THE JUNIOR STATEMENT
Spring/Summer 2012
The Official Newsletter of the Junior State of America (JSA)
Volume 1, Issue 10
As Summer nears The Statement Rolls on
By: Iman Baghai First off, thank you for reading The Junior Statement. The Statement will help bridge the gap between JSAers all over the nation. This will be the tenth edition of The Statement and the sixth full edition. This month’s issue will consist of the usual diverse topics discussed in The Statement from Greece to Santorum to Defending History to a tribute to JSA. I urge you to check out the articles and discuss them with your peers. It is through these discussions that we can become more educated citizens. I hope everyone had a fantastic time during the school year part of JSA and I hope all of you going to summer JSA activities the best of time possible. Again if ANYONE is interested in writing for The Statement on pretty much anything then please do not hesitate to contact me at ibaghai@jsa.org Also, if you have any feedback we'd love to hear from y'all.
Page 2 Votes=War on Voters Page 2 Greece-‐Part 2 Page 3 Winning the West Wing Page 4 Defending History Page 5 Santorum 2016? Page 6 I am Who I JSAm
JSA Be the People
THE JUNIOR STATEMENT A Battle for Votes Means a War on Voters By Joseph Laposata It was Einstein who first posited the idea that in order to travel backwards in time, one would have to exceed the speed of light traveling in the reverse direction of the rotation of the earth. It was not until recently that it was discovered that traveling back to 1954 was as easy as voting for Rick Santorum. The primary battle for the Republican nomination, like all primaries, was a battle for the party’s base. But as Rick Santorum, the strongest opponent to Mitt Romney, brought up issues like contraception and women’s reproductive rights, he forced the remainder of the party to try to out-right him by taking up similar positions. And now that Mitt Romney is the presumptive nominee, those primary positions are going to come back to bite him. So what are Mitt Romney’s views on women’s issues, exactly? He’s stated his opposition to Roe v. Wade and has said that abortion rights should be decided by the states. He didn’t take the Santorumesque step of coming out against birth control, but does believe that any and all employers should be able to choose not to cover it under their company health coverage on whatever “religious grounds” they choose. He wants to defund Planned Parenthood, a private organization that receives some public funds and provides women’s health services to millions of underprivileged women, into nonexistence. He would bring women’s rights into a new era exactly identical to the old era. It’s no wonder that the left is decrying the right’s attempts to undo women’s rights as a “War on Women.” The Republican Party is attempting to refute the label, but to little avail. The normal gap between men and women voters in a presidential election year is 7 points, with women voting for Democrats more often. So far this year it has exceeded 20 points, and is rising steadily. The Republicans are paying dearly in the general for their primary indiscretions. What does this mean for us, as future voters? The unfortunate side-effect of radical social policy from one party in a two party system is that people who normally agree with that party but disagree with the new direction (a surprisingly large number of independent voters fall in this category) must then weigh their agreements against their disagreements and either vote against some of their interests or not vote at all. So, when you can vote, vote feasibly. Vote for somebody whose positions can win in a general. At the
The Official Newsletter of the Junior State of America (JSA)
least, the debate around the issues is much more docile. And isn’t that really what we need right now? Greece—Part 2 By: Karthik Palaniappan I write part 2 because this drama had cooled off for a while, but now it’s back. Greece has been overspending for over a decade, but all came crashing down with the worldwide recession. It revealed how much their government was spending, and how little it was collecting in revenue. To avoid problems with the Euro, France and Germany negotiated massive bailout packages. However, the packages were not popular with the people because they were austerity measures. This meant less vacation and fewer benefits.
Extreme parties in Greece promised they would keep these popular programs and renegotiate better bailout packages. The people listened to them, and the Communists and the neo-Nazis made huge gains in the Greek parliament at the last elections. They could not form a coalition government (if there is no majority party, parliamentary systems require coalitions to run the government). Now, they will have another round of elections—it will be interesting to see what happens. Now, the rest of Europe, the US (watch the stock market), and the world is worried. If Greece does not keep up its end of the deal with the bailout package, it will default. This will have severe repercussions for the Euro-zone as well as the whole world. They could end up being the Lehman Brothers of Europe. In our country, Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson under President Bush agreed to bail out Bear Sterns, but then refused to spend more to bail out Lehman Brothers. He decided Wall Street had to be JSA Be the People
THE JUNIOR STATEMENT sent a message—if you fail, it’s your fault and you must deal with the consequences. Eventually, it caused the 2008-2009 recession. If Greece does the same, the contagion would spark fears in other economies—a domino effect. This time it could domino to entire countries rather than just banks. Spain and Italy are also on the verge of debt crises. Again, this could have repercussions for confidence in our markets—we could see huge stock market losses as investors are scared over Europe, which is a huge trading partner for us, so there are fears there. Greece could be kicked out of the Euro monetary system. Then, they would have to convert back to the Drachma (its old currency) or another currency. The citizens of Greece would probably pull their Euros out of the bank for fear they would be useless. Then, the banks would have no money, hurting the economy even more. The problem with austerity is that it doesn’t help the economy. The Greek economy was already in recession, and now France and Germany are forcing Greece to cut spending and raise taxes. That is spending less (taking money out of the economy) and raising more revenue (also taking more money out of the economy). The only way Greece will pay back its obligations is through more revenue, which could come more easily through a better economy. However, Greece has shown no will to strengthen their economy or cut spending, so that plan is out. Austerity is the last measure possible. Of course, there are many who think that fears are overblown. We have known that Greece is failing for quite a while. Europe has contingency plans in place to absorb the shock of a possible Greek default. How the West (Wing) Was Won By Jack Noland This November, Americans will go to the polls for a momentous opportunity; they will decide whether this decade will be one of liberalism or conservatism. However, the key to winning the Presidency lies with the middle, the centrists. President Obama will win reelection if he can move to the center and push Governor Romney to the right; it is as simple as that. There is historical evidence to back me up on this. When one party shifts too far to the extremes, the other will move toward a more balanced position, and win back power. The Republican Party had a monopoly on the White House throughout the 1920s, under Presidents Harding, Coolidge, and Hoover.
The Official Newsletter of the Junior State of America (JSA)
Massive deregulation, a post World War I boom, and dangerous spending patterns gave America the Roaring Twenties, a period of monumental economic expansion. However, the growth in this period was not sustainable or stable. The economy crashed, and crashed hard, in the Great Depression. In the election of 1932, the Republicans nominated the incumbent Hoover, and the Democrats brought forth Franklin D. Roosevelt. Americans were dissatisfied with the national collapse, and were drawn to Roosevelt. This can partially be attributed to the desire for a fresh face in the Oval Office, but the main reason for Roosevelt’s success was his moderate, economic recovery-based platform. FDR was by no means a hardcore left-winger, whereas Hoover represented the extreme right. With his position at center left, Roosevelt attracted disillusioned conservatives. By the same token that vehement conservatism was unattractive, America would not have voted for an extreme liberal. In fact, only 2.2% of the country did, for Socialist Party candidate Norman Thomas.
Following FDR’s ascendance, America enjoyed a period of liberalism, marked by the New Deal, reform, and welfare. Democrats held the White House from 1933 to 1969, with the exception of moderate Republican Dwight D. Eisenhower, who governed from 1953-1961. It was with this backdrop that American reform movements took shaped and picked up steam. This included the turbulent civil rights, women’s rights, and the development of a safety net for America’s poorest citizens. With President Johnson’s strident support for Civil Rights and the amelioration of poverty, the Democratic Party shifted farther left. In the election of 1968, Richard Nixon, the Republican nominee, ran as a moderate, to reflect the “silent JSA Be the People
THE JUNIOR STATEMENT majority” who were opposed to the turbulent change that had become the hallmark of the Democratic Party. This was compounded by internal strife and eventual breakdown of the Democrats, as frontrunner Robert F. Kennedy was assassinated. Americans were more comfortable with the moderate, once again. Other examples abound, including Clinton in 1992, but the aforementioned instances are the clearest models for the success of moderates. In the Republican campaign struggle, Governor Romney had difficulty walking the line between appealing to the conservative base, and being attractive to moderates. This has led to him contradicting himself on a number of issues, which has hurt his reputation among those who see him as a “flip-flopper.” By stretching to kowtow to the ultraconservatives, he has disaffected independents, and the reverse is true in his pandering to moderates. Now that Romney has all but won the nomination, he must focus on the general election. The simple fact of the matter is that, at the end of the day, hardcore Republicans will still vote for Romney, if only because they dislike Obama. I suspect that Romney is wise enough to try to move toward the middle because of this, but preventing this must be Obama’s first priority. This is because the conservatives will not carry Romney to victory. According to the Huffington Post, if an election were held tonight, Obama would win the election with 294 electoral votes, to Romney’s 170. This excludes “tossup” battleground states like North Carolina and Florida. However, a closer look at the data is enthusing for the Obama camp. 237 of the President’s expected votes are considered “strong,” meaning both that these states are very likely to vote for Obama in the general election, and that Obama would only need 33 more votes to wrap up the Presidency. This is covered by 57 “leans Obama” electoral votes, and possibly more from North Carolina and Florida, in which Obama has led for over a year. This race is certainly not over, but President Obama has all the tools to wrap up a second term. Putting Romney on the defensive over previous extreme positions will win him crucial votes. America does not need austerity and conservatism in this period of economic uncertainty and global change. America will not have to, if Obama’s campaign managers play the cards they hold and Obama asserts himself in the debates. Moderates win elections; hardliners, whatever their party affiliations, do not. Just ask Franklin Delano Roosevelt and Abraham Lincoln, a Democrat and a Republican, and moderates both, and America’s greatest Presidents.
The Official Newsletter of the Junior State of America (JSA)
In Defense of History By: Anthony Kayruz In many modern American schools, there is an inherent push for the math and sciences; much educational funding goes towards these subject areas, while others—such as fine arts and the humanities—are progressively given the short end of the stick. Some students meander through the hallways already knowing their purpose in life: to become doctors, engineers, pharmacists…to go to medical school, to take research jobs, to excel in math, and to study science. The divergence between the sciences and the humanities has caused many to look down upon the latter, deeming it impractical and useless in a world dominated by numbers and technology. However, the importance of liberal arts cannot be overlooked, and the overarching significance of one of the core components of the humanities—history—cannot afford to be forgotten. When one discusses studying history in his or her future, the snide stereotype that often ensues is: “Do you plan to teach it?” Whereas a degree in a science and a trip to medical school can open up numerous pathways to success, wealth, and happiness, history is thought to only be an option for aspiring teachers with an inflexible income. Naysayers believe that history is a merely a story, nothing more, and its worth should be judged accordingly. Sadly, these narrow-minded views overshadow the practicality, the advantage, and the necessity of comprehending the past in a modern society that is deprived of true historical scholars, especially in the realm of politics and decision-making.
Renowned essayist and self-proclaimed proponent of naturalism, George Santayana, uttered the following famous phrase: “Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” Although the JSA Be the People
THE JUNIOR STATEMENT words seem cliché and many have read them numerous times, their message, unfortunately, is consistently disregarded. Politicians continue to reattempt failed policies—in particular those pertaining to the economy—because they either refuse or are unaware of the glaring advantages of historical hindsight to pinpoint what does and does not work. These benefits have numerous associations in the past as seen in the 1960s Civil Rights movement, spearheaded by Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Martin Luther King, a prominent social reformer and human rights activist did not develop his concept of civil disobedience independently: he evaluated the historical successes and failures of previous African American leaders such as Booker T. Washington, W. E. B. Du Bois, and Stokely Carmichael. King understood that Du Bois’s unbending requests were too obstinate, Carmichael’s harsh methods of insurrection and rebellion were too radical, and Washington’s policies of relaxed complacency were too stagnant to conceive a prominent change. By recalling the errors of his revolutionary brethren, Martin Luther King was able to lead a successful movement that, within thirty years, almost completely freed the American community of the despicable values of racism and segregation— successes that would have proved impossible by simply abandoning a historical perspective. If current government officials would adopt the strategies of King, momentarily forget about the present, and look towards the past, they would understand how to shape effective policies that benefit the entire nation. If they remembered how the Vietnam War crippled the effectiveness of President Lyndon Johnson’s national programs, maybe they would not attempt to attack both foreign and domestic issues with full force. If they remembered how George Washington advised America to stay neutral in international affairs and refrain from alliances, maybe there would not be so much hatred, terrorism, and adversity around the world. If they recalled history in general, maybe America could regain its efficient edge, turn around its economy, and forever retain its status as the greatest nation on earth. By simply delegating due worth to history and protecting its integrity during the rampage and widespread focus on math and science, our elected leaders can add a sixth sense—the 20/20 vision of hindsight or rather history—to their political arsenal.
The Official Newsletter of the Junior State of America (JSA)
Why Santorum 2016 Is a Possibility By Joseph Laposata All through the Republican primary election, people said of Mitt Romney, “He’s inevitable!” And he was, by the calculable metric of the Republican Party. It’s said of the nomination process that Democrats fall in love and Republicans fall in line. Romney won the metaphorical “2nd place” for the nomination in ’08, so the spot fell to him. But what does that say about Santorum’s chances in 2016?
First, let’s look at some pertinent history. Historically, Republicans in the modern era have always picked a nominee who has been on more than one rodeo. Romney lost to McCain, who lost to Bush in 2000, who didn’t need to lose first because his father was president. His father won in ’88, having lost in ’80 to Reagan, who lost in ’76 to Ford, who was Nixon’s VP. It goes even farther back, but the pattern is obvious. Apply this to the current election cycle and Rick Santorum finds himself in an interesting position. In 2016, outgoing President Obama will represent the Democratic Party. Riding his wave could be anybody, anybody at all. It’s presumed that current Secretary of State Clinton would get the nod, but with the Democrats, nothing is certain. Who would have thought that Obama would win back in ’07 when he was first campaigning? The Democratic challenger is anything but certain, which just means that the Republican nominee needs to be flexible. The “inevitability” question is exclusive to the Republicans. So who will the Republicans nominate in 2016? History tells us it’ll be the “#2” presidential contender for this year. That means it’s either Santorum or whoever ends up being the GOP VP candidate. For those of you who are either concerned or enthused by JSA Be the People
THE JUNIOR STATEMENT this, start your planning now. Learn from history and act. I am who I JSAm By Joseph Laposata I first heard of JSA when a mailer arrived at our house sometime around January of 2011. I hadn’t even opened the envelope or read the contents, but my mother had, in her quest to fill up my summer whether I liked it or not. She practically informed me that I would be attending the summer school program at Georgetown (not that I objected; I love political science) and that I should learn more about JSA. Obviously, as an apathetic teenager (whoops, that’s redundant), I did no such thing. And then I actually attended. I studied Speech and Political Communication under Professor Huddy at Georgetown University during the first session of summer school. For three weeks, I split my time between learning and debating. I had an amazing time, not only learning things that I’d never learned before but also gaining lifelong friends that I have kept in touch with to this day. I left with a heavy heart, sad to say goodbye, but looking forward to senior year, looking forward to starting my own JSA chapter. I started my JSA chapter in January of 2012, having worked with my sponsor to get a space and a meeting time. I used the gavels I had won at the Summer School and Fall State as recruiting tools and had twenty members by mid-March. My chapter had thought talks, debates, solution sessions, and fun. I managed to drag four of my chapter members from Nashville, TN to Columbus, OH for the Spring State convention. I passed my leadership off to capable hands and expanded our club to our rival high school, making mini-cons a possibility. I dedicated myself to this chapter and it has paid me back ten times over, if only in terms of satisfaction. I love this club. America needs more organizations like it to engage high school students in this way. I’m graduating this May and heading off this August to the school I fell in love with last summer, Georgetown University. I’m going to be studying government there and intend to major in that field. I sincerely doubt I would have been accepted if I hadn’t been able to write about the time I spent there. I have already joined the JSA alumni association and intend to RA at the Georgetown Summer School in upcoming years, but it’s not enough. It will never be enough. I will never be able to repay JSA for the fun it’s given
The Official Newsletter of the Junior State of America (JSA)
me. So, in case it makes any difference, I just wanted to say thank you to all of you who work your hardest for this organization. To any and all who contribute to JSA, thank you. Thank you. Thank you. You’ve changed my life. JSA Summer Programs 3 Week Academic Summer Schools Stanford University July 1st – July 22nd Princeton University July 8th – July 29th Georgetown University July 15th – August 5th 1 Week Summer Institute & Symposiums UCLA Institute on Media and Politics July 23rd – July 27th Princeton Institute on National Security August 8th – August 11th Republican National Convention Symposia August 26th – August 31st Democratic National Convention Symposia September 2nd – September 7th
JSA Be the People