deserve and therefore improves the lives of all American citizens. The disabled who might not be able to perform a job, and need capital to pay for necessary costs, are given this capital and can, as a result, live and thrive. A misconception people usually have about the social security system is that the system is a Ponzi scheme. Ponzi schemes are frauds in which the operator promises or credits investors with exceptional returns, supposedly based on the performance of the assets purchased. The organizer acquires no assets, pays maturing promises or other withdrawals with funds from

as in theory the social security system is tax neutral. The social security system can be better envisioned as a trust fund rather than a Ponzi scheme. Social security functions like a trust fund as it provides benefits for an individual when he or she reaches a certain age. All American citizens have a natural right to the benefits given through the social security system. It provides an invaluable safety net for the lower and middle class, and improves the quality of life for all Americans. It is for those reasons that a reform is necessary. If the system is bankrupt, benefits cannot be given to the American citizens that deserve them. In order to reform the social security

been supporting a change to private social security accounts, which would theoretically reduce expenditures. There are as well countless ways to reform the social security tax that could increase tax revenues. In looking at which of these solutions is favorable, the stance of the Democratic Party has traditionally been that the benefits provided by the social security should not be harmed or reduced in any way and that the revenues of the social security system should be increased by having the rich shoulder much of the tax. On the other hand, the Republican Party believes that reducing the benefits given by the system should lower the expenditures of the system.

â&#x20AC;&#x153;All American citizens have a natural right to the benefits given through the social security system. It provides an invaluable safety net for the lower and middle class, and improves the quality of life for all Americans. It is for those reasons that a reform is necessary. If the system is bankrupt, benefits cannot be given to the American citizens that deserve them.â&#x20AC;? new depositors, and skims money off the top to support lavish personal consumption. Social security isnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t a Ponzi scheme, as unlike a Ponzi scheme it does not require continued growth to sustain it. Also, there is no fraud in the social security program. Another key component of a Ponzi scheme, when the manager of the scheme promises enormous returns to the investor, is not a part of the social security system,

system correctly, the United States government must stop the annual loss of money. They can do this two fundamental ways: increasing revenue by raising the payroll tax, or decreasing expenses by taking away or reducing benefits. Both these ways will theoretically equalize our social security system. There are many ways, however, to either lower expenses or raise revenues. For example, recently, many congressmen have

The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXII

Republicans and Democrats have often clashed on the issue of social security and the current United States Congress has been known to be slow in the passing of legislature due to an apparent lack of bipartisanship. Hopefully, Republicans and Democrats will be able to do the seemingly impossible and compromise on the issue of Social Security before the system goes bankrupt.

Economics

SOLUTIONS IN SMALL PROJECTS By Lauren Futter

uring his State of the Union address, President Obama focused on the economy and job creation. However, Congress is split on how to fix the economy due to intense bipartisanship. Discussing possible measures to take with regards to the economy quickly becomes unproductive; in the end, government officials provide bifurcated solutions to the issue. For once, let’s talk about a noncontroversial proposal that can actually get passed in Congress. Let’s start small and build from there and see what can be accomplished. Ralph Waldo Emerson once remarked, “If you build a better mousetrap the world will beat a path to your door.” This expression has particular application in today’s world. To advance, the United States needs to improve its economy, but it cannot if there is too much bipartisanship. In order to improve the economy, the United States must find smaller projects to invest in. For example, the United States is an amazing place filled with beautiful and interesting national parks and forests. Called “a shrine to human foresight, strength of granite, power of glaciers, and the tranquility of the High Sierra” by its website. Yosemite is one such park. Unfortunately, a recent outbreak of Hantavirus, a debilitating illness transmitted through rodents, has led many people to cancel vacations

to Yosemite. Hantavirus can be prevented by setting mousetraps. Setting mousetraps, in turn, can benefit the local economy, because the government’s purchase of mousetraps benefits local mousetrap makers. Instead of making this small investment in the local economy, however, the National Park Service has instead warned people not to

To fix the economy, let’s talk about a noncontroversial proposal that can actually get passed in Congress. Let’s start small and build from there and see what can be accomplished. come to the parks, losing money in the meantime. A proactive stance would have allowed both businesses and the national park service to generate revenue and business while helping the local economy. Hantavirus, therefore, can not only have health implications but also have

The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXII

an impact on the local economy. It can be a negative impact, through businesses around Yosemite not getting as much business as they would if the tourists came. It can be a positive impact, through businesses around Yosemite manufacturing and installing mousetraps and other means of combating and preventing Hantavirus. Preventing Hantavirus is noncontroversial -most people would agree that it should be stopped. It is one small but perfect way to easily get somewhere with the economy without all the hoopla created by introducing a new budget bill. Yes, the entire recovery will rest on one small simple device -- the metaphorical mousetrap -- because this simple approach can be replicated throughout the nation in many ways. Congress, especially in recent years, has faced the roadblock of politics to economic recovery. The way around this roadblock should not be to repeatedly ram into it. Instead, Congress should take another road. For example, in order to ameliorate the recent flood in the mid-west, Congress could have allocated funds to help farmers irrigate crops. The costs of construction, the vegetables produced, and the extra workers needed to help during the drought would have all created more jobs without focusing so much on the larger problem of the economy as a whole.

Economics

Another initiative that President Obama mentioned in his speech was the spending tax dollars on scientific research to “unlock answers to Alzheimer’s” and with the purpose of “developing drugs to regenerate damaged organs.” According to the President, “Every dollar we invested to map the human genome returned $140 to the economy.” Initiatives such as government funded science research projects and attempts to stop the spread of diseases such as Hantavirus have a noticeable effect on the economy as well as the living standards of all Americans. Instead of wasting time talking about how to fix the economy, Congress focused on an issue that everyone agrees needs solving: Alzheimer’s. They were then able to fund a project to research the causes of Alzheimer’s, the results of which could aid the United States in a multitude of ways. As Senator Marco Rubio’s response to President Obama’s speech shows, he did not appear to disagree with President Obama’s dream to fight Alzheimer’s and help people with damaged organs; he disagreed with high amounts of government spending. Government spending has always been a source of tension between Republicans and Democrats. This fighting prevents anything from getting done. However, by taking smaller actions, President Obama was able to sidestep

GOP opposition and generate revenue for the economy. Even though Senator Rubio did not mention it in his speech, spending on science research is a form of government spending and intervention, not free trade as he stated Republicans wanted for the United States. Ironically, in agreeing with a smaller means of government spending, Sena-

President Obama should focus on projects that Americans want to see happening, such as improving infrastructure, making scientific advances, and advancing public education. tor Rubio actually showed that tackling smaller government projects could be the way for Congress to reach an agreement and fix the economy. While helping the economy without trying to “fix the economy” might seem like a radical idea, it is not. The government already spends time on

The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXII

noncontroversial legislation with the purpose of simply passing legislation. Now, they can pass uncontroversial legislation while fixing the economy. Even President Franklin Delano Roosevelt used a similar strategy during the Great Depression in which he supported Congressional legislation that stipulated the construction of new infrastructure and monuments. Focusing on small sections of the economy instead of tackling the big picture should be a priority. Helping people innovate and move forward from this point should be a priority. Paul Krugman, a Princeton University professor and Nobel Prize Laureate, argues that the answer to solving the problems of this economy is to spend and invest in projects in the private sector His view, although valid in my opinion, ignores the political resistance. Consequently, the role of the economy in this term of office should be non-existent… technically. Instead, like a parent trying to get his or her kid to eat vegetables by putting it in foods they like, President Obama should focus on projects that Americans want to see happening, such as improving infrastructure, making scientific advances, and advancing public education. If we discuss about less controversial ideas, we will be able to find more common ground and solve relevant problems of our nation faster.

Science and Technology

What Do THEY See? The Extent of Government Snooping By Anne Rosenblatt

he American government has recently been able to utilize modern advancements in technology to its fullest potential, protecting our country and the safety of our citizens. As hacking and Internet crimes have been continuously increasing, modern technology provides the government with an opportunity to prevent crimes and intervene before any damage is done. In addition, the government is able to collect information on potentially dangerous suspects and further avoid even international disputes. Although governmental snooping can be an extremely helpful tactic for international and homeland security, many have begun to question the extent of government snooping. At what point

does the government truly begin to infringe on the rightful privacy of American citizens? In response to the phenomenon of 21st century technology, the private lives and information of the majority of the American population can be found on various websites and servers such as Facebook, Google, E-mail, etc… Facebook has publically released that as of December of 2012, their site had over a billion monthly active users. While these websites and servers allow easy access to social networking, a serious threat is posed to the people who enter information into a social network or web browser. The main issue is the unawareness of Americans on how information they

The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXII

are posting online is truly being used. The Department of Homeland Security, a cabinet of the US federal government that specializes in protecting the United States from terrorist attacks and disasters, released a list of the keywords and phrases that they use to monitor social networking sites for signs of threats in May of 2012. Most of the words on this released list make sense, and refer to potential threats, such as “attack”, “Al Qaeda”, and “terrorism.” However, the Department of Homeland also released on their list that they also patrol and monitor conversations with words such as “cloud,” “Mexico,” “food poisoning,” and “pork.” Much controversy arose from this, as United States citizens began to become more aware of how much

Science and Technology

“Google claims that government requests for information about individuals have increased by 70% over the past three years.” information the government could truly obtain on them. To further publicize this issue of government snooping, Google has reported that the number of requests for information from law enforcement and

government has reached its ultimate peak. Google claims that government requests for information about individuals have increased by 70% over the past three years. To combat this problem, Google is recruiting support against personal data being accessed by the government. The company states that each government request is examined and inquired into, and the users are notified of the request if the law allows. Still, Google complies with these requests 88% of the time, allowing the government to access private email accounts and personal information. At the core of the problem lies the fact that the law does not grant enough protection to emails. The Electronic Communications Privacy Act was enacted long before the widespread use of Internet communication and so gives more protection to papers than to online personal matters. In the United States, 68% of requests for personal information are in the form of subpoenas, meaning they do not require a judge’s approval. Google says they have been fighting subpoenas by requiring search warrants for information that

goes beyond basic information such as a name, location, and phone number. Congress needs to reconsider the Electronic Communications Privacy act to better protect one’s personal online matters. Although the American government must work to minimize their snooping on innocent Americans while still protecting our country, the American population more importantly needs to have an increased awareness of how much information they

“At the core of the problem lies the fact that the law does not grant enough protection to emails.” are really releasing to the world online. A private conversation can easily be monitored by any hacker, or even the government, and in reality, is not private at all. Social networking sites and databases should be encouraged to further release and publicize the security of information entered on their sites. Although certain companies may be more reserved in releasing this security information, it would highly benefit the American population in providing a clear understanding of online security. Establishing a clear relationship between online companies and involved individuals would force a reexamination of seemingly private Internet usage. Increasing this awareness in American citizens is a necessary first step in minimizing government snooping in our lives. However, even after extensive actions taken by both the government and American individuals, it may be impossible to fully resolve this issue of personal privacy.

The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXII

Science and Technology

Spread Awareness! Celiac Disease Goes Undiagnosed By Samuel Fisch

hen was your last Celiac disease screening? Most Americans have either never heard of Celiac disease or only have some vague understanding of the condition. Since the disease can wreak medical havoc on the body if undiscovered, both adults and children in the U.S. need to be routinely screened for Celiac disease. “Celiac disease is a significant medical condition… [it is] a multisystem disorder whose primary target of injury is the small intestine,” says Dr. Peter H. R. Green, a leading Celiac Disease physician and expert. Gluten, the main storage protein found in many grains, triggers the disease, as gluten can damage the small intestine until it cannot properly absorb nutrients. Although gluten is “poison” for a person with Celiac disease, once diagnosed, people with Celiac can treat the disease by going completely gluten-free for life. This entails a significant lifestyle change, but Celiac is an unusual autoimmune disorder because a dietary change can effectively cure the disease in the vast majority of those who have it. “Celiac disease is the most common - and one of the most under diagnosed hereditary autoimmune conditions in the United States today,” states Dr. Green. This disease is just as common in Americans as hereditary high cholesterol. While the disease is considered quite common in many countries, specifically in European and South American countries, it affects “approximately one percent of the U.S. population.” Most startlingly, 97 percent of the people affected by Celiac disease remain undiagnosed. If a delay in diagnosis occurs, patients have an increased chance of developing “secondary

“Maybe she’s gluten intolerant.”

conditions associated with the disease” such as: osteoporosis, anemia, malignancies, dental enamel defects, and infertility. Children and adults should be routinely screened for Celiac disease due to the many additional medical problems a patient can obtain from having a delayed diagnosis. In addition, patients who have celiac disease are more likely than the general population to develop an additional autoimmune disease. Many celiac disease patients are also diagnosed with type 1 diabetes and autoimmune thyroid disease. Unfortunately, people with celiac disease have an increased mortality rate, “exceeding that of the general population, due mainly to malignancies.” Current research show that patients with celiac disease can be up to 33 times more likely than the normal population to have intestinal cancer and up to a 23 times greater chance than the regular population for papillary thyroid cancer, the most common type of thyroid cancer. Clearly, the effects of undiagnosed Celiac disease are severe. In the United States, “the average time to diagnose celiac disease is currently nine years - a time frame that…[is] known to be…about eight years too long.” Routine screening for celiac disease would allow for early recognition of the disease, eliminating the harmful medical problems that can begin to occur in an undiagnosed patient. The current lack of routine screening results in “a huge population of patients suffering unnecessarily and at considerable risk for major complications.” These medical complications are both physical and emotional. People undiagnosed with the disease may experience depression and

“Most startlingly, 97% of the people affected by Celiac disease remain undiagnosed.”

The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXII

“complicated professional and family dynamics as a result of their long-term undiagnosed” disease. Unlike the United States, in Italy, many children are screened by the age of six. Even children without obvious symptoms are diagnosed with the disease in Italy because of the greater familiarity with the condition and better screening. In addition, because physicians in Italy are more aware of the disease and its wide variety of symptoms, Italians of any age are often tested for Celiac disease when symptoms appear. Therefore, the average time of diagnosis is far less than that of the United States. As Celiac is more frequently diagnosed in Italy, physicians do not consider it as rare and consequently even more people are screened. Even if we are not prepared to screen the general population for Celiac disease, American children should be routinely screened for the condition. In addition, it certainly makes sense to screen those at an increased risk for developing Celiac disease. American primary care physicians should routinely screen people with commonly related conditions like type 1 diabetes and thyroid disorders. The countless women who undergo fertility treatments each year should also be routinely screened for Celiac disease. Furthermore, first-degree relatives of people with Celiac disease should be automatically screened for the condition. By screening these at-risk individuals, we are ensuring that less people stay undiagnosed with Celiac disease. We need to be aware of the importance of routinely screening for Celiac disease; the disease is more common than one might think. The current unsettling scientific research explains why routinely testing for Celiac disease is important for both adults and children in America. By creating routine screenings for Celiac disease, we can prevent the countless complications that supplement the disease.

Science and Technology

An Exciting Scientific Future

n 1964, Peter Higgs came up with a theory claiming there is an energy field that permeates throughout the entire universe. This field is now universally known as the Higgs field. Higgs came up with the conjecture to attempt to explain why some subatomic particles have a large mass. His theory described a field that interacts with these subatomic particles and gives them their mass. The theory also says that large particles would interact with the field in high numbers and massless particles would not interact with the field at all. Can this theory be real? If so, the effects of this discovery could be monumental to our understanding of physics. In order to better visualize this new field, we can compare the Higgs Field to water. The “fish” are the subatomic particles, and the “humans” are the large particles. A fish, an organism with a low mass, can move through the water very quickly, while a human, with a large mass, moves through the water much slower. Here the fish has much less contact with the water

than the human, so it moves through the water more quickly. Continuing this analogy, there are subdivisions of the “fish.” The lightest known subatomic particle is the electron and the heaviest known subatomic particle is the top quark. The top quark is about 350,000 times heavier than the electron. Scientists believe that both particles are the same size, but the top Quark has more mass because it interacts more with the Higgs Field. If the Higgs field did not exist, both of the particles would have zero mass. These particles would just travel at the speed of light forever. The Higgs Field gives particles mass by enabling them to move slower than the speed of light. The Higgs Boson is the smallest part of the Higgs Field, which is made of a countless number of Higgs Boson’s. Like water, which is made up of many H2O molecules, many Higgs Boson’s make up the Higgs Field. On July 4, 2012, scientists at CERN, in Switzerland, announced that they believed

The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXII

they had found a particle with a signature consistent with that of the Higgs Boson. This particle was able to slow down other particles. Using the LHC (Large Hadron Collider) at CERN, scientists shot protons at each other at around the speed of light. When they crashed, the scientists could look for the formation of Higgs Boson’s. Scientists are hoping that with this breakthrough, they can open new doors in physics and start a completely new path of experiments. This research is crucial to the human understanding of physics. We should continue to conduct research until we understand how the Higgs Field works and what advancements it can make in the world of science. This has been one of the mysteries of the universe ever since Peter Higgs presented his theory. The Higgs Boson is the final piece to the puzzle and a beginning of a new one as well. It not only completes our understanding of modern physics, but also opens a door into a different world of physics.

Science and Technology

Earlier Detection of Chromosomal Abnormalities

By Emily Kramer

Rising Ethical Questions

dvances in medical science now allow us to isolate and evaluate fetal DNA through maternal blood, ultimately allowing for earlier detection of chromosomal abnormalities in the fetus, specifically Down Syndrome and other syndromes due to the addition or absence of chromosomes. This new method of detecting chromosomal abnormalities, a method known as Massive Parallel Sequencing, was discovered by Drs. Dennis Lo, Rossa Chiu and Alan Chan of the Chinese University of Hong Kong. Previously, testing for Down Syndrome and other abnormalities required invasive procedures, such as Chorionic Villus Sampling (CVS), a procedure in which a needle is inserted into the uterus in order to extract fetal tissue or cells, and Amniocentesis, a procedure in which a needle is inserted into the amniotic sac

in order to extract amniotic fluid containing fetal cells. Moreover, these procedures are risky, with a 1/200 miscarriage rate. They also are usually performed late in the pregnancy; CVS can be carried out, at the earliest, 11.5 weeks into the pregnancy and Amniocentesis can be executed16 weeks into the pregnancy. However, Massive Parallel Sequencing now allows us to detect or rule out fetal genetic abnormalities with a 99% accuracy rate as early as 10 weeks into the pregnancy. Equally important, as this is a non-invasive test, it imposes no risks of miscarriage. These advances in DNA sequencing mean that women will no longer have to undergo such risky and invasive procedures to determine if her child is healthy. Before this technology was available, women had to accept the possibility of losing a genetically healthy pregnancy in

“Massive Parallel Sequencing will allow for early gender identification, presenting the opportunity for an earlier termination of a pregnancy based on gender preference.”

The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXII

order to rule out any possibility of chromosomal abnormalities. Scientists predict they will eventually be able to map out the entire fetal genome from fetal DNA derived from the mother’s circulation. The great scientific benefit of this is the ability to detect or rule out early on a vast number of genetic abnormalities, such as Sickle-Cell Anemia, Taysachs Disease, or any other inheritable or newly developed genetic disease. However, with these technological advances also come new ethical dilemmas. This new technology runs the risk of increasing the number of abortions performed for reasons that have less to do with genetic abnormalities and more with a parent’s preference for specific genetic characteristics in their offspring. Abortion in itself creates various moral dilemmas, presenting the question of whether or not it can be considered a form of murder. At what point is a fetus considered a human being? Some believe that human life begins at the point of conception, while others believe it begins at the point of viability, when a fetus can survive outside of the mother’s womb. As there is no distinct evidence proving one side correct over the other, we must allow each individual to make his or her own decision. However, even individuals who are pro-choice oftentimes draw their

Science and Technology own ethical lines in the sand when abortion is morally appropriate. A pregnant thirteen-year-old should be provided the opportunity to terminate her pregnancy, a woman who finds herself pregnant after sexual abuse should be able to choose whether or not to carry the pregnancy, and a mother who, through prenatal testing, discovers she is carrying a child with a genetic abnormality should be allowed to make the decision of whether or not to have an abortion. Many individuals who are pro-choice have defined circumstances such as these where abortion is morally acceptable. However, is it morally acceptable to terminate a pregnancy based upon gender preference? In its easiest and simplest form, Massive Parallel Sequencing will allow for early gender identification, presenting the opportunity for an earlier termination of a pregnancy based on gender preference. The termination of a pregnancy based upon gender is most likely to occur in countries that restrict the number of children parents may haveâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;i.e. China, where the technology originated,â&#x20AC;&#x201D; or in cultures where a particular gender is preferred. The misuse of this technology is not restricted to these places, but can occur just as readily in the United States. Take for example, the following hypothetical situation: a mother has three boys and wants a girl, but discovers her fourth child will be male. This new technology facilitates the ability of the mother to terminate her pregnancy based upon this information. Although one can see the great advantages Massive Parallel Sequencing provides in the detection of genetic abnormalities and inheritable genetic diseases, this new technology is vulnerable to great abuse. As our ability to understand the human genome increases, we must be wary of the distinct lines that determine when abortion is morally acceptable. In the future, we are going to find ourselves, as a society and individually, redefining the circumstances in which abortions are ethically appropriate. This technology has the potential to eventually allow us to identify other genetic characteristics of the fetus other then gender (eye color, height, hair color, etc.). As a society, we need to imminently address the ethical questions we will be confronted with to ensure that the distinct moral lines do not become blurred.

1954 - Amniocentesis *performed 16 weeks into pregnancy *1/200 risk of miscairrage

1984 - Chorionic Villus Sampling *performed 11.5 weeks into pregnancy *1/100 risk of miscarraige

2005 - Massive Parallel Sequencing *performed 10 weeks into pregnancy *No risk of miscairrage

The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXII

Science and Technology

Illuminating Apple’s Stocks

Why Apple’s Stocks Do Not Indicate A Decrease in Competitivness

By Jacob Zurita

pple’s share price, once at a staggering $705 per share, plunged about 35% from late September to January with a 12% drop on January 24. At the time, fifty out of fifty- seven analysts confidently felt bullish. However, the precipitous drop of the stock does not reflect the status of the fundamentals of Apple’s business, which remains strong. Despite having slower growth than that of previous years, Apple is still growing with remarkable celerity. What is more, the “herd” mentality of stocks assisted in driving the stock price down along with investors’ miscellaneous worries. Although the reason for the drop in

the share price is a combination of various concerns surrounding the company, the most notable has to do with Apple’s not living up to Wall Street’s unrealistically high expectations. These expectations have been set due to Apple’s unprecedented rate of growth during the 2008 economic crisis. Apple did miss quarterly fiscal expectations for the third time in a row with the release of its 2012 fourth quarter report. However, the numbers associated with Apple’s growth remain unrivaled and staggering. iPhone sales rose 29% to 47.8 million and iPad sales hit 22.9 million iPads during the holiday quarter. Even though those figures were about

The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXII

one million short of analyst expectations, they are still extraordinary and indicate a company that is basically thriving, not struggling. Similarly, net sales rose 18% to 54.41 billion dollars but still missed analyst’s estimates of $54.73 billion. How could Apple’s hardly missing its earnings create an immense drop in the share price? The “herd” mentality of stocks is possibly the most significant culprit for the diminishing in Apple stock prices. The “herd” mentality in finance refers to when individuals invest or sell based solely on the fact that many others are investing or selling. There were already various un-

Science and Technology certainties, including iPhone sales, which created a weak base for the stock as its share price artificially increased from its $600 share price to $650 to $700. Apple’s competitors were beginning to grab a larger market share and create competitive devices such as the Samsung Galaxy S3. In fact, the Galaxy S3 is now ahead of the iPhone in terms of features. The release of the iPad mini was a slow response to increasing competition and relied more on the brand name rather than the technology inside of it and a low competitive price against other cheaper tablets. Additionally, Apple was slow to enter the vast market of China. The earnings report led investors to panic and sell, while many others followed suit. The stock consequently plunged, despite Apple’s healthy numbers in its earnings report. Even though Apple did not aggressively enter the Chinese market, the company is now beginning to reap the benefits with China generating 6.8 billion dollars in revenue for Apple last quarter, a 67% increase from the prior year. The report overall demonstrated an exceptional, and still growing business, just one that was growing slightly slower. Margins and revenues have augmented in the last two years while its equity returns and invested capital returns have surpassed 40% in the same timeframe. Apple has zero debt on its balance sheet and few long-term or short-term liabilities. iPhone sales, which account for roughly 55% of Apple’s valuation according to Trefis Research, were an additional reason for worry as a number of reports indicated the demand for iPhones had been shrinking and Apple had cut orders to its suppliers for components of the iPhone. The production of fewer devices suggests that fewer devices are being sold. However, the accuracy of these reports is questionable. To maintain its lead over other technology companies, Apple needs to be at the forefront of new consumer technology as it was with the iPhone and iPad. Rather than introducing incremental updates once a year for its devices, Apple should push the boundaries and implement innovative ideas. Competitors, including Microsoft and Samsung, launch an overhauled device every year. Apple could very well fall behind and lose investors’ confidence by following the same path as in the past few years by releasing an iPhone 5S this fall.

The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXII

Science and Technology

NASA Must Live On By Harry Seavey

he first man stepped on the moon 43 years ago with the immortal words, “That’s one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind.” However, Neil Armstrong’s first step for man, indeed, NASA’s giant leap for mankind, would not be on the moon. It would take place here, right on Earth. The NASA of the 1960’s and onward would be America’s foremost innovator, revolutionizing such disciplines as medicine, technology, and general science. The world we live in today is one that NASA helped create, shape, and mold. What many in Washington and elsewhere fail to realize about NASA is that the organization has not simply siphoned money from the federal budget for nothing but ‘unhelpful’ space exploration, but rather has given the world real, tangible benefits. Even so, contrary to Congressional opinion, space exploration is something that the United States should be pursuing vigorously. Half of a penny on every American tax dollar is a pitiful insult to the institution that has brought the American people a victory in the midst of the Cold War and such things as the MRI and CAT scans. The brutal slashing of NASA’s budget since the 1990’s has severely hampered American innovation, and the exploration of the very impor-

tant Last Frontier, and yet the worst part is, nobody has seemed to realize it yet. It is not anomalous that the average American taxpayer wonders what his hard earned tax dollars are doing in space. With such things as poverty and hunger seemingly running rampant across the United States, it is only natural that many doubt the government when it deems space travel as a venture worth the investment of billions of dollars. As such, the audacity

of saying we should put more money into NASA would probably shock the average American who relies on the monthly paycheck. The goal of appealing to this audience, the wider one, is what NASA struggles with in lobbying for increased funding. It would be far easier for NASA to accrue positive Congressional and public opinion if people were aware of what it has accomplished. Satellite Television, SAT NAV, Google Earth, Virtual Reality, artificial limbs, and dialysis are all products of govern-

“The brutal slashing of NASA’s budget since the 1990’s has severely hampered American innovation, and the exploration of the very important Last Frontier, and yet the worst part is, nobody has seemed to realize it yet.” The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXII

Science and Technology ment investment in NASA. Interestingly, these technologies have been simple byproducts of greater research; NASA’s intentions were not to invent such things from the start. And yet, these achievements are the very reason that an increase in NASA funding is crucial to a successful America in the 21st century. It is entirely likely that NASA may change the 21st century world like it did the 20th century world, but the first step to take is to allow NASA to do such a thing. NASA created groundbreaking, innovative technology when it received 4%, 3%, and 2% of the GDP from the 60’s to the 80’s. Now, with barely .5% of the GDP, NASA is no longer capable of what it was two decades ago. Suffocating the Administration by allowing it such minimal funding and a short leash is simply the wrong way to go, especially when Congress flippantly throws away billions of dollars every year towards unworthy projects. The world of tomorrow is a bright one, and yet it could be brighter if the American government embraced innovation rather than opposed it. NASA’s ties to the current state of the American economy are an unforeseen boon to the American people. As a driver of innovation and economic growth, NASA is key to the long-term sanctity of the American economy, as well as maintaining the United States’ greatest economic edge, creativity. As a producer of high-skilled labor, and a home to 18,000 employees, as well as 70,000 contractors, NASA is an overwhelming force in today’s economy. NASA has invested hundreds of millions of dollars in all fifty states, which has totaled 1.2 billion since 2001. NASA investment usually targets small or otherwise disadvantaged high-technological companies to bring cutting-edge products to the U.S. Money invested in NASA is largely money that ends up bouncing back to the U.S., either by technological or monetary means. The idea that NASA yields no practical or tangible benefits for the average American is ill founded or simply wrong. Why must we go to space? If there are problems here on Earth, should we not solve them first? These are questions asked time and again. NASA’s rationale in answering these questions are two fold: In going to space, we can discover and aid the Earth.

The Horace Mann Review | Vol. XXII