Women In Politics Magazine: Road to The Election

Women in Politics Magazine

E T T H O R OA D

N O I T C E L E

POLL BOOTH OPEN October 2020

A Word from the Women In Politics Team Dear Reader, Several weeks ago this country lost a pioneer, icon, and revolutionary of American democracy: Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. As an organization whose central mission is to empower females to get involved in and later pursue politics or law, RBG was admired and respected by both our team members and our followers, regardless of their political views.

Although RBG’s most notable achievement is becoming the second woman to serve on the Supreme Court, she is truly remembered for being a trailblazer of the feminist movement. From her litigating days in the early ’70s fighting to end gender discrimination to her time on the court, RBG was a voice for civil rights.

She herself not only expanded women’s influence in law and politics with her achievements but also constantly fought for the inherent equal rights of others.

RBG’s life was truly notorious, and we are extremely saddened by the loss of such an influential female figure in politics. She will be remembered by us and the rest of the world as a fighter for equality - not only for women but for all people.

We wish to put politics aside to commemorate her incredible life and, as a team, would like to collectively dedicate this month’s issue to her.

Sincerely, Women In Politics

A Word from the writing leader ELLA STILLON SOUTHARD

The highly anticipated general election of 2020 is exactly one month from today. One month! Here at Women In Politics, our goal is not to be partisan towards one side, but rather educate our audience on the pressing issues associated with this years’ presidential election. We know how daunting it can be to read alarming headlines and complicated Twitter storms, or how overwhelming the political attacks can be on both sides. It seems like there is a new disagreement every day with the campaigns or the election. That is why we created this issue for you! As you flip through the magazine, you can find many informative articles regarding not only the election, but other current issues the United States is facing head-on.

Although most of us at Women In Politics and our audience can not vote, it is still incredibly crucial to pay attention to the political process of elections. Most of our team, and presumably many of you, want to eventually work in the political field. Educating ourselves now and fully understanding how elections work will set you up for a better future in your career! And if not your career, then just as a better citizen of this country. In this time of chaos with the reopening of schools, the continued global pandemic and the social unrest regarding racial injustices, it can be relieving to recognize that something is in our control. Even if we can not vote as young Americans, we can discuss with and educate others. It is an empowering reminder that the United States, built off the idea of the freedom to think and express your opinions, still holds that sentiment true today. We hope you enjoy this issue!.

01

A Brief History of the Electoral College: How It Came to Be & How It’s Become Problematic

09

Andrea Chow

Megan Baker

04

The USPS: A Hidden Part of the Election Process

11

Sara Keegan

06

Alexandria OcasioCortez and Her SixtySecond Nomination

Everything You Need To Know About the Cares Act

How Much Does it Cost To Run for President?'

Stella Kleinman

14

Andrea Montenegro

TABLE OF CONTENTS 16

Ed Markey: the Senator Ending Decades of Kennedy Dominated Politics Gabby Scott

Social Media and Disinformation in the 2020 Election Ting Cui

19

Biden Will Be Better for Healthcare PostPandemic Manya Kodali

22

A Look Into the United States Venezuelan Sanctions Lily Veits

33

Interview with Palak Shah: A look into His Public Service career Rebecca Joseph

A Brief History of the Electoral College: How It Came to Be & How It’s Become Problematic

By Megan Baker The electoral college is an integral component of America’s presidential election process; it has functioned as a dominating determinant in deciding America’s next president since its inception at the Constitutional Convention in 1787. Although created to address the larger concern of how the president should be elected into office, another major deliberation surrounding the mechanism of the electoral college was the contention that existed between the country’s large and small states.

The electoral college was created at a time when the Constitutional Framers found that the main points of political contention pertained to the conflicting interests of large and small states. In a manner similar to Roger Sherman’s Connecticut Compromise – which blended the Virginia (large-state) and New Jersey (small-state) proposals of how to both structure the legislative branch and delegate power to state governments in the Constitution – the electoral college was established with specific provisions in an effort to produce an equilibrium in representation for both large and small states. The number of electoral votes a state receives depends on the number of representatives that state has in Congress – one vote for each member the state has in the House of Representatives in addition to two votes, one vote for each of the state’s two senators.

1

To win, a candidate must receive the majority (today this amounts to at least 270 out of the possible 538) of electoral votes. Since electoral votes directly correlate with the number of House members – which is linked to a state’s population – large states have more electoral votes.

"To win, a candidate must receive the majority (today this amounts to at least 270 out of the possible 538) of electoral votes."

Bayard’s action triggered opposition to the electoral process because it highlighted the potential downfalls of each state’s vote having equal weight despite varying population sizes because it demonstrated how one state could unilaterally affect the outcome of deciding who acquires America’s highest ranking office.

Not long after its inception, the

Complications that were exploited

shortcomings of the electoral college

towards the beginning of the

became both apparent and

country’s founding still currently

unignorable. The election of 1800

persist, albeit in different ways. The

exposed numerous problematic areas

vast expansion of national territory,

within the mechanism. In 1800, both the

paired with the delocalization of the

Federalists and Democratic-

election and campaigning processes,

Republicans formed nominated tickets,

only served to exacerbate these

as is practiced today. However, a tie

issues and alter the presidential

between Thomas Jefferson and his

landscape in ways the Founding

vice-presidential running mate Aaron

Fathers could never have foreseen.

Burr revealed embedded structural

The main problem is that while the

issues with the electoral college when

nature of elections has changed, the

the vote fell to the House of

electoral college and Constitutional

Representatives and neither Jefferson

election mechanisms have not.

nor Burr received the necessary majority despite tallying votes over 39 times. To end the stalemate, Delaware Representative James A. Bayard broke the deadlock by switching his vote to Jefferson, who thus won the presidency.

2

The compact needs the signatory In numerous presidential elections,

states’ electoral vote count to

like the ones in 2000 and 2016,

total at least 270 (enough to sway

one state functioned as the final

a presidential election) to go into

determinate in who gained

effect - the compact is currently

control of the oval office; even

at 196 electoral votes, 72.6% of

after a recount, the candidate

what is needed for it to be

that won the popular vote by over

enacted.

3 million more votes failed to also be the candidate that won the

While many people disagree on

electoral vote, and as such, many

rectifying the shortcomings of the

have explored avenues for

electoral college, most concur

electoral reform. Maine and

with the argument that the

Nebraska instituted a district

electoral college is in need of

system that allowed the states’

serious reform. With much

electoral votes to be split

skepticism falling to the

between candidates contingent

mechanism after Hillary received

on the popular vote of each

over 3 million more popular votes

congressional district. However,

than Donald Trump in 2016 and

this only led to gerrymandering

still not emerging as the country’s

and the weakening of each

next president, it will be

state’s weight in the electoral

interesting to see how 2020 will

system, whereas all other states

play out - and if it could be the

continued to enforce a winner-

last election where we see the

takes-all approach. A national

electoral college as we know it.

popular vote interstate compact also emerged as pragmatic electoral reform: a compact between states stating that each signatory state would wait until the national voter was tallied and allocate its electoral votes to that candidate.

3

The USPS: A Hidden Part of the Election Process

By Sara Keegan

How many times do you either send or

As COVID-19 continues to be a

receive a package monthly? Is it more

prominent issue in the US, many voters

than 5 times, 10? 15? The postal service is

feel uncomfortable going to the polls,

used every minute of every day, hundreds

as they would rather stay home to

of thousands of people depending on it

prevent the possibility of getting

for products and income. Established by

infected. As a result, the percentage

the Second Continental Congress in

of people planning on voting by mail

1775, the United States Postal Service

has increased drastically, skyrocketing

was created in hopes of organizing and

to numbers never seen before. To keep

constructing an efficient system that

up with the demand, the already

would lead to easier communication

financially struggling USPS has

between the United States and Britain.

requested 25 billion in funding to

By constructing postal facilities, mail

handle the influx of mail in ballots

wagons, and a faculty, the postal system

coming in for the upcoming

became considerably more proficient

Presidential election. During a press

and cut delivery times in half. Today, the

conference on August 13, 2020, Trump

postal system has over 40,000 postal

stated that he opposed funding for the

offices and delivers an estimated 212

USPS, not wanting additional money

billion pieces of mail to over 144 million

being invested in the postal system for

homes. It is the nation’s largest civilian

mail-in voting: "They want $25 billion

employer and provides any resident the

for the Post Office. Now they need

ability to send and receive mail.

that money in order to make the Post

4

Office work so it can take all of these millions and millions of ballots,"

The President defends his position stating that this funding will go to waste with the failing service, not impacting the election and its outcome. However, many politicians and coalitions think otherwise. The Declaration for American Democracy Organization believes that refusing to fund the additional costs would be contributing to voter suppression, leading to fewer people voting overall. What made the situation even more alarming is that President Trump appointed Louis DeJoy, a major Republican donor and president’s supporter to head USPS. By July, the postal service banned overtime, causing vast delays in mail delivery. It’s been reported that mail sorting machines were being removed from postal offices, further validating the fear that the President is actively trying to suppress the voices of many who will most likely not vote for him. Unbeknownst to many Americans, the United States Postal Service has always been an integral part of the election process, however, its role in an election amidst global pandemic is even more crucial.

Many interpret this as an attempt by Trump to manipulate the election for his own benefit, as many of the residents who will send their vote through mail ballots support the democratic candidate, Joe Biden. 48% of American citizens in support of Biden stated they would be voting by mail, unlike a smaller percentage of 23% who stated that they were voting for Trump by mail. By withholding funds needed by the USPS for vote-by-mail ballots, thousands of voters will be unable to fulfill their responsibility as citizens to vote.

President Trump has been attacking the United States Postal Service and mail in ballots for months now. His claims of “rampant fraud” are unsubstantiated and look brazenly hypocritical, as he has voted by mail numerous times, including in this election cycle. “Mail in ballot fraud is extremely rare” according to the Brennan Institute, a nonpartisan policy institute. According to the center, the states that hold elections mostly by mail, have not had any fraud.

Considering that the post primaries audit of the already financially strapped USPS revealed that one million mail in ballots were sent late and that the service has experienced more delays and disruptions since, many fear that an election without a functional postal service will be undermined. As a result of the public outcry and the suspictions, Postmaster General DeJoy announced on August 18th that he will pause all budget cuts till after the election.

As the election draws nearer and the partisan talk and distrust increases, we the people of the United States of America must evaluate the benefits and drawbacks of the decision on how we will ensure our votes count. If voting in person on Election Day is not possible for you and the crisis around the United States Postal Services makes you apprehensive to rely

5

on it, check what options you do have in the state you live in. Can you vote early in person?

Can you use a ballot drop box? Know your rights and exercise them.

Everything You Need To Know About The CARES Act

By Andrea Montenegro

The catastrophic blow to the American economy by the coronavirus pandemic is surpassing that of the Great Depression, leaving millions unemployed and desperate to find a steady income to support themselves and their families in these unprecedented times. To help remedy this, the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act was passed and signed into law by President Donald Trump on March 27th, 2020. This act, which received bipartisan support in the 116th U.S. Congress would provide $2.3 trillion in relief checks for workers, families, and small businesses impacted by the virus. But, despite being a generally supported bill, the CARES Act has received some criticism, with democrats and republicans alike asking the same question: Is it enough?

For adult workers whose income is lower than $99,000 (or $198,000 for joint filers), an Economic Impact Payment (stimulus check) of $1,200 is provided through the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) with an additional

ăƒź

$500 per child under 17 years old

e.g.

$3,400 for a family of four. The Paycheck Protection Program ensures that small businesses are included in the CARES benefits, providing 8 weeks worth of support payments and loans, as well as dedicating $659 billion toward maintaining job retention, among other expenses.

Additionally, the CARES Act has reserved $150 billion for supporting state, local, and tribal governments with handling health costs. This financial support will have an immediate impact on the lives of millions of

The CARES Act provides economic relief through various methods, including loans, direct transfers, tax deferrals and deductions,

Americans, but the CARES Act is also projected to have a significant effect on the U.S. economy in the coming years.

grants, and much more.

According to the Penn Wharton Budget Model (PWBM), an analysis by economists at

6

the University of Pennsylvania, the CARES Act points to benefits within the next five years with some possible disadvantages in the long-term.

Their model shows an initial increase of Gross

A few companies, like Shake Shack and

Domestic Product (GDP) by five percent in

Ruth’s Chris Steak House, have returned their

the next five years, in reference to the

PPP loans in an attempt to appease the

projected outcome without the CARES Act.

public. Others, like companies owned by

GDP is a very important calculation which

YouTube influencers Jefree Star and MrBeast

indicates the strength of a country’s economy

have not, igniting social media controversy

by totaling the worth of all products and

focused around the two influencers’ lives of

services. There are various types of GDP and

grandeur and fame. Many are shocked and

different things it could mean, but (very

angered with the fact that money supposedly

generally) an increase in GDP points to an

reserved for small businesses is going to

improving economy and a decrease points to

multi-million dollar corporations. Additionally,

a deteriorating economy. By these standards,

a recent study by economists at MIT shows

the CARES Act is beneficial, but by looking

that the wait time to receive PPP loans was

further into the future analysts found that

dependent on the size of the business, noting

GDP would decrease by 0.2% in ten years

that larger companies received their checks

when compared to the projected outcome

quicker than smaller businesses. A study by

without the CARES Act. This is a result of an

economists at the University of Chicago

increase in national debt that lowers capital,

concluded that only 15% of businesses

and thus impacts the GDP negatively. The

received a PPP loan in areas (congressional

PWBM concluded that the CARES Act

districts) where the pandemic was worst,

provides the necessary immediate relief

while 30% of businesses in less affected

Americans need during the pandemic, but

areas did. This too points to the possibility

without policies to battle national debt it will

that the CARES Act funds are not going to

continue to lower GDP in the long-term.

those that need it most.

So, the CARES Act is doing what it promised,

Despite its flaws, policy makers agree that

providing instant support for workers, families

more support should be provided. Democrats

and small businesses, but is it really? Some

and Republicans alike agree that another

believe that the CARES Act is not what it

relief package should be provided but have

seems. Recently, multiple large corporations

different ways of going about it. In May,

came under fire for claiming loans under the

Democrats passed the Health and Economic

Paycheck Protection Program (PPP), meant to

Recovery Omnibus Emergency Solutions

aid small businesses.

(HEROES) Act, providing an additional $3 trillion in aid, including unemployment

7

benefits and another round of stimulus checks.

Likewise, Republicans would go on propose the Health, Economic Assistance, Liability Protection, and Schools (HEALS) Act in July, showcasing a considerably lower budget at $1.3 trillion and including another round of stimulus checks. This bill is still being revised, as Congressional Democrat Leaders push for aid to be increased. While negotiations continue, many unemployment benefits and PPP loans have expired, leaving many Americans still unemployed.

The future of the CARES, HEROES, and HEALS Acts is unknown. Yet, the argument is no longer about how to provide more relief, but how much. Moving forward, the deficiencies in the CARES Act will provide a source of guidance for the passing of future relief legislation, and function as a reminder to Americans that there is always room for improvement. These unprecedented times call for unprecedented change, and introducing new legislation will continue to play a vital role in

ăƒź

improving America’s economy in the short-term need it most.

88

as well as supporting those who

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Her Sixty-Second Nomination

by Andrea Chow

Like many Americans, I spent a late

Although Joe Biden was a decisive

August night stationed in front of my

winner coming out of the primary

family's television with a blanket and a

elections, one of his main concerns was

bowl of popcorn within arm's reach. No,

building party unity -- specifically

I wasn't gearing up for a movie

between the party’s moderate and

marathon or a Netflix binge. Instead, I

progressive branches. With moderates

was about to watch the Democratic

tending to support Biden and

National Convention. And, like many

progressives tending to support

other Americans, I was thoroughly

Sanders, Biden chose to allow Sanders

confused by Rep. Ocasio-Cortez's

to retain his delegates without having

formal nomination during the roll call of

to forfeit them to Sanders, along with

Sen. Bernie Sanders. Why did she only

the nomination loss. This served as a

give a 60-second speech? Why were

symbolic concession to the more left-

people still nominating Sanders when

leaning branch and a counter to long-

Biden was the clear nominee? What was

standing accusations that the

going on here? Soon after she spoke,

Democratic establishment has not been

Twitter burst with a flurry of

receptive to the voices on the Left that

speculations, including one later-

challenge it. Because Sanders never

retracted tweet that only stated that her

formally ceded his delegates, the DNC

speech was "one of the shortest of the

required a formal roll call and a

night." This tweet, clearly accurate yet

nomination for every candidate that

short on context, left Americans

passed the delegate threshold. Ocasio-

grasping for more. So Ocasio-Cortez

Cortez was the figurehead who was

turned to Twitter to explain her

formally asked by the DNC to deliver a

comments and clear up any

short speech nominating Sanders.

misunderstandings.

9

Later, she took to Twitter to explain to her followers that this was merely a formality; while she supports Sanders' platform, she also supports Biden's presidential candidacy. She extended him congratulations and expressed excitement to "go win in November."Potentially, this move on behalf of the Democratic Party was a strategic play at unifying the much-fragmented political Left. Ranging from moderate republicans who are simply dissatisfied with President Trump to the revolutionaries who reluctantly engage in electoral politics, the Democrats have a broad base to appeal to. In allowing Sanders and his supporters a voice in the nominating process, despite being only a formality, this has the potential to create stronger support for Biden and secure a decisive win in the November election. But not everything went as seamlessly as the Democrats might have hoped. Immediately following Ocasio-Cortez's speech, NBC News issued that decisively inflammatory tweet -- whether intentional or unintentional -- that sparked a frenzy of Twitter users attempting to figure out what was the purpose of formally nominating Sanders.

Ocasio-Cortez was quick to criticize NBC for sparking "an enormous amount of hatred and vitriol," potentially painting her as trying to divide the Democratic party instead of unifying it. The DNC had shared the agenda and purpose of her remarks in advance of the event, leading many to wonder why NBC, who had that information available, would choose to publish this news with such a convoluted and potentially misleading headline.

Additionally, the DNC raised further criticism from Sanders supporters as to why Ocasio-Cortez was only allowed a mere 60 seconds to speak in support of his platform and nomination, while others (including non-Democrats such as John Kasich) were allotted much longer speech times.

As monumental as it is for such a prominent and ground-breaking woman politician to go against the grain and back an equally ground-breaking nominee, the DNC and its surrounding media coverage left many of its party members with much to desire in terms of representation of fair and diverse perspectives. Conventions are an influential moment in the election period for campaigns within any party. And, just like with the DNC, I’ll have my movie-theater snacks ready for what is sure to be a captivating

10

general election.

HOW MUCH DOES IT COST TO RUN FOR PRESIDENT? By: Stella Kleinman

With the 2020 Presidential Election on our horizons, most Americans see campaign donation requests on a daily basis. Democratic nominee Joe Biden and incumbent president Donald Trump

In 1905, president Theodore Roosevelt

frequently ask the public to “chip in� to

responded to the need for campaign

their campaigns on all forms of media. In

finance reform by calling for legislation to

fact, the first message on both of their

ban corporate contributions to

websites is a pop-up requesting

independent politicians. Congress made

donations. Nowadays, most major

multiple attempts at reform throughout

political candidates come from wealthy

the following decades but often failed to

backgrounds and still request more

enforce their laws. After witnessing major

money to fuel their campaigns. How have

financial abuses in the 1972 presidential

presidential elections become so costly?

election, Congress amended the Federal Election Campaign Act to set limits on contributions and establish the Federal Election Commission (FEC) in 1975. Today, the FEC serves as the regulatory agency charged with administering federal campaign finance laws. The Commission has financial jurisdiction over campaigns for the US House, Senate, Presidency, and Vice Presidency.

11

Despite regulation attempts, campaign spending has steadily risen over the last 100 years, even after accounting for inflation. Between 2000 and 2012, spending for presidential elections has quadrupled. The 2016 election cost a total of $2.4 billion for all candidates. From a historical standpoint, the biggest spender tends to win the election over 70% of the time. However, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign spent approximately $300 million more than Donald Trump’s and while she successfully secured the popular vote, she failed to secure enough electoral votes to win the presidency. Trump’s campaign for reelection has already surpassed both candidates’ expenditures from 2016, as he and the RNC have fundraised $1.21 billion as of August 21. Joe Biden and the DNC trail behind with funds totaling about $700 billion. Trump has spent about $1.01 billion while Biden has spent a much smaller $580 million. Trump’s campaign expenditures surpass all American presidential campaigns in history.

According to the FEC, campaign funds come from a large variety of sources including large donors, small donors, and organizational donors. Individual donations account for a significant amount of a candidate’s campaign funds. Joe Biden is receiving the most donations from the Northeast, collecting over $17 million from New York County alone.

Donald Trump is receiving many individual donations from the Southwest, collecting $16.7 million from Los Angeles County alone. While these contributions add up rapidly, another major source of campaign financing are Super PACs, or special political action committees. A Supreme Court decision in the 2010 case Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission allowed these committees to spend unlimited amounts of money on a candidate without requiring them to disclose the names of contributors. The money spent by Super PACs contributes to a presidential campaign but does not represent money spent by the candidate because the committees are prohibited from coordinating their activities with a particular candidate. Super PACs receive several donations upwards of a million dollars from major players in finance and the top 1%.

12

After accumulating money from the public, candidates must make strategic spending decisions. There are ten major categories for campaign teams to allocate funds for: administrative, equipment, events, fundraising, media, payroll, strategy/research, technology, travel, and “other.” 2020’s opposing nominees are spending their campaign cash in starkly different ways. Trump’s campaign has spent about 41% of its resources on media compared to Biden’s 37%. Biden has spent much more money on improving his fundraising efforts as he attempts to close the gap between his and Trump’s campaign funds. Biden spends 26% of his funds to pay his team while Trump only allots 8% of his cash to the payroll category. Biden also dedicates 14% to the administrative category while Trump dedicates 19%.

So how much does it really cost to run for president? To have a serious chance at victory, funds close to $1 billion currently appear to be sufficient. While money is essential to a campaign, candidates must possess more than just the dollar value.

They need incredible qualifications, widespread support, a hardworking team, strategy, a major party nomination, and most importantly, electoral votes.

13

Presidential elections may be alarmingly costly, but so are their results.

ED MARKEY: THE SENATOR ENDING DECADES OF KENNEDY DOMINATED POLITICS By: Gabby Scott

Ed Markey is one of the leading politicians in the progressive movement, and has been endorsed by many candidates, including Bernie Sanders, for the upcoming election in Massachusetts.

He grew up in a working class family and neighborhood, which is one of the main factors that shape him and his politics today. One of his most defining characteristics is that he refuses to change his character and compromise to the white collar lifestyle dominating the political field. Markey has worked with Wall Street, co-authored the WaxmanMarkey Bill, and taken many pivotal steps forward in ensuring a brighter, safer future for generations to come.

Most recently, Markey was challenged for his seat as the Senator of Massachusetts.

While this is routine in the world of politics, this election was very different.

Senator Ed Markey was challenged by

14

U.S. Representative Joe Kennedy III for the Democratic nomination; however, the Kennedys have dominated politics for years and a Kennedy family member has never lost an election.

The date of the election, September 1st, 2020, left many Markey supporters, endorsement groups, and more on the edge of their seats. This ended up being the day that made history, ending years of Kennedy reign over U.S. politics.

This article is not meant to bash on Kennedy politics. Instead, it is meant to understand the root causes of how Markey won over a household political name. The main reason can be attributed to the fact that Joe Kennedy III could never find an explanation for why he actually wanted to run for Senator. He was so confident that his last name could carry him to the position that he never found a real reason to run. In addition, Kennedy very quickly lost support from many progressives and young voters. Markey had endorsements from Sanders, Warren, and the Sunrise Movement, all very popular candidates among young voters. While Kennedy had Nancy Pelosi, just Pelosi alone was not enough to sway the vote towards the traditional democratic candidate.

All in all, no matter your candidate of choice, September 1st, 2020 was a day that made history. Ed Markey will forever go down in history, opening a new chapter in U.S. politics without the interference of legacy. If you live in Massachusetts, be sure to register and vote on November 3rd to ensure Markey’s success, and be a part of the campaign that changed history.

15

Social Media and Disinformation in the 2020 Election By: Ting Cui

The 2020 election, clouded by the coronavirus, has forced the usual campaign season filled with rallies, conventions, and canvassing to be canceled as everyone faces a new socially distant reality. Campaigning has been moved online, pushing America deeper into the depths of

Now more than ever, there is a spread of two forms of wrong information online: misinformation and disinformation. Both words refer to false information, but only disinformation is wrong on purpose.

disinformation that threaten democracy itself.

Social media has been a game-changer for political campaigns. Unlike traditional broadcasting methods like tv or radio, social media platforms allow political candidates to have a direct communication line to air campaign ads that reach, engage, and persuade voters.

Social media usage has also been steadily increasing in the US well before the pandemic began and forced millions of Americans to be stuck at home with

For the first time in the company’s history, more than 3 billion people used Facebook, Messenger, Instagram, or WhatsApp in a single month. And Twitter saw a hours to kill online.

16

first-quarter increase of 24% in the

number of daily users who saw ads.

US officials, including the President, use social media as a megaphone to spread disinformation. President Trump has shared denigrating narratives about his opponents, labeled politically inconvenient events as “fake news,� and shared misleading information on the safety of mail-in ballots and their potential of fraud this election. Most recently, on September 3, 2020, Trump encouraged the people of North Carolina to vote twice - which is illegal. Sharing these false claims creates distrust in voters on the infrastructure of US democracy.

Facebook is a key battleground for both presidential campaigns, with its billions of users, dominating the political ad market with 59.4% of digital political spending during the 2019-20 election cycle. It has faced increased scrutiny recently as domestic misinformation about this year’s election has proliferated. As a result, Facebook rolled out a sweeping set of changes to clamp down on confusion. The company will block any new political ads on Facebook and Instagram during the final week of the election campaign, add warning labels to inaccurate posts, and remove ads and posts that discourage people from voting. If any candidate tries to declare a preemptive or false victory, it will direct users to the official outcome instead.

Facebook will work to slow the spread of misinformation across private communication channels as well by limiting the number of forwards a user can send from 150 to 5. In addition, Facebook and Instagram will compensate users for deactivating their accounts before election day in a research initiative aimed at examining the platforms’ impact on politics.

The growing issue of misinformation and disinformation has also prompted other social media companies to take a stance on the issue. Youtube is holding conversations regarding its post-election strategy to minimize political manipulation on their platform. Twitter banned political advertising last year and this year has added fact check labels to politicians’ tweets.

Pinterest announced that it would no longer show election-related ads and plans to update its Civic Misinformation Policy to ban election-related misinformation on its platform. Additionally, Pinterest employees will be given eight hours of paid time off to vote or work at election polls. TikTok had already banned political ads from its platform in 2019, becoming the first social media platform to do so.

These efforts made by social media companies are a good start, but much of the toxic content flowing freely on these sites, in private groups and individual posts, are not addressed. Some of the actions taken may even unintentionally make the platform more politicized. Regardless of these new policies, false or inaccurate information will continue to be spread, though (hopefully) at a slower pace.

17

In the months before Election Day, Congress will likely not pass major regulations regarding online political advertising, let alone a counter-disinformation bill that governs how social media platforms respond. And because of the pandemic, social media will play some role in the outcome of the election, now that it's become the primary source of information and social communication.

A number of organizations aimed at curing disinformation have also popped up since the last election and should be utilized as well.

NewsGuard is a browser extension you can download to prevent false information as you browse online news by providing you with ratings on the reliability of a site. The News Literacy Project is a nonpartisan national education nonprofit that provides programs and resources for the public to become smarter consumers of news and information.

The 2020 election will be one dominated by disinformation, but individuals can slow the spread.

Voters can practice “informational distancing” when they feel the need to react to a piece of content encountered online. Rather than rage-sharing, they should give themselves the space they need to process the information and avoid being manipulated. Users should also use fact-checking sites such as Snopes for reference on questionable posts.

As the 2020 presidential election goes forward, posts will be posted, and tweets will be tweeted. There’s no doubt that social media companies need to make more substantial efforts to prevent disinformation and must be held accountable. However, we must also become smarter users of the internet.

Over half of what gets shared is shared by people who haven’t read past the headline. People simply accept the information being presented to them and share it, allowing wrong information to be circulated, rather than stopping to scrutinize. We need to become more skeptical consumers of information

18

online. We need to use our voices to amplify the truth.

Biden Will be Better for Healthcare Post-pandemic By: Manya Kodali DISCLAIMER: “Manya Kodali wrote this article in her personal capacity. The views expressed herein do not represent the views of Women In Politics a Non Partisan Organization”

The world-wide pandemic has had unparalleled impacts on every aspect of our lives. The devastation wrought by this virus has been unprecedented.

However, in this time of need, our world has rapidly adapted. Nowhere is this clearer than in the healthcare sector. Innovative researchers have come up with groundbreaking inventions to aid doctors in their fight; glow in the dark test kits, electronic ppe, even COVID-repellent seating have all materialized in markets over the last few months in response to consumer demand. Apart from the physical workings of the industry, there is a section oft-overlooked: customer opinion.

We’ve already seen changes in the way people view the science of vaccines or trustworthiness of experts such as Dr. Anthony Fauci, but the question still up for debate is how this pandemic will affect people’s lasting perceptions of healthcare. The upcoming election will no doubt be a major event for the country to see how people’s opinions on health care have changed. Whomever voters choose to place their faith in will have an enormous task ahead of them - fixing our healthcare crisis.

19

From payment policies, prescription drug prices, the everincreasing cost of care, and of course, the need for a COVID vaccine, healthcare has long been regarded as a top issue in the election. However, as November 3rd nears, it has become

A Kaiser Family Foundation poll found that healthcare is only considered to be the most important election issue by 10% of respondents, down from 26% in February. An especially clear that opinions have recently changed.

important finding by the same poll shows that only 11% of swing voters, key players in this uncertain election, consider healthcare a top priority. Instead, most people are focused on the economy. These results are quite surprising in a pandemicridden world where the need for accessible healthcare has been highlighted.

With no vaccine in sight, people are going to continue to fall ill, require hospitalizations and expensive treatments that many just can’t afford.

Various issues have been plaguing the nation’s healthcare system for years: 27 million Americans live uninsured, a pharmaceutical industry with few cost regulations, rising deductibles and out-of-pocket payments, and a consolidating healthcare industry. There is reasonable bipartisan consensus that change needs to be made to fix our broken healthcare system; disagreement occurs when focusing on how to fix a system that isn’t working for the people any longer. Democratic nominee Joe Biden supports the Affordable Care Act, a public healthcare option, and working to control drug prices; in essence, Biden’s goal is to increase access while dropping costs through government negotiations and policy.

Republican incumbent Donald Trump wants to eliminate the ACAs

20

essential health benefits and restructure its subsidies, change tax codes, and expand the use of pre-tax Health Savings Accounts to pay insurance premiums. This will hand more control of Medicare to states and reduce regulation to give Americans lower costs.

Based on this information of each candidate’s plan, it’s clear that if President Trump is re-elected, the country will face more of the same-a President unfit to lead through devastation. The nation has witnessed Trump’s consistent downplaying of the pandemic, use of misleading death estimates, lack of international cooperation, and refusals to wear a mask.

His plan to shift the burden of healthcare reform to Congress and the states during such a raw time for our nation, is a clear indicator of what the next four years will look like under his leadership.

However, Biden has an opportunity for change; COVID-19 has laid bare the weaknesses of American government and its role in healthcare. His plans offer ways for American citizens to know, without fear of harsh payments or lack of access, that they will be taken care of if, and when they fall sick. Access to healthcare will not only ensure people’s health and satisfaction, but it is critical to returning to a normal life and economy.

As the Democratic party shifts left, many Democrats view Biden’s policies as too moderate and maintaining the status quo;

it’s clear that Biden is the leader our nation needs to escape the suffering this pandemic has caused.

whatever one’s opinion may be,

21

A Look Into the United States Venezuelan Sanctions

By Lily Veits

DISCLAIMER: “Lily Veits wrote this article in

It should not always be assumed that

her personal capacity. The views expressed

economic sanctions are less harmful than

herein do not represent the views of Women

military action. Any given nation has a

In Politics a Non-Partisan Organization�

multitude of options when implementing sanctions; for instance, targeted sanctions

U.S foreign policy toward Venezuela can be called ineffective at best.

may cause much less harm than collective sanctions but can still be equally as effective.

At worst, it has directly contributed to one of the biggest

mass exoduses in modern

human history.

It should not always be assumed that economic sanctions are less harmful than military action. Any

The bottom line is this: when considering sanctions, two criteria need to take full priority. The first is just how harmful the sanctions are expected to be; this allows for a cost-benefit analysis to center around uplifting and improving human rights (which should be the ultimate goal in any foreign intervention). The second is the probability of said sanctions actually ending a foreign nation’s abuse of its people.

given nation has a multitude of options when implementing sanctions; for instance, targeted sanctions may cause much less

harm than collective sanctions

but can still be equally as effective.

The United States imposes sanctions under

22

various legal authorities against foreign individuals, private entities, and governments that engage in proliferation activities, as stated by the U.S.

Department of State. Economic sanctions are defined as any actions taken by one nation or group of nations to harm the economy of another nation or group, often to force a political change.

Since 2017, the US federal government has sanctioned individuals and businesses associated with the regime of Maduro. Carrie Filipetti, a State Department spokeswoman, summarizes the intent relatively concisely; that US sanctions

The goal of US sanctions in Venezuela is to halt cash flow to Caracas and Maduro. There is, of course, a glaring fault here. Venezuela’s

are designed to “to cut off those sources of financial income and prevent the oil industry from being exploited for patronage.”

sizable black market only grows when economic restrictions are tightened. This results in those aforementioned gaining more control of this informal economy. More

There is certainly merit to suspicion to America’s purity of motivation where foreign interests are concerned, but Maduro is no saint where Venezuelan human rights are

generally

concerned. He has shown to have little to no regard for the wellbeing of his own people;

sanctions can have the perverse effect of bolstering authoritarian, statist societies

according to Human Rights Watch, torture of dissident’s relatives is disturbingly common.

Hyperinflation wreaks havoc on the economyand all the while, the Maduro regime exists semi-comfortably, knowing Russia will bail out Caracas once more if need be.

By creating scarcity, they enable governments to better control distribution of

Perhaps more important than the regime’s

goods. The danger is both moral, in that

treatment of Venezuelans, in this context, is

innocent people are affected, as well as

Maduro’s affinity for Russia. This obviously

practical, in that sanctions that harm the

clashes with US interests, and thus gives the

population at large can bring about

federal government more of an incentive to

undesired effects-a wonderful example is the

drive Maduro out. In doing so, however, we

triggering of a

large scale emigration.

can analyze where exactly US policy has failed- after all, Maduro is still in power.

23

The sanctions are ironically somewhat counterproductive to U.S. interests in ousting Nicholas Maduro by giving him more control of Venezuela. The harsh sanctions allow him to make a false paradigm of Western imperialism/ Venezuelan patriotism. Rallies and propaganda are nothing new, but it is interesting to witness Maduro’s forceful directness. He is reported as saying things

Francisco Rodriguez of the Washington Post writes that “Sanctions seek to punish governments that violate the rights of their people and induce them to change their conduct. But they can also end up harming the people that they intend to protect. In Venezuela, the escalation of sanctions was part of a strategy of “maximum pressure” aimed at producing a break in the military’s support of the regime. That break has not

such as:

come about, and Venezuelans now get to live in the worst imaginable world: ruled by a dictatorship and living in a sanctioned economy.”

“HANDS OFF VENEZUELA, MR. IMPERATOR DONALD TRUMP!” AND “GET OUT OF VENEZUELA, IMPERIAL YANKEE!”

Historically, sanctions alone are unlikely to force an unwavering political regime to stand down. They could not persuade Haiti’s junta to honor results of an election, China from exporting sensitive tech, and Serbia to dial back military aggression. Why Venezuela’s outcome

24

will be vastly different is unclear.

Interview With Palak Shah: a look into his public service career

By Rebecca Joseph

DISCLAIMER: “Mr. Palak Shah was interviewed for this article in his personal capacity. The views expressed herein do not necessarily represent the views of the Bureau of International Labor Affairs, U.S. Department of Labor, U.S. Agency for International Development, or U.S. government as a whole.

I was given the privilege to speak with Palak Shah: a graduate of

Cornell University, majoring in

Industrial and Labor relations, who later pursued law at the

University of Chicago Law School.

Shah is not only accomplished in his academics but has a noteworthy career, having worked in various sectors of law and public service from private

U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), and presently at the U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of International Labor Affairs. Through this interview, I was able to practice, to the

learn about highlights of his schooling, during which he was fortunate enough to study under future U.S. President

Barack Obama, learn more about the

different roles he has held in his career, and his viewpoints for our readers on public service and getting involved in politics.

25

I heard a story that one of your professors in law school was former President Barack Obama. Many of our readers look up to Barack Obama as he was able to break down some barriers for minorities. Can you tell me a little about your experiences with him?

First, let me just say it was such an honor and privilege to be his student and not simply because of his success as a U.S. senator and the U.S. president. A number of characteristics struck me from day one in the classroom. He is a powerful orator and lecturer for students, and anyone who has heard him speak can attest to that. Through his delivery style, you can tell that he is a very thoughtful and highly intelligent individual.

many students who may not have agreed with him, politically or otherwise, to still wish to take and participate in his classes.

He's a master facilitator and was always asking questions and inviting different perspectives from students to enhance the discussion. And, unlike other law school classes, he challenged you on issues not

As a Professor, he had a very positive approach to teaching and was very inclusive of all students. He wanted his students to be able to discuss very sensitive topics while bringing in a diversity of perspectives, no matter where they fell on the political spectrum. And, his approach, which people have witnessed throughout the country, that ‘folks might disagree without being disagreeable’ was definitely displayed in the classroom. That approach allowed

26

only in terms of what the law was or is, but what the law could be. He pushed all his students to question their assumptions on points and to see the other side of an issue.

What got you interested in public service?

In short, I wanted to be part of something larger than myself.

I started my career in the private sector to strengthen my analytical skills in a law firm setting. Although the private firm in Chicago was very reputable, public service kept calling me. I was especially intrigued by the intersection of law and policy. Federal government service provides a great opportunity to mix the two. And, with politics thrown into the mix, I felt I found the perfect calling. In addition, I am honored and privileged to be part of a profession where we are focused on protecting

fundamental human rights. At the Department of Labor, we work to ensure that workers from all backgrounds and identities have access to dignified work free from exploitation. The workplace is one of the central places in our society where individuals spend most of their waking hours, so it is critical that workers’ rights are protected there. To be able to represent workers through government service is a great honor and privilege.

27

Can you tell me about your career since you graduated law school?

As I mentioned, I started my career by practicing at a large private law firm, and I honed my research and critical thinking skills by covering complex litigation and transactional matters. I am proud of the challenging legal work in which I was engaged. In addition, I developed good, professional relationships with my co-workers.

I respect the great talent of the lawyers with whom I worked. They sharpened my analytical, writing, and advocacy skills. Of course, my calling was public service, and I had this thought even when I began law school. After paying down my law school debt and gaining solid legal experience, I left private practice for the federal service.

In particular, international affairs captured my imagination, and it has been that way since childhood. Because my parents immigrated to the U.S. from India, I always had a connection outside of our country. My parents left their homeland in the 1970s for the great economic opportunities that the U.S. could provide, and their success provided me with the opportunity to pursue a higher-level education. Because of those opportunities, I had the luxury to think about how I wished to develop my career, including the pursuit of one in public service. Growing up, my family and I traveled overseas, including family trips to India. I was always fascinated how we as Americans view other countries and how people from other countries view the U.S.

My first opportunity in government was with the Foreign Service at USAID where I worked on democracy, governance, and human rights issues, some of which was overseas and the rest at the Washington D.C. headquarters. Now, at the U.S. Department of Labor, I am

able to bring together my full professional experience, including my undergraduate degree in Industrial and Labor Relations, law degree and practice, and international human rights experience. My current position is an International Labor Advisor for Trade Policy, and I am privileged to advocate for stronger labor standards globally and enforce labor

28

commitments in U.S. trade agreements.

What is the goal of USAID?

USAID is a federal agency that works on behalf of the American people through partnerships with non-governmental entities, leading international development and humanitarian efforts to save lives, reduce poverty, strengthen democratic governance and help people progress beyond assistance. In addition to advancing U.S. national security and economic interests, the assistance imparts American values abroad. The mission reflects American generosity and our caring spirit.

Through this assistance, the U.S. wishes to promote peace and prosperity abroad, which enhances people’s lives and increases stability in the world. I worked on the development side to enhance democratic governance abroad, working toward improved civic participation, independent media, justice, and political competition.

How did the USAID affect the way you feel about America?

USAID’s mission makes me very proud of America. It is one of the best missions in our government because it demonstrates the generous spirit of the American people. Even though we have challenges to address within our own country, we still set aside approximately $20 billion annually, less than one percent of our federal budget, to assist others in great need around the world. Many other countries do not have the luxury to do so. We as Americans believe so strongly in this concept of assisting others that we stood up a whole separate government agency that is dedicated to this cause. Since with most everything USAID does is with non-governmental partners, many of which have ties to the U.S., the agency is able to expand its reach.

29

How do other countries view America based on your work at USAID?

I think that question provides insight into one of the central reasons why the U.S. government funds USAID. In addition to the technical work that I previously mentioned, there is an amount of goodwill that the U.S. government wishes to spread, which helps preserve American interests abroad through our embassies and consulates. This work also helps American business interests, which in turn helps our economic growth. Now to peace and security: if we have more people and more countries who appreciate our approach and what we have done for those countries as true partners, standing by them on their development journey, then one day they may no longer need assistance from USAID. Instead, they may be our next trading or even development partner to help other

countries overseas. And that has happened in several examples such as South Korea, which the U.S. assisted in small part on its development journey. Now, South Korea has a vibrant economy and is a U.S. trading and development assistance partner, helping alongside the U.S. in combating poverty and disease overseas. That model is a long-term view, and it can take decades to see real change. In my experience in Nicaragua for two years, the people had a very warm and positive reaction to the U.S. and were happy to engage with me as a representative of our government overseas. With the government, of course, the perception may change depending on who is in power, how they got to power, and if they hold the same values that we do in America.

I can tell you during my time in Nicaragua from 2010 to 2012, dealing with the central government was challenging because the government, which is still in power today, did not adhere to principles of democratic governance, civic participation, and political competition. Of course, over time, as the U.S. continues its dialogue and assistance with

30

other countries and their people, we strive for relations to change for the better.

What advice would you give Women, who are interested in a career in politics?

Great question and I think my answer applies to all people alike. One thing that I hope the readers focus on is that one should never self-select out of an opportunity just because of what one group or organization may think. If you do have an interest in serving and representing your communities in politics, that is great, so please get involved. That might sound simple, but I hope it is a call to action for your readers.

There are so many people in our country with great ideas or thoughts, but they are not stepping outside of their comfort zones to build bridges in the community. And, this poses a great loss for their community. So that is first and foremost: get involved, by bringing people together from different backgrounds. Of course, that means bringing folks together from different races and genders, but it also means looking at additional categories that might be overlooked, such as socio-economic and geographical backgrounds.

I encourage everyone reading this piece to build bridges between these different parts of the community, tightening our bonds. Whatever your political views, speak and learn from those who carry different political views as that will help sharpen and hone your own argument. You will gain a different perspective that you can use to enhance your specific position. This is also how you learn to compromise; comprehensive solutions come from thinking critically about your views and your oppositions’ views. If we had more folks with that mentality, we would be able to

31

advance better policies that would improve our communities to a greater degree than if we did not follow this approach.

SROTAERC EHT TEEM

WOMEN IN POLITICS MAGAZINE Founder and Co-Exec. Director

Rebecca Joseph

Walnut Creek, CA | 14 years old

My name is Rebecca Joseph and I am a highschool sophomore from the Bay Area. I got interested in politics during my first year of high school where I joined the Speech and Debate team. From there I fell in love with the

world

of

politics,

but

soon

became

aware

of

the

lack

of

representation women were getting in the field. I wanted to be part of a community of teens who want to support each other and the younger generation to pursue a career in politics; however, I was unable to find anything, so I started Women In Politics. Now, four months later I have been blessed with an amazing team and I cannot wait for all we are going to accomplish.

Co-Exec. Director Katherine Bronov

Philadelphia, PA | 17 years old

My name is Katherine Bronov and I am an online high school senior from the suburbs of Philadelphia, PA. I have been interested in politics since the start of high school and I have searched for organizations and clubs that interest me but found nothing until Women In Politics (WIP) caught my eye. WIP is a very special organization and quite interestingly the first of its kind. I am so grateful to be a part of this organization and work alongside girls that are just as passionate about politics as I am, who recognize the shortage of women in this important field.

Please enjoy this issue!

SRETIRW

Please enjoy this issue!

Kansas City, MI | 16 years old

Andrea Montenegro-Polanco | Mary Corey | Anna Pabst | Andrea Chow | Lily Veits | Manya Kodali | Gabby Scott | Stella Kleinman | Sara Keegan | Ting Cui |Megan Baker

Editor Leader

Lily Sun

San Ramon, CA | 16 years old

Justine Simons | Sophia Laraki | Kalani Seymore | Kaylyn Allingham | Sanjana Patel | Sophia Escobar | Cedar Roach Magazine Design Leader

Isabella Pang

Long Island, NY | 16 years old

Kashish Singh | Sara Keegan | Grace McPadden | Sydney Stewart

SRETIRW

Ella Stillion Southard

SROTIDE

Writing Leader

SRENGISED

SROTAERC EHT TEEM

WOMEN IN POLITICS MAGAZINE

Instagram: @womeninpolitics_

Youtube: WomenIn Politics

FOLLOW OUR SOCIALS! Twitter: @womenin poltics

TikTok: @womeninpoltics

Email: womeninpoliticswip@gmail.com