JHU POLITIK
the
I
OCTOBER 5, 2015
VOLUME XVIII, ISSUE VI
the
JHU POLITIK EDITORS-IN-CHIEF Christine Server & Juliana Vigorito MANAGING EDITOR Mira Haqqani
HEAD WRITER Evan Harary
ASSISTANT EDITORS Dylan Etzel Preston Ge Shrenik Jain Sathvik Namburar
POLICY DESK EDITOR Arpan Ghosh
CREATIVE DIRECTOR Diana Lee
MARYLAND EDITOR David Hamburger
COPY EDITOR Zachary Schlosberg WEBMASTER Sasha Cea-Loveless MARKETING & PUBLICITY Chiara Wright
CAMPUS EDITOR Christina Selby
STAFF WRITERS Olga Baranoff Dylan Cowit Rosellen Grant George Gulino Morley Musick Sathvik Namburar Corey Payne
FACULTY ADVISOR Charlotte O’Donnell
2 the JHU POLITIK
• October 5, 2015 • Volume XVIII, Issue VI
INSIDE THIS ISSUE
4 5 6 7 8
The Week in Review:
Johns Hopkins and Baltimore
Juliana Vigorito ’16 & Christine Server ’16
“Hoganomics” Needs to be Amended to Improve Maryland Sathvik Namburar ’18 The Future of Chinese Cyber Liberty:
President Xi Jinping’s Tech Meeting in Seattle
Mengyun (Catherine) Yang ’17 Eyes on the Road:
Big Automobile Manufacturers are Missing the Real Issues
Shrenik Jain ’18
From Russia, Without an Ounce of Love Abigail Annear ’18
Volume XVIII, Issue VI • October 5, 2015 •
the JHU POLITIK
3
The Week in Review: Johns Hopkins and Baltimore by Juliana Vigorito ’16 & Christine Server ’16, Editors-in-Chief President Daniels Recognized for Leadership In an announcement last week, the Carnegie Corporation of New York selected President Ron Daniels as one of four honorees for its biannual Academic Leadership Award. The Carnegie Corporation, a grant making foundation established by Andrew Carnegie to advance educational and diplomatic causes, cited President Daniel’s efforts to knit Hopkins’ nine academic divisions into a cohesive whole and to strengthen ties between Hopkins and Baltimore City as worthy of commendation. The award recognizes leaders of U.S. colleges and universities who have gone above and beyond their administrative duties to enact an innovative vision of undergraduate education. More than just an accolade, the Carnegie Corporation awards the honoree’s institution with a sum of $500,000 to be used toward furthering their academic initiatives. In a continuation of past efforts to increase community engagement, President Daniels plans to use this grant to advance partnerships between the university and local public schools, particularly through the Baltimore Scholars Program. Since its inception in 2005, the Scholars initiative has granted full-tuition scholarships to graduates of City high schools and helped encourage more high-achieving local students to choose Hopkins. The Launch of HopkinsLocal With the announcement of HopkinsLocal initiatives, President Ron Daniels has made clear his intended legacy for the University: community engagement and service, an uncommon choice among his predecessors. While past University presidents have constructed new labs, vied for government research dollars, or merely tried to balance the budget in times of economic turmoil, Daniels has matched his focus on scholarship with an equal passion for good citizenship. HopkinsLocal is an ambitious new endeavor to keep University dollars close to home through preferential contracting with Baltimore-based vendors, service providers, and entry-level employees. The principle of hiring locally stands out as particularly valuable, since it will target individuals residing in high-poverty zip codes and promote the principle of economic inclusion that many local politicians hail as a necessity for the future of Baltimore. As East Baltimore Development Initiative (EBDI) projects buzz with ongoing construction, opportunities for HopkinsLocal to create sustainable new jobs and business relationships look promising. Though EBDI is a much-criticized project due to its displacement of homeowners, HopkinsLocal provides an opportunity to both save face and genuinely do good in the surrounding area. The introduction of these efforts is not a triumph just yet, but may well result in Daniels being hailed as the Hopkins president who made community partnerships a top priority. Plenty of Representation, Not Enough Taxation While HopkinsLocal stands out among links between college and community, it fails to acknowledge a key way in which Hopkins benefits from Baltimore City monetarily. Hopkins institutions, despite being some of the biggest economic drivers in Maryland, receive tremendous breaks on property taxes from the City. Baltimore’s budget, projected as $2.554 billion for Fiscal Year 2016, relies most heavily on property tax revenues; they make up 35% of the total budget, 15% more than the next-biggest contributor. Thanks to an agreement brokered between local non-profits and government in 2008, institutions including Hopkins are slated to pay a total of $1.4 million in property taxes for FY16. Without this agreement, non-profit institutions would pay over fifty times more. The taxation detente is set to expire this fiscal year, opening the way for new negotiations on property tax rates for Hopkins and its local peers. Baltimore will likely always struggle to gather adequate tax revenue, as nearly a third of properties in the City receive some type of exemption. If Hopkins will lead the way by paying more of its fair share, the City could have more income to put towards public works projects, safety initiatives, and tax breaks for home buyers - all essential investments that Johns Hopkins ought value. ■
4 the JHU POLITIK
• October 5, 2015 • Volume XVIII, Issue VI
“Hoganomics” Needs to be Amended to Improve Maryland
I
by Sathvik Namburar ’18, Assistant Editor
t has been nearly a year since Larry Hogan’s victory in the Maryland gubernatorial election last November, an event which dramatically changed political dynamics in the state. In his campaign, Hogan repeatedly mentioned his belief that Maryland is struggling economically, promising to cut taxes and fundamentally shift the state’s economic policies to promote business growth. As governor, Hogan has consistently supported efforts to reduce costs imposed by the government on Marylanders; just this week he announced a new fee reduction program that he believes will contribute to this goal. Still, Governor Hogan could do significantly more if he switched his current focus from taxes and government intervention to issues of income inequality. Some of the new measures introduced by Hogan include the reduction of the cost of homeless ID cards to $1, the elimination of monthly fees for Maryland’s E-ZPass toll system, and lowered licensure costs for professionals in certain occupations, such as veterinarians and real estate brokers. Hogan followed these moves with a reminder to citizens who pay both out-of-state and in-state income taxes that they no longer have to do so, per the recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling in the case Comptroller of the Treasury of Maryland v. Wynne, and thus are entitled to tax refunds. The government of Maryland has estimated that the fee reduction program alone will save Marylanders $50 million over five years, with another possible $200 million in tax refunds following the Supreme Court decision. Despite the obvious benefits to those directly affected, the broader impacts of the measures announced this week are more questionable. The vast majority of the fee reductions are inconsequential to most people, and only a limited number of Marylanders will receive a tax refund. Furthermore, the fees primarily impact members of the upper middle class, so it is fair to wonder whether Hogan’s announcements are more of a political ploy than a major economic reform. It is telling that Hogan is trumpeting the relatively small-scale fee reduction and tax refund programs, as he has yet to score a major economic victory. It might be that the Governor has recognized that some of his proposed economic reforms are unnecessary. Contrary to Hogan’s dire economic predictions during the 2014 campaign, Maryland is one of the most prosperous states in America with an unemployment rate of 5.3%, close to the national average. The state is a regional leader in job creation and continues to benefit from its proximity to Washington, DC. There is little reason to tamper with success.
Rather than simply cutting taxes and decreasing spending, an area where the governor can make a major impact is income inequality and poverty. Any visitor driving through Baltimore can easily see the impacts of inequality, and the clear wealth dichotomy is a blight on the state’s economic record. By taking measured yet urgent action on these issues, Hogan has a real opportunity to leave an economic legacy. Reducing fees on homeless ID cards, while a positive first step, is only meaningful if Hogan plans to make further impacts. Income inequality is a multifaceted issue that cannot be quickly resolved. Still, Hogan should attempt to implement measures aimed at combating its prevalence such as improving education among the poor and reforming welfare programs. For example, numerous studies have shown a link between preschool education and better wealth outcomes, so implementing universal pre-kindergarten would be an excellent start for the Governor. As Hogan has to contend with a Democraticallycontrolled State House and Senate, he is much more likely to find common ground over inequality than tax cuts. Simply by focusing on income inequality instead of measures such as the fee reduction program that primarily help the wealthy, Hogan could leave office having altered not only the political, but also the economic landscape of Maryland—even if the economic change is different from that which he had originally envisioned. ■
Volume XVIII, Issue VI • October 5, 2015 •
the JHU POLITIK
5
The Future of Chinese Cyber Liberty: President Xi Jinping’s Tech Meeting in Seattle
O
by Mengyun (Catherine) Yang ’17, Contributing Writer
n September 22nd, Chinese President Xi Jinping hosted a meeting of high-profile Chinese and U.S. technology industry leaders in Seattle. In an effort to reassure foreign tech companies’ over their growing concerns about Chinese protectionism, President Xi declared that “China will never close its open door to the outside world.” Following the meeting, President Xi met with tech CEOs and visited the headquarters of major Silicon Valley corporations. Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg used his impressive Chinese language skills to communicate with President Xi, perhaps hoping that he could charm the Chinese leader into allowing Facebook in China. President Xi and First Lady Peng Liyuan also visited Microsoft’s Redmond, CA campus, where the President expressed his appreciation for Microsoft’s business in China and his hope for more cooperation with Microsoft. China is often criticized for its protection of local companies at the expense of foreign ones, as well as its restrictions on cyber liberty. This meeting may have been a turning point. Without cyber liberty, China cannot do business with tech companies like Facebook, which is currently blocked in the country. Moreover, China will not be taken seriously on the global stage as a legitimate force until it ensures basic freedoms such as open Internet access. Chinese Internet censorship will, in the long run, impede Chinese businesses and the economic power of the nation. Of course, if China frees its Internet, Chinese citizens will be exposed to unfiltered news sources, a development that the government wants to avoid. Currently, most all news that is disseminated in China is selected and polished by the government. Xinhua News Agency, the dominant news source in China, is closely affiliated with the Communist Party and therefore sticks to the party line on issues. Dissent is not tolerated in China, as the arrest of artist and dissident blogger Ai Weiwei in 2010 demonstrates. Each year, hundreds of dissidents like Ai are arrested for their online criticisms of the government. Though the Chinese government may not be ready to ensure complete cyber liberty for its citizens, information technology is developing so rapidly that China cannot block foreign Internet platforms forever.
in Washington, D.C. These companies have historically been able to either avoid or win antitrust suits due to their close relationships with influential government figures. Additionally, tech companies have a major advantage over non-tech corporations since they collect massive amounts of user data. As the Edward Snowden leaks revealed, the U.S. government often taps into this data for security and other purposes and thus needs to cultivate a strong relationship with American tech companies. Ideally, China’s cooperation with U.S. tech companies would also allow them to collectively mediate the tense relationship between China and the United States. Increased cooperation between the Chinese government and U.S. technological companies may also mitigate American critiques of China’s protectionist policies and censorship. No matter how much the two countries disagree ideologically, it is an unassailable fact that economics trumps all else. Additionally, collaboration with American tech companies that possess advanced technology would benefit Chinese businesses looking to improve their own services. For U.S. tech companies, China’s market is full of potential. Even though it would be economically advantageous for China to end its Internet censorship, the country’s future still overwhelmingly depends on the actions of the Communist Party. President Xi and his party remain determined to eliminate any potential political challenges from within and without, which increases the difficulty of ending censorship. As a result, we are likely to see a slow transition to an open Internet rather than a quick policy change. Regardless of how such change occurs, however, President Xi’s meeting last week continues to demonstrate the need for a shift in Chinese policy regarding censorship. ■
Cooperation with U.S. tech giants is important for China on many levels, in spite of the fact that the Chinese government has political incentives to continue censoring the Internet. Tech companies possess strong lobbying power and have the capacity to influence U.S. policies. Apple, Facebook, and Google have all spent millions in lobbying and have many lobbyists
6 the JHU POLITIK
• October 5, 2015 • Volume XVIII, Issue VI
Eyes on the Road: Big Automobile Manufacturers are Missing the Real Issues
I
by Shrenik Jain ’18, Assistant Editor
n the last month, Volkswagen has found itself in the crosshairs of government agencies, consumers, and lawyers for duplicitous software deliberately placed in its “clean diesel” models to manipulate emissions test results. News of the scandal saw Volkswagen savaged on the trading floor, with tens of billions sliced off of its market cap. Martin Winterkorn, Volkswagen’s CEO, stepped down almost immediately, and the company began issuing a slew of repentant statements, pledging to cooperate with the authorities and regain the trust of consumers. Volkswagen seems confident that it can follow in the steps of Toyota in 2009 and GE in 2014—apologize for a few months, pay some fines, and return to business as usual. But the automobile industry is running on borrowed time; increasingly strict regulations, brittle business models, and new competition from technology companies means that Volkswagen and its traditional competitors will soon see the landscape of their industry shift dramatically. Regulatory standards have long been the bane of automakers, but Volkwagen’s use of intentionally deceitful software showcases the dismal state of the industry. The ease with which Volkswagen installed manipulative software suggests that it is easier for car companies to sidestep regulations rather than follow them. First-hand industry accounts describe emissions tests in Europe as almost farcical: “special lubricants make the engines run more smoothly…[and] tape on the cracks around panels and doors reduces drag.” Volkswagen’s recent drop in share price was accompanied by dips in prices of competitors such as Toyota and GE as nervous investors wondered which company would be caught next. With VW’s lies exposed, it is evident that the money auto companies have spent on marketing diesel as an eco-friendly and economical alternative to electric vehicles was wasted. With billions in fines and retributive regulations coupled with a general slowdown in demand originating from Russia and China, large car companies are looking to consolidate. However, modern day auto manufacturers have problems that mergers would only aggravate. There exists a massive overcapacity in manufacturing, built at the height of China’s demand boom. As emerging markets slow, this idle productivity adds to costs and prevents carmakers from achieving economies of scale. Carmakers are buckling under the increased cost of investments in alternative fuels, as well as spending on technological features like Internet access that are now expected on even base models. Large companies take advantage of low interest rates to flood production and increase their total number of cars sold, but profit margins are dropping precipitously; VW made only a 2.5
percent margin on vehicles under their core ‘VW’ brand. Large car companies have overextended their financial capabilities by offering loans to increase sales, but the VW scandal has sent the price of capital soaring. The prospect of an eventual interest rate increase means that VW may find itself in need of an external capital injection to remain solvent. On the edge of this chaos, companies such as Tesla and Apple are sharpening their weapons. Elon Musk pounced on news of the scandal, declaring it evidence that carbon based fuels are unsustainable. While many dismiss the newfound interest of tech giants in the auto industry, Tesla’s success demonstrates that technology-focused vehicles can easily gain a foothold in the luxury segment, critical for large automakers due to the increased margins per car sold. Large tech companies do not struggle with investing in new technology, whether it be mobile hotspots or self-driving, or have Big Auto’s problem with cash: Apple’s cash stores alone are reported to be around $200 billion in size, five times the entire market capitalization of VW. Apple supposedly already has a team of 200 working to design an Apple car to enter production in 2020. The automobile industry may be full of established brands, but anyone who remembers how quickly Japanese corporations dominated domestic American firms within a decade back in the 1970s should be wary of an equally disruptive market shift today. Volkswagen’s scandal cuts far deeper than those in the automobile industry are willing to admit. The widespread cheating in the entire automobile sector will soon be juxtaposed next to competitors with near bottomless pockets and coveted brands. The old conglomerates of the automobile industry desperately need to reform their diseconomies of scale and fragile capital structures while still somehow meeting increasingly stringent regulations—no small task at all. ■
Volume XVIII, Issue VI • October 5, 2015 •
the JHU POLITIK
7
From Russia, Without an Ounce of Love by Abigail Annear ’18, Contributing Writer
D
espite the growing panic and frustration of U.S. officials with expanded Russian involvement in the Middle East, the Kremlin is not drastically shifting its stance on Syria. Moscow, as a loyal ally to President Bashar al-Assad and a fierce opponent of radical Islam, is acting similarly to the United States in seeking to establish its own coalition to reverse Islamic State gains and protect the principle of sovereign authority, using the Syrian regime as a base from which it can conduct such operations. Over the four year trajectory of the Syrian Civil War, dozens of governmental, Islamist, and secular forces have engaged in both combative and diplomatic missions to resolve the crisis. Given the complexity of intertwining allegiances and motivations, it is impossible to distinguish those who are “terrorists.” In a recent briefing at the United Nations, Russian Minister of Foreign Affairs Sergei Lavrov pronounced, “If it looks like a terrorist, if it acts like a terrorist, if it walks like a terrorist, if it fights like a terrorist, it’s a terrorist, right?” To Americans who call for Assad’s removal from power, anyone who advocates for his dethronement could be considered a righteous revolutionary. Russians regard these same individuals as terrorists looking to subvert lawful authority. No longer can the term “radical Islamist” simply serve as an all-encompassing characterization of Western targets, since essential nuances differentiate each group involved in the crisis. As a citizen of the United States, it is my responsibility to challenge our representatives regarding who they believe poses the gravest threat to American interests and way of life. As President Vladimir Putin himself recognized in a recent interview with Charlie Rose on 60 Minutes, the U.S. government often employs foreign “antagonists” as political pawns in its perpetual quest to muster national unity in order to justify military maneuvers intended to preserve its global hegemony. Russia has the potential to present an “existential threat” to the United States, but not at all in the manner that Secretary of Defense Ash Carter has suggested. The Russian Federation, given its longstanding history of foreign-led alienation, remains one of the few nations willing to vocalize dissent against American dominion in international affairs. Amidst an era of ever-increasing globalization, in which the evolution of warfare has negated interstate combat, the face of the enemy has changed. Notwithstanding a few isolated exceptions such as Israel and Iran, the majority of modern governments cannot point their fingers directly to other countries when naming pressing dangers to their interests. In this day and age,
8 the JHU POLITIK
ten individuals on the FBI’s most wanted list wield a greater ability to undermine security and disrupt civil society than most nations do. Unlike its Western foil, the Russian government has accepted the reality of this new world order and now seeks to develop more effective methods to counter the rise of radical terrorism. Ultimately, by bolstering Assad’s regime, the Kremlin aspires to invalidate puppet governments, which it claims—often correctly—that the United States has sown and cultivated throughout the Middle East, exemplified by its failed invasion of Iraq and support of coup d’etats, as well as other destabilizing entanglements with Arab Spring affiliates. While many world leaders agree that Assad commands a repressive administration, coercing his removal from office would further exacerbate disorder and spawn yet another power vacuum in the region. As Russian officials have argued, we need only look to Ukraine, Egypt, Afghanistan, and Libya to understand the futility of forcibly deposing heads of state. Thus, defending existing authorities and crippling extremist operations remain Russia’s primary concerns. Undercutting an already tainted American reputation in the region comes as a convenient consequence. Throughout his tenure in office, President Obama has erroneously assumed the position of a domineering father over what he views as an errant teenager in President Putin. To ensure cooperation and mitigate past rivalries, America must come to terms with the fact that Russia, along with countless emerging powers, will refuse to answer and acquiesce to Washington’s demands. Russia has moved on to countering other threats. It is time that the United States does the same by concentrating all efforts on the Islamic State instead of fretting about their implications to Assad’s rule. ■
• October 5, 2015 • Volume XVIII, Issue VI
WRITE FOR the JHU POLITIK
PHOTO COURTESY: UNITED STATES LIBRARY OF CONGRESS’S PRINTS AND PHOTOGRAPHS DIVISION
JHU Politik, founded in 2008, is a weekly publication of political opinion pieces. We proudly seek to provide the Johns Hopkins community with student voices and perspectives about important issues of our time. Rather than hide within a cloistered academic bubble, we know we must critically engage with the world that surrounds us. That, we believe, is at the heart of what it means to be learning. We are lucky to be situated in the city of Baltimore, a city with a rich history and an ever-changing politics. We aim to look at the politics of the Homewood campus, the city of Baltimore, the domestic landscape of the United States, and the international community . While we publish the Politik weekly, we work simultaneously on our special issues which come out once per semester. These magazines confront a single topic from multiple angles. We have run issues covering topics like the political nature of research, the Arab Spring, and our city Baltimore.
If interested, e-mail us at
JHUPOLITIK@gmail.com Or find us online at
jhupolitik.org
Volume XVIII, Issue VI • October 5, 2015 •
the JHU POLITIK
9