November 2010 http://studentorgs.unc.edu/thehill Volume X, Issue II

The HillChapel Hill Political Review

America’s Economic Future: Adaptation to Austerity

Obama Shifts to CenterRepublicans Gain Clout

University System Fiscal ReformCuts On Our Own Campus?

Change in AfricaNorth Africa in Turmoil

2 The Hill

The beginning of the new se-mester has seen a whirlwind of changes in both domestic and foreign affairs. The ongoing Arab Revolution, which began in Tunisia with the self-immo-lation of a young frustrated vendor (p. 6) has seen the established order set ablaze in Egypt (p.21), where a galva-nized public toppled President Hosni Mubarak’s government through popular protests. The fate of both states and the future of the region have become more uncertain than ever. Just south of Egypt, a popular referendum affirmed the upcoming partition of Sudan and the birth of a new independent state this summer. On this domestic front, politi-cal affairs at all levels of government are plagued by disagreements over how to reduce the deficit as the inevitability of expanded austerity measures becomes

From the Editor The Hill Staff

Send us your comments

We’re proud to share our work with you, and we invite you to share your thoughts with us. Send us a letter or e-mail - no more than 250 words, please. Include your name, year and major.

Our Mission: The Hill is a medium for analysis of state, national and international politics. This publication is meant to serve as the middle ground (and a battleground) for political thought on campus where people can present their beliefs and test their ideas. A high premium is placed on having a publication that is not affiliated with any party or organization, but rather is openly non-partisan on the whole. Hence, the purpose of The Hill is to provide the university community with a presentation of both neutral and balanced analysis of political ideas, events and trends. This means that, on the one hand, the publication will feature articles that are politically moderate in-depth analyses of politics and political ideas. These articles might be analytical, descriptive claims that draw conclusions about the political landscape. On the other, The Hill will feature various articles that take political stances on issues.

To our readers: EDITORSTatiana Brezina

Siddarth Nagaraj

MANAGING EDITORSCaroline GuerraClayton Thomas

Yash Shah

WRITERSTatiana Brezina

Amanda Claire GraysonCaroline Guerra

Sam HobbsAlex Jones

Krishna KolluRadhika KshatriyaAaron LutkowitzSiddarth NagarajIsmaail Qaiyim

Christian Rodriquez Wilson Sayre

Stephanie ShenigoClayton Thomas

Kevin UhrmacherSarah Wentz

WEB EDITORSarah Wentz

DESIGNNicole Fries

HEAD OF ARTMegan Shank

ARTJR Fruto

Connor Sullivan

CIRCULATIONAmanda Claire Grayson

Wilson Sayre

TREASURERKendall Law

FACULTY ADVISERFerrel Guillory

208 Frank Porter Graham Student Union

UNC-CH Campus Box 5210Chapel Hill, NC 27599-5210

http://studentorgs.edu/thehill/thehillpr@gmail.com

The HillChapel Hill Political Review

clearer. Just as President Obama con-tends with a Republican House over reduced spending (p.16), state govern-ments contemplate where to implement cuts in order to stay afloat (p.12 & 13). And of course, UNC-Chapel Hill faces many harsh spending cuts of its own, leaving the future of many programs (and possibly the school itself ) uncer-tain (p.14). What these measures mean for the university and for its students is discussed within.

Siddarth Nagaraj is a junior majoring in global studies and political science.

Tatiana Brezina is a senior majoring in international studies and political science.

February 2011 3

Contents

Cover

Features

February 2011 Volume X, Issue II

University System Fiscal ReformCuts On Our Own Campus?

In Every Issuev Notes from The Hill

v Best of the Blog

Sudan’s Historical Context and Possible Future

WikiLeaks

14

State Budget CutsThe Good, the Bad, and the Ugly

The Last WordTucson and Mental Health

718

12

22

4 The Hill

Notes from The Hill

reluctantly chose not to visit New Orleans because that would have re-quired taking a large number of first responders away from relief efforts to support his security detail. This was a cost he was not willing to pay. Bush says the claims of racism were the worst point in his presidency.

Another public relations nightmare took place on the deck of the USS Abraham Lincoln in 2003, as Bush announced the end of major combat operations in Iraq. The ‘Mission Accomplished’ banner hanging behind him celebrated the Lincoln’s successful completion of its job in the Persian Gulf. But the combina-tion of Bush’s announcement and the large banner was disastrous, as critics said Bush was claiming for political purposes that the war was won.

Before readers judge George Bush, they should hear his side of the story. Perhaps they will find it ridiculous; perhaps they will find it refreshing to hear from the man himself rather than from his shout-ing critics. But only after hearing from him can they pass judgment about his time in office.

Kevin Uhrmacher is a first-year majoring in journalism and political science.

“Decision Points” by George W. BushHistory will judge George Bush. The adage is commonly used among supporters of the 43rd president. Even as his second term drew to a close, and his approval ratings dwindled in the low-to-mid-twenties, Bush retained a following of staunch supporters. They main-tained that he had done what was necessary to keep the country safe after 9/11. Now, Bush has put his own spin on that argument. Yes, history will judge George Bush as it has every president before him. “Decision Points” is his attempt to influence the verdict.

Getting Even

While Bush says that the book is a presentation of the major decisions he made, at times it seems like a ve-hicle for his vendetta against those who he believes have wronged him.

For example, Bush is quick to lay blame on Louisiana Governor Kathleen Blanco for his administra-tion’s belated response to Hurricane Katrina. He claims that he wanted the federal government to intervene earlier, but that an antiquated law tied his hands when she stopped his efforts.

Perhaps more telling than the people Bush mentions are those

Review

Notes fromThe Hill

he chooses to omit. Nowhere does Bush mention Press Secretary Scott McClellan, who was with him for three years. Is it a coincidence that McClellan penned a memoir in 2008 railing against the administra-tion? I think not.

His Side of the Story

Bush provides a counterpoint to the criticisms that have been leveled at him for years. He examines two of his presidency’s public relations low points in a new light. Bush dedi-cates an entire chapter to Hurricane Katrina, as well as several pages to the afternoon in 2003 when he gave a speech to troops on an aircraft carrier beneath a now-infamous banner bearing the words “Mission Accomplished.”

Bush admits that he made a major gaffe in telling FEMA Director Michael Brown that he was doing ‘a heck of a job.’ He also says he did not know that members of the press pool would take photos of him as he peered out the window of Air Force One at a battered New Orleans. Those photos outraged critics of Bush like Kanye West, who labeled him a racist who “doesn’t care about black people” enough to fly into the city and speak to the victims, as he did after 9/11. Bush says that he

February 2011 5

Notes from The Hill

HATCH-ED:Update

No one really knows who is in charge in Rochester, N.Y. these days. The beginning of 2011 brought major confusion because the city had three different mayors in a span of three weeks.

At the center of the debate is the Hatch Act, the landmark civil service reform law passed in 1939. The law regulates the political activity of federal employees who work with public funds. The Hatch Act is only considered by federal courts if someone accuses their political opponent of violating the statute, in which case local elections can become immersed in a tangled web of politically charged accusations. Things get complicated very quickly.

May 26, 2010 – Rochester Mayor Bob Duffy is gubernatorial candidate Andrew Cuomo’s pick for lieutenant governor.

Oct. 28, 2010 - City Corporation Counsel Tom Richards is appointed deputy mayor so that he can replace Duffy if he is elected lieutenant governor.

Nov. 2, 2010 - Cuomo and Duffy win the election.

Jan. 1, 2011 - Duffy leaves Rochester and Richards assumes his duties as mayor. Rochester debates whether to hold a special election or general election to find a permanent replacement.

Jan. 5, 2011 – The city charter says that the deputy mayor “shall act as mayor,” which prompts confusion over whether Richards is the mayor or acting mayor. If he is the acting mayor, Richards is still considered a civil servant and cannot run in a special election under the Hatch Act.

Jan. 18, 2011 - Trying to avoid the coming legal storm, Richards steps down from his position. Commissioner of Neighborhood and Business Development Carlos Carbal-lada is appointed “Emergency Interim Successor” (EIS).

Jan. 28, 2011 – Caraballada’s opponents file suit against the city, claiming he can-not be EIS because there was no ‘attack or a public disaster’ that prompted his appointment, as the city charter would require.

March 29, 2011 – A special election is set to occur on this day. Declared can-didates include Tom Richards and former mayor Bill Johnson, who threw his hat into the ring in late January.

An end to the confusion? Doubtful.

Kevin Uhrmacher is a first-year majoring in journalism and political science.

Meet Your New Mayor. And Your Other New Mayor

6 The Hill

International

A republic in theory, but an autocratic regime in practice, Tunisia has tended to remain out of the scope of the global media. Yet Tunisia has been all over the news recently. This, of course, is a direct result of the po-litical protests that have rocked the nation since mid-December. Tu-nisians have taken to the streets in protest over unemployment, food inflation, government corruption, censorship of media and speech and poor living conditions. This general dissatisfaction with the condition of the state erupted in mid-December, and led to cries for political change including specific demands for “real democracy” in Tunisia. The protests remained relatively contained and went unnoticed by the international media until early January. What is truly remarkable is the Tunisian effort to get interna-tional media coverage of their plight, goals, and protests. The Tunisian government’s Internet censorship is the strictest in the world, matching China’s, according to a statement made by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in January 2010. Despite that, Tunisians have been able to get an abundant amount of informa-tion to media beyond their borders via the Internet, particularly through social media such as Facebook and Twitter. YouTube was censored from Publinet, the Tunisian state-owned network, for years until the ouster of former President Zine el Abidine Ben Ali’s government in January. Heavy Internet use can be attributed to the driving force be-hind this revolution: the youth of Tunisia. Much of the information that has driven the “Jasmine Revolu-tion” was information that the gov-ernment had tried to restrict access to. However, educated youth, skilled

in circumvention technology, were able to bypass the filters on the re-stricted information and retrieve material the government had sought to keep from the Tunisian public. This information was then dissemi-nated amongst Tunisians, stirring the desires for reform and catalyzing more Tunisians to join the protests. And in an effort to draw attention and support for their efforts, Tuni-sian activists have been sharing in-formation the government would choose to restrict online, translat-ing information and contextualizing stories for the international media to pick up.

Given the evident censor-ship in the country, many have ques-tioned why the government did not stop the flow of information. The simple answer is: they tried. Their ef-forts were unsuccessful, however, in large part because the biggest plat-form for revolution has been Face-book. The government attempted to censor profiles with information they wanted to remain classified, and also attempted to hack into ac-tivist Facebook, email and Twitter accounts to shut them down. These efforts, however, have had varying degrees of success and little effect on quelling a revolution that seems to have taken on a life of its own, bringing protests and shouts for re-

form beyond the nation’s borders. As Tunisian-American UNC-CH student Mariem Masmoudi explains it: “Home videos of demonstrations and clashes with police forces, blogs of dissident reporters, and status up-dates proliferating important news updates were uploaded to Facebook constantly.” It is clear that both so-cial media and international media can be credited for launching and strengthening the campaign for re-form in Tunisia, and one can cer-tainly posit that the growing protests and cries for reform in other Arab nations have been inspired by Tu-nisia’s efforts. The question then, is what is next for Tunisia? The people have already ousted former President Ben Ali, causing him to flee with his family (and 1.5 tons of the nation’s gold), and the nation is in the process of transforming its government. Yet surely, the revolution shall not end with the mere change of political figures in office. As African Studies Professor Georges Nzongola-Ntala-ja said in an interview with The Hill, “There is no alternative to establish-ing democratic governance. This is what the people of Africa have been fighting for since independence. We did not want to get rid of tyr-anny by European colonialists only to have the colonial system replaced by the same type of repression and economic negligence by African rul-ers.” Indeed, it seems as the only way this media-led revolution can end is with some level of reform and an in-crease in transparency, for the people of Tunisia, and perhaps the people of other Arab countries as well.

Sarah Wentz is a junior majoring in political science and global studies.

A Media Led Revolution?

February 2011 7

International

In 2004 t-shirts, bracelets, and publicity materials screamed “Save Darfur” at international actors, but Janjaweed militias continued ethnic cleansing of the non-Arab populations of western Sudan. Much of the slow international response could be attributed to timing, as the genocide occurred in the midst of the North-South peace negotiations. On January 9, 2005, five decades of civil conflict between North and South ended with the Comprehen-sive Peace Agreement. Fast-forward six years, and Southern Sudan voted with an im-pressive 99.57% majority for inde-pendence from the North. What lies ahead for Southern Sudan is uncer-tain, but the future may finally pro-vide some resolution to the civil war that has ravaged Sudan since 1955.The conflict dates back to Brit-ain’s colonial administration of two separate Sudanese regions until 1946, when they merged a cultur-ally Arabic North and a culturally Sub-Saharan African South. As Su-dan approached independence in the early 1950s, northern Arabic leaders backed away from commit-ments to southern autonomy, result-ing in a strong southern separatist movement. The North has histori-cally opposed southern autonomy that would deprive it of profits from the South’s oil and other natural re-sources. In 1955, southern military officials and students formed the Anyanya guerilla army, engulfing the country in factionalism until former army lieutenant Joseph Lagu united the rebels under the Southern Sudan Liberation Movement in 1971. The

strength and organization of this movement forced both sides to the bargaining table, and in March 1972 the Addis Ababa Agreement ended the conflict and granted the south significant administrative autonomy.However, peace only lasted eleven years, during which northern fun-damentalists repeatedly violated the Addis Ababa Agreement’s terms, at-tempting to control on-the-border oil-rich areas and declaring Sudan an Islamic state in 1983. Southern secessionists formed the Sudan People’s Lib-eration Army (SPLA) and fought against the North, which became dominated by Colonel Omar al-Bashir’s military junta. Al-Bashir’s junta introduced a harsh penal code, purged the personnel of the civil and military administrations, and at-tacked southern regions. External attempts at peace-ful resolution came in 1995, when Eritrea, Ethiopia, and Uganda com-mitted military troops to assisting the SPLA. In 2000 Egypt and Libya called for power-sharing but ignored the larger issues of religion/state re-lations and southern independence. Peace talks in 2003 and 2004 finally culminated in the Comprehensive Peace Agreement of 2005, which created a six-year interim period of southern autonomy, equitable divi-sion of resources (jobs, oil, military, etc.), and a referendum to deter-mine Sharia law’s continuance in the south. On January 9, 2011, the six-year interim period ended with the scheduled southern referendum on independence, which clearly dem-onstrated desire for secession. Many

feared resumption of the civil war or mass rape and chaos, but Presi-dent Omar al-Bashir surprisingly announced to his southern rival in Juba on January 4, “If the vote is for secession, we will support you and congratulate you.” The United States promised to normalize relations with Al-Bashir’s regime if he peacefully lets the south go, and the optimistic dictator is also hoping the ICC will drop his charges upon a conflict-free split. Predictions for the future of Southern Sudan range from hope-ful to dire. The November 22, 2010 edition of The Economist forecast, “[South Sudan] is a place of tribes, jealous of their cultures and lands. The largest think they have a claim on the oil revenue that will come with independence. That is a recipe for disaster.” Southern Sudan’s new gov-ernment must now transition from its former administrative autonomy to a fully sovereign state. Dr. An-drew Reynolds, Chair of the Global Studies curriculum, optimistically explained in a discussion with stu-dents, “This is a much more rosy pic-ture than we expected.” Some forecast oil wars and ethnic conflict, while others, like Reynolds, predict democracy pro-motion and conflict resolution. What the future holds for South Sudan is unclear, but secession is a hopeful conclusion to its horrific past.

Amanda Claire Grayson is a is a soph-omore majoring in political science and peace, war, & defense.

Southern Sudan’s Independence Struggle

8 The Hill

International

The year 2000 marked a definitive milestone for Sino-African relations and ushered in a new era of eco-nomic possibility for African states. The Forum on China-Africa Coop-eration (FOCAC) marked the be-ginning of a new and dynamic rela-tionship between the world’s largest developing country and the world’s largest developing continent. The Chinese government announced that the debts of 31 African coun-tries had been cancelled, aid to Afri-can countries would be increased and development assistance would be forthcoming in addition to a myriad of other promises that have come to fruition. The FOCAC meets every three years to evaluate and reaffirm Chinese economic commitments to Africa. The nature of the economic and political alliance between China and many African countries em-bodies a delicate balance of poten-tial and peril for both parties. The Sino-African relationship is one defined by complexity and even ob-scurity; however, it is a relationship that characterizes the 21st century geopolitical climate and the modern push toward economic expansion both for and within Africa.

The nature of Chinese investment in Africa is fundamentally distinct from previous forms of investment because Chinese economic policy focuses on infrastructural develop-ment and extraction of resources without political preconditions. The one China policy is the only official

exception to this rule. Many within Africa and around the world look to China as the legitimate partner Africa has always needed. This new outlook is partially fueled by a desire for growth and disenfranchisement with the U.S. and European coun-tries.

Margaret C. Lee, Associate Profes-sor of African Studies with a focus on African political economy, main-tained in an interview with The Hill that Africa is in need of long term economic development versus short term economic growth. Professor Lee describes the Sino-Chinese re-lationship as one marked by a large degree of economic and political ex-ploitation of African resources. For instance, a recent contract with the DRC gives China a vast amount of access to mineral resources over the course of 25 years in return for $9 billion dollars of infrastructural de-velopment. Professor Lee also be-lieves that Chinese investments hold some positive benefits for ordinary Africans but also increase tensions between local Chinese and African workers in various countries. Some of these concerns stem from the nature of Chinese investments. Ac-cording to Professor Lee the exact amount of investment is unknown, but is disproportionately beneficial to Chinese firms. China is export-ing vast amounts of labor to African countries in all sectors of society. Some experts believe this figure may get as high as 300 million people.

Also, many African exports to China are believed to be illegal, especially within the timber industry. The in-vestment in the informal or shadow sectors such as prostitution is also largely unknown, but is very evident. In reference to policy, Lee maintains that “the notion that the Chinese don’t intervene is a misnomer.”

A major problem in the Sino-Afri-can equation is that of support for corrupt leaders, something the U.S. and China are both guilty of giving. “In order for Africa to experience real development,” Professor Lee maintained, “the culture of African leadership must change drastically.”

The creation of the United States Africa Command (AFRICOM), took place in 2007. One of the of-ficial objectives of AFRICOM is to protect the continent against terror-ism; however, some believe that the timing of the creation of the new military command might be largely in response to the growing presence of the Chinese in Africa.

The long term outcome of this de-finitive partnership between China and Africa is unknown, however it is a reality. Regardless of what occurs, African development will remain an integral part of the future outcome.

Ismaail Qaiyim is a junior majoring in history and peace, war, & defense.

Africa & ChinaSupport for Corruption?

February 2011 9

International

Drowning in a sovereign debt crisis, the Iberian Peninsula escaped from financial news for a few short weeks last July with the World Cup. Spain won its first World Cup, largely on a strategy of extremely precise, cal-culated, and measured passing in the midfield. Unfortunately for the na-tion’s economic welfare, as well as its neighbor, Portugal, it did not follow a similar game plan in the financial sector. Instead, both Portugal and Spain relied on excesses – of spend-ing and of budget deficits – and are facing the prospect of defeat.

Spain and Portugal have been strug-gling to recover from seemingly insurmountable challenges. The European economy has been stag-nating regionally, and both have faced a housing market crisis (with Spain under even more strain) that has left debt skyrocketing. As their respective national deficits have ballooned with reckless abandon (both more than 9 percent of over-all GDP), Spain and Portugal have to cut spending to avoid the conse-quences of inflation and a sovereign debt crisis. As unemployment rises, however, people are demanding the opposite of austerity measures. If the governments of Spain and Portugal lack fiscal discipline, their economies could tumble out of control. UNC Political Science Professor Thomas Oatley said in an interview with The Hill that, “It all depends on whether or not the citizens of these states elect governments that are willing to

pay.”This instability has been present in other economically weak coun-tries in Europe and has threatened the livelihood of the continent. Just months ago, many economists feared the permanent end of the Euro, and with it, European economic and so-cial cohesion. Though an ocean has separated the United States from the brunt of the economic dam-age in Europe, America’s economic woes are highly correlated with the European Union’s economic status. While Oatley has described Amer-ica’s economic resilience against these flailing states as “remarkable,” he asserts that a double-dip reces-sion in America could easily cause a further deterioration in the econo-mies of Spain and Portugal. Given how fragile the European recovery is, any major shocks from the United States could easily slow the progress of many European nations. There may be hope on the horizon. While the rest of Europe may envy the Iberian dominance on the fútbol pitch, these same nations might be willing to rescue the Spanish and Portuguese governments through bailouts. Regional leaders, especially Germany, will go to great lengths to preserve the Euro from collapsing and have spent billions on bailouts for other European nations and on auctions to purchase government bonds. Spain and Portugal cannot rely on these handouts indefinitely, however. German leaders have al-

ready said that money will flow from Berlin to Madrid and Lisbon as a last resort. The strain between the haves and have-nots of Europe is bulg-ing. Even if short-term problems are patched over, Oatley has called the long-term implications of this crisis “huge. Either somebody needs to leave [the Eurozone] or they need to find some bailout mechanism.” Despite all of the assistance, Spain and Portugal are seen as extreme-ly unstable and volatile economic states. Both countries have to reign in the exuberance that their econo-mies have displayed for the past few years. Controlling their budgets and restructuring their economies are both crucial steps that they must take to survive. Spain may have won the 2010 World Cup, but the hosts of the 2014 speak Portuguese. The host nation is not Portugal, but Bra-zil, a developing power that recently has seen much healthier economic growth than either nation in the Peninsula. They have also won more World Cups than both combined.

Aaron Lutkowitz is a first-year major-ing in business and political science.

The Irritable Iberian

10 The Hill

International

In agricultural villages surrounding Ahmedabad, a booming metropolis in India, the explosion in property values has induced poor farmers to sell their land to commercial inter-ests. Although these farmers have accumulated tremendous wealth, there are no schools or proper health facilities in these newly ur-ban townships. The farmers, who no longer seek work, spend their days gambling in the village square, and children are still usually married before the age of 15. While this is the reality of economic transition in developing countries, cases such as this offer a fresh insight into the relationship between the free market system and poverty eradication. In particular, critics argue that income growth alone is insufficient for, and can even inhibit, economic devel-opment. Within this context, social entrepreneurship has emerged as a dynamic strategy to approach the underlying problem of poverty.

Social entrepreneurship is being implemented in a diverse range of issues across the world by institu-tions, non-profit organizations and individuals. In general, social ven-tures apply innovative and sustain-able solutions to public problems. One of the world’s premier social ventures is the Grameen Bank in Bangladesh, the prototype for mi-crofinance institutions, founded by Nobel Peace Prize recipient Mu-hammad Yunus. Microfinance is the practice of providing small loans to the poor without requiring collat-eral. This is a pioneering strategy in poverty eradication because the poor previously had no low-price option for borrowing. Esther Duflo and Abhijit Banerjee of the MIT Pov-erty Action Lab articulate that while

most of the poor are entrepreneurs, they are unable to specialize because of lack of capital. Microfinance pro-vides a viable credit market for these entrepreneurs, which is a basis for sustainable growth.

Amartya Sen, a Nobel Prize-win-ning expert on developmental eco-nomics, argues in Development as Freedom that poverty must be con-ceptualized as the failure of social capital. In particular, he is concerned not primarily by the lack of income and wealth, but by the inability of the poor to access real opportunities. Social entrepreneurship is unique in that it enables the poor to take agen-cy over their own development. This signifies a paradigm shift from the welfare approach prominent in de-veloped countries, in which the poor are merely recipients of aid.

Yunus furthers that social busi-nesses empower the poor through a bottom-up model for economic development. In Creating a World Without Poverty, Yunus explains that Grameen expanded to many other social ventures after the initial success of its microfinance initia-tive. For instance, he described the origin of Grameenphone, now the leading cellular service provider in Bangladesh, as a project to advance women’s rights to participate in the workforce. By linking a business model to a social agenda, the venture was able to create a sustained impact on gender barriers in Bangladesh. In effect, it is a strategy that can take advantage of public-private sector collaboration in the effort to rectify social problems.

In 1999, the World Bank initiated one of the first comprehensive stud-

ies on this topic, focusing on the impact of the Grameen microcredit model on poverty in Bangladesh. Using a panel survey of borrow-ers, the study estimated that a mi-crocredit loan increased household income by 20 percent annually. In addition, researchers concluded that such households were more likely to put their children through second-ary education and access healthcare services.

In a follow-up study in 2005, Sha-hidur Khandker confirmed that the returns from loans had sustained the 1999 levels. Furthermore, Khandker established a spillover effect of mi-crofinance in which even non-par-ticipants in such programs benefited from their presence. In an interview with The Hill, Ajit Krishnan, Direc-tor of Panchayat, a network of mi-crofinance groups in India, attested that “despite the economic growth India has experienced, it has been microcredit and other social initia-tives that have driven development at the bottom of the pyramid. In fact, social ventures will be the growth in-dustry looking ahead.”

Social entrepreneurship has demonstrated the potential to use the free market in a way that benefits those who were once mar-ginalized by it. The success of such ventures is even apparent at UNC through Campus Y projects such as the Community Empowerment Fund, one of the first microfinance organizations in the United States. While the future of this movement is promising, this is merely the start-ing point for the war against poverty.

Yash Shah is a senior majoring in eco-nomics and political science.

Social Entrepreneurship

February 2011 11

International

Wake County Schools and the Debate on School Busing

On May 18th, 2010, the Wake County Board of Education cast a controversial vote to end the district’s diversity policy and revert to neighborhood schools. Under the diversity policy, the school dis-trict had balanced out school de-mographics by establishing magnet programs in schools in low-income areas to draw middle-class students. It also offered students school choice and undertook strategic busing. The policy ensured that no single school would have more than 40% of its population qualify for reduced-price or free lunches. Opponents of the vote to end the diversity policy be-lieve it will lead to “resegregation,” while supporters praise it for pre-serving neighborhood unity. There has been ongoing de-bate, and perhaps confusion, about the cause of constant school reas-signment for students. The Board of Education attributes it to the coun-ty’s high level of population growth in recent years, while many parents

blame the diversity policy. Anne Sherron, a member of the board’s Student Assignment Commit-tee, explained in an interview with The Hill that “newcomers confused the frequent reassignments with the diversity policy, which brought low-income students from down-town Raleigh to their schools. The frequent reassignments happened in the high-growth portions of the county…all this together created an air of discontent that resonated with voters in the school districts most affected, and were up for election in the fall of 2009.” While most students have gained in standardized testing un-der the diversity policy, critics point out that the poor test scores and low graduation rates for low-income and minority students remained in place despite the diversity policy. On the other hand, there is a sub-stantial body of research showing that as the level of poverty rises in a school, academic performance suf-

fers. Studies have also shown that economic integration, the main goal of the diversity policy, can be a pow-erful tool when it comes to closing the achievement gap. A study con-ducted by The Century Foundation in Montgomery County, Maryland, concluded that low-income elemen-tary students who attended high-income schools outperformed those who were assigned to low-income schools, even though the county tar-geted the low-income schools with extra funding and resources. Some parents and commu-nity members voiced opposition to the plan to move towards neighbor-hood schools, saying that it will lead to a few high-poverty and racially isolated schools. There are also fears that the policy will hurt the county’s chances at millions of dollars in fed-eral grant money for magnet schools. Shortly following the passage of the new policy, the NAACP filed a law-suit that claimed that the 700 initial student transfers the board has ap-proved will lead to increased racial segregation and violates laws that prohibit federal funding for discrim-inatory purposes. The county also stands to lose its accreditation from Ad-vancEd, which is conducting a review that was sparked by a complaint filed last year by the NAACP. AdvancEd has made it clear that it will be look-ing at how the board conducts itself, including how the board reviews and amends school policies.

Radhika Kshatriya is an undeclared sophomore.

12 The Hill

Cover

California. New Jersey. New York. Illinois. We know the states whose names have been splashed across front pages for months, ac-companied by ev-er-worsening debt and deficit figures. They are America’s PIGS, the acro-nym coined to de-scribe the weakest, most debt-ridden economies in Eu-rope that threaten to bring down the entire EU (Portugal, Ireland, Greece and Spain). But for as much as has been said about the catastrophic na-tional debt, in addition to the state fiscal basket cases listed above, the situation may be even worse than many people realize. We will first examine some states whose fi-nancial woes are not as well-known as those of California or New Jer-sey, and then explore the states that have managed to remain fis-cally stable. According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP), 44 states and the District of Colum-bia are currently fore-casting budget short-falls for the fiscal year 2012 (which begins July 1, 2011 in most states) totaling $125

billion, an amount approximately equal to the nominal GDP of New Zealand. States have indeed faced significant shortfalls since the onset

of the recession. However, most of the federal money that helped states to close budget gaps and avoid major service cuts in the past few years is now gone. According to CBPP esti-

mates, the state in the worst position is not New Jersey, whose shortfall as a percent of the fiscal year 2011 budget is 37.4 percent, nor even

California (29.3 percent), but Nevada, whose short-fall for 2012 is estimated at 45.2 percent of its 2011 budget. But if Nevada is any indication of how states will deal with their financial cri-ses, the signs are not good. Governor Brian Sandoval (R) has refused to budge from his campaign promise

not to raise taxes; thus, huge, possi-bly debilitating, cuts are in store for education and other state services. The Chancellor of Nevada’s higher education system said that state cuts would necessitate raising student

America’s Economic Future: Adaptation to Austerity

They are America’s PIGS, the acronym coined to describe

the weakest, most debt-ridden economies in Europe that

threaten to bring down the entire EU.

February 2011 13

Cover

costs by 73 percent. The Las Vegas Sun unfavorably reviewed Governor Sandoval’s proposed budget as “short on bold initiatives, long on kicking the proverbial can down the road by dodging permanent solutions.” In ef-fect, Sandoval’s budget en-sured that other groups, such as local school boards, would have to make the cuts, in-stead of state officials. Texas is another state whose budget situation has recently burst onto the scene as one of the direst in the nation. While conservatives have been quick to attribute the state’s budget troubles to overspending, liberals point to Texas as evidence of an alternative trend. Texas, with its extremely business-friendly envi-ronment, was viewed as immune to budget problems. Texas lawmakers have refused to raise taxes and will

thus have to close a budget gap es-timated at $27 billion through cuts alone. Texas has a $9 billion ‘rainy day’ fund, but legislators have re-fused to tap into that. Proposed cuts will hit education (with over $10 bil-lion in cuts over the next two years) and Medicaid programs the hardest.

Some Texas legislators have pinned their hopes on an economic turn-around, with increased tax revenues

for the state, but it remains to be seen if the economy will improve enough, and in time, to ward off these extremely deep cuts. But the picture is not all bad. According to CBPP, there are six states that do not face significant budget shortfalls for the coming fiscal year: Alaska, Alabama, Wyo-ming, Delaware, North Dakota and Arkansas. The Hill contacted state legislators and budget officials from the last two states to try and figure

out why they were in such good shape and what advice they had for their suffering neighbors. Arkansas Representative Kathy Webb, who serves as vice-chair of the Joint Bud-get Committee, attributed Arkan-sas’s financial success to the Revenue Stabilization Law, which has been

in place since the 1940s. In Webb’s words, “this prevents us from run-ning budget deficits. When revenues

are cut, e x p e n s e s are cut. Therefore, we tend to budget on a more con-s e r v a t i v e

basis continually, to prevent getting into trouble during lean times.”

The vice chairman of North Dakota’s House Finance and Taxa-tion committee, David Drovdal, ac-knowledged his state is more than a bit lucky: revenues from natural gas and other resources have done much to shore up North Dakota’s budget. Drovdal also points to North Dako-ta’s business-friendly policies: “The state has also helped its citizens and other business by returning some of the dollars in property tax relief and income tax reduction thus giving us a business-friendly environment for others thinking of relocating.”

But the legislators and bud-get officials who responded to The Hill had little in terms of advice for other states. Citizens in other states will likely face cuts to services and perhaps even higher taxes. That is, unless they take Representative Drovdal’s advice: “move to North Dakota.”

Clayton Thomas is a senior majoring in history.

America’s Economic Future: Adaptation to Austerity

44 states and the District of Columbia are currently forecasting budget shortfalls for the fiscal year 2012 (which begins July 1, 2011 in most states) totaling $125 billion, an amount approximately equal to the nominal GDP of

New Zealand.

Citizens in other states will likely face cuts to services and perhaps even higher taxes. That is, unless they take Representative Drovdal’s

advice: “move to North Dakota.”

14 The Hill

Cover

The University system that we know today may be changing. Administrators, faculty and students at all sixteen UNC system campuses are feeling the squeeze from previ-ous budget cuts and the next round promises to be the worst yet. While official financial information on the cuts will not be available for a few months, the system has to find a way to compensate for a $3.7 billion loss of funds, a cut of approximately 15 percent of the state’s total bud-get. Previous budget cuts attempted to cut administrative costs, but this new round of cuts promises to have a more direct effect on students and faculty. This round of budget cuts includes a permanent 5 percent cut equivalent to $26 million. The UNC system estimates that 5 to 10 percent of faculty jobs will be cut, which means that 900 to 2,000 people will lose their positions. Most institutions are implementing hir-ing freezes, which equates to fewer courses being offered to students. System universities are getting cre-ative in trying to find other ways to close the gap without losing jobs. Across the board, they are attempt-ing to raise tuition and fees by $500 to $800. Recently the UNC system office announced plans to eliminate duplicate majors among its cam-puses, possibly replacing them with online programs. NC State Univer-sity, which faces a 15 percent budget cut, is looking at consolidating ser-vices and majors, as well as cutting under-enrolled classes and academic majors. Other university systems are

feeling the pinch as well. Students in the University of California system have seen mid-year fee increases, and tuition is expected to rise 30 percent by next fall. Private universities are hurting too, with Duke and Yale’s endowments falling by approxi-mately 25 percent between 2009 and 2010. UNC relies on state appro-priations for approximately 25 per-cent of its fiscal budget. Chancellor Holden Thorp has remarked that it is going to be difficult to protect jobs, academics and research while still providing all necessary finan-cial aid, which is expected to see an increase in demand. “Our objective is to protect the academic quality of the University, the academic experi-ence of students and financial aid. The University will do whatever it takes to protect those priorities, in-cluding possible enrollment growth funding and tuition revenue.” In anticipation of ear-lier rounds of cuts, the university brought in Bain & Company, a con-sulting firm, to help find ways to cut costs without affecting academ-ics or jobs. The firm found that the growth of administrative costs has outstripped that of academic costs. It recommended simplifying UNC’s organizational structure, consolidat-ing services like Information Tech-nology Services and consolidating departmental offices. To implement the changes, UNC created the program known as Carolina Counts. Mike McFarland, the Director of University Commu-nications, described the program in an interview with The Hill. “Caro-

lina Counts is the University-wide initiative to improve the efficiency of campus operations and reduce ad-ministrative costs, based on the key recommendations by the 2009 Bain and Company study. The first year concentrated on campus-wide sav-ings and efficiencies in three central areas: Information Technology Ser-vices, Finance and Human Resourc-es. This year, the focus will turn to the academic units and seven central areas, to identify ways to reduce ad-ministrative costs at the unit level.” However, UNC probably will not be able to save all the money that Bain Consulting estimated it could due to state regulations on the university. The speculated plan of the state cut-ting UNC loose was not something that administrators were willing to discuss. So what does this mean for UNC students? Despite the best ef-forts of UNC’s administration, the system will likely see faculty cuts and fewer course offerings. That means more headaches come registration time, larger classes and less faculty-student interaction. Slashed ITS and department budgets will mean lon-ger lines and slower service. Tuition and fees will increase. Organizations will receive less funding from the school and will be forced to get cre-ative in order to balance their bud-gets. These cuts will be painful, but we can rest assured that the UNC administration is doing its best to maintain quality at Carolina.

Stephanie Shenigo is a junior majoring in political science.

University Budget Cuts

February 2011 15

Cover

In the next few months, the United States debt will reach its ceiling at $14.3 trillion. Accordingly, spending cuts are likely the num-ber one item on the agenda for the 112th Congress. The largest govern-ment expense is defense spending, accounting for over 20 percent of the federal budget. The budget for the Department of Defense in 2010 was over $780 billion including the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Typically, Republicans have defended military spending, but concern over the debt has produced a consensus from both sides of the aisle that even defense spending should not be spared. In a rare mo-ment of concord, the two groups prepared to slash the most from the defense budget are liberals and Tea Party conservatives. The Obama administration has tried to direct the dialogue from the center using proposals made by the bipartisan National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform and by Secretary of Defense Robert Gates. However, Congress has the power of the purse. Secretary Gates believes there are numerous opportunities in the Department of Defense for cuts. First, he wants to establish a leaner hierarchy. The military has added over 1,000 civilians to its bureaucra-cy since 9/11, including more than 100 generals and admirals. Gates views the civilian expansion as an inefficient bureaucracy and proposes cutting at least fifty generals and admirals. He also proposes elimi-nating the Joint Forces Command, which was founded after the Cold War to improve cooperation among

The Future of Defense Spending in Austere Times

divisions of the U.S. armed forces. Gates is not convinced that it pro-vides a service worthy of its price tag. Second, Gates argues that the billions of dollars spent devel-oping high-technology weapons focuses too much on anticipating the requirements of the future as op-posed to meeting the demands of the present. As a result, Gates cancelled construction of the new F-22 fighter and instead increased production of unmanned drones. He abandoned the DDG-1000 Destroyer and the Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle, because their intent was for use in operations last seen in WWII. In all, Gates cut twenty expensive weapons from the military’s budget, totaling over $300 billion in future spending. Congress has fought many of Gates’ proposals. Congressman Buck McKeon, the chairman of the House Armed Services Commit-tee, announced that he would not support any measures that endan-gered American national security. McKeon and other Republicans are concerned that blind spending cuts could jeopardize the U.S.’s troops and weaken its global strength. They worry that wartime cuts in defense spending could undermine key for-eign policy objectives. Gates is distinctly aware of those risks. He does not want to gut the military and has said that what the Department of Defense saves on overhead, it will spend on op-erations. Nonetheless deficit hawks protest that the proposed changes will do nothing to balance the bud-get, while security advocates object to the projects abandoned. Eventually, Gates is going

to have to accept some deep cuts to the defense budget. He rejects arguments that link budget cuts to increased vulnerability. In his own words from May 2010: “Is it a dire threat that by 2020 the United States will have only 20 times more advanced stealth fighters than Chi-na?” One of the underlying rea-sons for congressional opposition to the proposed cuts is the desire to protect local interests. Many of the cuts would eliminate thousands of jobs in production factories and military bases across the country. Regardless, the dissent is in the minority. According to author Continued on next page...

16 The Hill

Cover

They have accused him of rolling over and alienating the left. They have called him a pushover and claimed he is too soft on conserva-tives. Yet President Barack Obama continues to move increasingly to the center of the political spectrum in the wake of a midterm election that struck a damaging blow to the Democrats’ hold on government. The greatest indication of Obama’s change in direction oc-curred in December, when he com-promised on a temporary extension of the Bush-era tax cuts for wealthy Americans in exchange for benefits for the unemployed. Other policy initiatives indicating a shift to the center have focused on the budget, including an announcement after the elections of a two-year freeze on federal civilian salaries. Some have accused the president of reacting improperly to the Republican and Tea Party vic-tories in November. Democratic Congressman Anthony Weiner of New York said recently that Obama should not believe “that if he rolls on his back the new Congress is go-ing to rub his belly.” Weiner is not alone. Many Democrats have ex-pressed their concerns that Obama will abandon some of his progressive promises in an effort to compromise with the new Republican House. They worry that as Obama attempts to shift his policy initiatives towards the center, Republicans will remain united and firm, as they have for the past two years, and turn down Obama’s offers of cooperation. However, Obama’s appoint-ments of William Daley as Chief of Staff and of former General Elec-tric CEO Jeffery Immelt as head of the President’s Council on Jobs and Competitiveness have given many the idea that the president may adopt

a more corporate-friendly agenda. This has brought attention to the possibility that Obama’s steering to the center might be in anticipation of the looming re-election campaign in 2012. After a turbulent first term, some believe there is no question that the president needs to make some changes if he hopes to have a chance in 2012. In an interview with The Hill, UNC Associate Professor of Public Policy Daniel Gitterman was asked which of these theories he believed to be the cause behind Obama’s shift to the center. “All of the above,” he said simply. He also noted that there was “no doubt he was feeling some need to shift after the election” and that Obama’s poli-cy reflects his desire for “survival in 2012.” However, when asked whether or not he was surprised by Obama’s move towards the center, Gitterman said “I don’t think any-body’s surprised.” He mentioned how much Obama’s actions reflect Clinton’s in 1994. After a Republi-can takeover of Congress, Clinton initiated what became known as ‘tri-angulation,’ promoting many tradi-tionally Republican ideals and there-by boosting his popularity enough to be re-elected in 1996. If Obama’s actions were expected, then why have his recent policy initiatives and appointments so antagonized the left? Much of it may simply be the media’s ever-present inspiration to create politi-cal drama in Washington’s polarized political atmosphere. However, left-ist Democrats worry that Obama’s approach over the next two years may be the result of a series of shockwaves in American politics in the last decade. After being forced to deal with George W. Bush for

eight years, Democrats found them-selves in control of Congress and the White House in 2008. Liberals were greatly disappointed when Republi-can unity and Democratic disunity resulted in a largely lackluster two years. The president’s biggest tri-umph, the healthcare bill, was itself considered to be weak legislation in which neither side was truly satis-fied. Now, after a hard-hitting midterm election, the Democrats find themselves in a position infe-rior to what they had two years ago and it is possible they fear Obama’s new initiatives are steering them in the wrong direction. From an out-sider’s perspective, however, it is un-derstandable that Obama has taken note of the present political situation in Washington and of a future re-election campaign. It is likely, as one CNBC columnist said, that Obama “has taken a page from fellow Dem-ocrat Bill Clinton’s ‘triangulation’ playbook.” And, though Obama’s shift has worried many liberals, the coming months will likely reveal a new drive by the president to appeal to a much broader spectrum of the American electorate.

Christian Rodriguez is a first-year majoring in political science.

Obama’s Shift to the Center

Continued from previous page...

and political analyst Douglas Shoen, “both parties have rallied behind the idea that the nation’s debt amounts to a national security risk.” In the face of bipartisan cooperation, the Department of Defense will endure profound cuts.

Sam Hobbs is a sophomore majoring in history.

February 2011 17

Cover

Now we wait.

On February 3, North Carolina At-torney General Roy Cooper submit-ted a petition for writ of certiorari that would allow the state to bring its case against the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) to the Supreme Court. Many environmentalists and North Carolinians in general are hoping the Court will overturn the Fourth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals’ de-cision on NC v. TVA from July 2010. That decision reversed a low-er court’s ruling against the TVA that was going to force the corporation to reduce its air emis-sions. The Supreme Court must now decide whether or not to re-view the case.

There is no doubt that the TVA’s coal-fired power plants are polluting the air, nor is anyone disputing the link between this air pollution and the haze and serious health problems faced by North Car-olinians living downwind from these plants. “The TVA no longer contests in this litigation that the emissions from its power plants cause public health harms,” explained UNC Law School Professor Donald Horn-stein in an interview with The Hill. Besides the estimated 15,000 ill-nesses in North Carolina caused by out-of-state power plant emissions, there are many cases of death and near-death emergencies. “[It’s] as if they’re smothering,” a local doctor said of his patients in an interview with NPR’s “All Things Considered.”

In NC v. TVA, North Carolina is arguing that the emissions from TVA’s coal-fired power plants are a “nuisance” to the public and should be stopped. The nation’s courts have a long history of nuisance cases that have set precedents relevant to the facts of NC v. TVA. North Carolina is basing its current nuisance claim on these classic cases. This common law approach is not new to environ-

mental disputes, but the Fourth Cir-cuit found it to be problematic in this case. According to Judge Wilkin-son, who wrote the Fourth Circuit’s opinion, “vague public nuisance standards” developed and enforced by courts throughout the country will “scuttle the nation’s carefully created system for accommodat-ing the need for energy production and the need for clean air.” In other words, corporations that obey fed-eral guidelines administered by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) might still find themselves in court. The Fourth Circuit believes federal guidelines should trump judge-imposed regulation stemming from old public nuisance cases. In response, North Carolina points to the “savings clause” in the Clean Air

Act that sought to ensure the rights of states to use their own laws, in-cluding their common law, to afford more public-health protection than the statutory minimum.

What if the federal guidelines are not good enough? According to At-torney General Cooper, the EPA was not doing enough to keep North Carolina’s air clean. A public

nuisance lawsuit was an opportunity to protect North Carolina’s citizens by forcing the TVA to be cleaner than federal regulation required. The Fourth Circuit cried foul, and its ruling will stand if the Supreme Court decides not to review the case. If the Court does decide to weigh in, it could affirm, modify, or reverse the Fourth Cir-cuit’s ruling. Unfortu-

nately, we cannot expect to know the Court’s decision about reviewing the case until after this semester is over.

The final decision in NC v. TVA will make a significant difference in how environmental disputes can be resolved from now on. If denied the opportunity to make nuisance claims against polluters that harm their citizens, states will have no other recourse besides advocating for stronger federal regulations. In the words of Prof. Hornstein, NC v. TVA will determine “if any room is left for a state to protect itself.”

Caroline Guerra is a senior majoring in political science and international studies.

NC Petitions Supreme Court

18 The Hill

Cover

Over two months since WikiLeaks posted the first of over 250,000 dip-lomatic cables that stirred the na-tion, it is important to assess the policy implications of these leaks, especially in light of continued post-ings. WikiLeaks has served as a virtual drop box for confidential in-formation since 2006. In accordance with its mission to provide a whis-tle-blowing service, it posts most of what it receives after review. Despite the legal troubles that founder and editor in chief Julian Assange faces, the site has said that it will continue to release documents over the com-ing months.

There have been concerns since No-vember that WikiLeaks is a threat to American security. In January, the State Department issued warnings to individuals named in the leaks about their potentially compromised safety and has relocated a handful of them in order to preempt any dan-ger. However, despite initial fears, there has been no serious fallout for those individuals. Similarly, negative repercussions on the diplomatic and international fronts have appeared minimal, though at times embar-rassing.

Though the recent leak of U.S. mili-tary classified documents may have been an isolated event, it has brought up questions about the way the mili-tary protects its information. Tom Blanton, director of the National Security Archives, said in an inter-view with NPR that the way the U.S. protects its secrets is by surrounding a “vast prairie” of information with “low fences.” He suggests that “high fences” are needed around the most sensitive information.

No significant change in classified policy has been made public as of yet. Bradley Manning is the soldier charged with violating his contract by using his confidential clearance to access the military’s cables and handing them over to WikiLeaks. His hearing is scheduled for May. Supporters of WikiLeaks have at-tempted to defer criticism of the site by shifting blame onto Man-ning, emphasizing that the leaks were not the product of hacking. Did WikiLeaks really do anything wrong? Undeterred by these argu-ments, U.S. federal prosecutors have been searching for evidence that would allow them to try Assange..

What has been so troubling to many is the question of what ethi-cal parameters WikiLeaks should be bound by, or in other words, how it should censor its material. It is a self-described “non-profit media organization dedicated to bringing important news and information to the public.” WikiLeaks is a new medium for information dissemina-tion that the American legal system has little experience with. The New York Times is one example of a news source that has on numerous occa-sions elected to omit sensitive infor-mation. It has justified its decisions with article 19 of its Code of Eth-ics, which reads: “We gather infor-mation for the benefit of our audi-ence.” Critics of WikiLeaks have also pointed to the Times’ article 27, “[NYT Journalists] may not purloin data, documents or other property, including such electronic property as databases and e-mail or voice-mail messages,” as a shining example of a code that WikiLeaks should adopt.

Critics of WikiLeaks say that many of the leaked cables simply reveal diplomatic conversation, not ille-gal activity, as is the mission of true whistle-blowing organizations This has been a thorn in the side for many who otherwise would generally sup-port such a venture; even strong sup-porters of expansive First Amend-ment rights have been divided in their opinions of WikiLeaks.

Despite the initial outcry over the leaks, little seems to have been done on a policy level to prevent further leaks from happening. Has this leak, then, really mattered? Initial con-cerns regarded the possibility that other governments would not trust the U.S. or become upset given that some of the cables revealed Ameri-can frustrations with diplomacy and other nations.

However, American relations with other countries have not visibly suf-fered. This in turn challenges the ini-tial goals of WikiLeaks; continued interest is in the leaks themselves more so than in the content of the documents. As the leaks continue, it will be interesting to see if anything ever comes of them, but right now it seems that the State Department and the rest of the diplomatic com-munity are simply grudgingly riding out the effects of the rest of the post-ings.

Wilson Sayre is a sophomore majoring in philosophy.

WikiLeaks Lasting Effects

February 2011 19

Cover

Shirley is an orphan. Her parents were killed on Jan. 12, 2010, when an earthquake hit Haiti. As if life could not get any worse, she was raped just one day after moving into a tent camp, Camp de Mars. She said to Newsbeat, “In the night it was rain-ing. I was in my tent and one man came in, kicked me in the belly. He then raped me. I screamed but no-body could hear me because of the rain.”

Far from being an isolated tragedy, rape has become a more common occurrence in post-earthquake Hai-ti. Not only are overpopulated camps less secure, criminals also have less reason to worry about being pun-ished. The justice system has essen-tially collapsed. Moreover, the police force, already inadequate in size, has been accused of corruption. To make matters worse, two thirds of prison-ers in Haiti have escaped.

Post-earthquake Haiti is still full of problems. Here are some horrifying numbers: About one million people are still homeless. About 800,000 to one million people still live in cramped tent cities. Only 5 percent of 675 million cubic feet of rubble has been removed. Intensifying dif-ficulties further, a cholera epidemic struck Haiti, taking between 2,500 and 3,000 lives.

Health infrastructure is in dire straits. Much of the education in-frastructure, including medical and

Haitian RecoveryIs Hope or Blame Being Passed Around?

nursing schools, has been destroyed and not yet rebuilt. In addition, the health care delivery system is very poorly coordinated, with too many actors running amok. As a conse-quence, Haiti has had a difficult time dealing with cholera, maternal mor-tality and tuberculosis.

Who is to blame for this slow, pain-ful recovery? Some wag the finger at NGOs, accusing them of ineffi-cient spending. On a methodologi-cal level, NGOs have been accused of not engaging with local Haitians. Even though Haitians know they need foreign help, they would much prefer to be active participants in re-building their country. For example, they might prefer to see Haitian en-gineers re-building the Haitian na-tional palace. However, the majority of aid contracts have been given to foreign engineers. Moreover, the re-building plan has been criticized for bypassing local authorities and thus impairing state functional ability. Much to Haiti’s dismay, the interna-tional community did not seriously consult the Haitian people in devis-ing a reconstruction plan in March 2010. It is not surprising, then, that Action Plan for National Recon-struction and Development (AP-NRD) was supported by only 17.5 of people.

Others blame Haiti’s dysfunctional bureaucracy and tax systems, as well as its endemic corruption. Political instability has caused major infra-

structure renovations to be post-poned. With the Haitian govern-ment in a state of limbo, donors have been reluctant to contribute to relief efforts. Indeed, only $1.2 billion of the $5.3 billion in donations already pledged for the first 18 months of infrastructure renovations has actu-ally been delivered to specific proj-ects.

Everything considered, it would be very unfair to tag the Haiti recovery process as a failure. There is much to celebrate. Over 3.5 million people have received food. 1.2 million have daily access to safe water. Further-more, there are about 700,000 peo-ple in cash-work programs. Homes are being rebuilt, lives are being re-stored and hope is being found, even amidst terrible circumstances. How Haitians can be resilient, physically and spiritually, is perhaps the biggest wonder of it all.

As for the future, Derek Sciba, who works for the nonprofit World Con-cern, said to The Hill in a phone interview, “There has been progress made in the last year. It’s easy to look at the headlines right now and ask, you know, what hope is there? It’s important not to despair but con-tinue on for the sake of those people who are suffering.”

Krishna Kollu is a junior majoring in economics and computer science.

20 The Hill

Best of the Blog

By: Eric Eikenberry

Maybe it’s because I’m sick, but I feel re-sponsible for delivering this constipated bit of news to The Chapel Hill Political Review’s readers: nothing, and I mean absolutely noth-ing, will get done until 2012. For those who are passionate about LGBT rights, global climate change, reformation of the tax code, and who still want to fight the good fight (no matter what your side), I advise you to take a break. Go on vacation, write a novel, get arrested (no capital crimes, please) because your aspirations are on hold.

Why the negativity? Well, I would just like to point out that the major “bipartisan” achieve-ment of the past two months was a mad-dash effort to uphold a tax policy that will continue to explode our much-dynamited national debt.

But wait, I haven’t even gotten to the good stuff! Remember the year and a half battle over the Affordable Care Act (also known as the ACA, or “The Job-Killing Health Care Law”) the long debate that left liberals unsatisfied, Tea Partiers foaming at the mouth, and the public exhaust-ed, all while marginally improving the status quo? Well, we’re in for some more rabid good-ness. A bill of repeal passed in the Republican House, failed in the Democratic Senate (gee, who could’ve seen that coming?), and now the effort to restore “truth, justice, and the Ameri-can way” will wind through the courts. So far, two District Court judges appointed by Demo-crats have upheld the law’s constitutionality, while two judges appointed by Republicans have declared parts of the bill unconstitutional. Once again, I know you didn’t see that coming.

The Supreme Court will eventually decide this issue (centered on the constitutionality of the ACA’s individual mandate) sometime in the near or not-so-near future. Despite its hopeless nature, the debate is worth tuning into now and again, if only to see (though not totally fathom) the causes of our national slothfulness. As The New Republic blogger Jonathan Chait wrote

about the conservative desire for repeal, “But the Affordable Care Act has become to the right a symbolic totem that has little to do with actual policies. Its very existence is an enduring emo-tional wound.”

Chait is a liberal and a supporter of the ACA, so if you want to contest his singling out of “the right,” do what you’ve got to do. But un-deniable, I think, is his assertion that the cur-rent political climate is one based on emotion. The disagreements are intractable, thought of by opponents as a struggle of good versus evil (as opposed to differing policies), and portrayed by twenty-four hour cable stations as a zero-sum battle. This atmosphere is not conducive to shared solutions.

The ongoing ACA repeal effort is the perfect example of why nothing will be accomplished anytime soon. For those worried about our eco-nomic stagnation, our decaying infrastructure, and our limping education system, items which need (and have needed) extensive attention, this is bad news.

But guys, chin up! Seriously, I shouldn’t be such a downer. There’s so much to look forward to. Like, New York Rep. Peter King’s Homeland Security Committee hearing on “The Radical-ization of Muslim Americans.” Because that won’t turn into a latent (or outright, depend-ing on the witness) expression of Islamophobic bile (Rep. King is already on record stating that “eighty percent of American mosques are con-trolled by radical imams.”). And both sides have agreed that the war in Afghanistan should con-tinue until 2014 and beyond. There’s some real, measurable progress.

But I am afraid that my pessimism has worsened to a point which renders me ineffec-tual. Ignore my prior advice. If you are an ac-tivist seeking change, and you have a cause in which you believe, please, continue to fight. Just don’t expect a helping hand from the 112th Congress.

As for me, I think I’ll just go back to bed.

Best of the Blog

Ah Yes, the Simple Pleasures of Gridlock

To better serve our readership, The Hill maintains a blog, bringing you new content in between print issues. The fol-lowing articles are some favorite pieces this month from

our bloggers.

February 2011 21

Best of the Blog

By: Kelsey Jost-Creegan

At first glance, Egypt is a land of extremes. Fertile Nile bed meets barren desert. Hardee’s delivery motorcycles park near ancient monu-ments. The poor construct shelter in cemeter-ies while the rich build mansions on the city outskirts.

As the media likes to note, Egypt has a long history of authoritative rule, be it under ancient pharaohs, colonial powers, or modern dicta-tors. As of this past week, however, this authori-tarianism has been sorely shaken. The people’s protests have achieved their goal, and thirty-year President Hosni Mubarak has resigned.

The last few weeks have demonstrated how the West has lived in fear of an extremist Islam-ic uprising in Egypt; Mubarak built his regime on the threat that if he left, the only alternative was an extremist and anti-western state. As these protests reveal, however, this is one sup-posed dichotomy that rings hollow. Over the last three weeks, millions of protesters stood up to the regime that held ironclad power for three decades. But instead of being the traditional-ist, extremist, anti-American affair that many anticipated, these demonstrations were start-ed on Facebook by a Google executive, driven by youth and fueled by the whole spectrum of Egyptian society, blending creed, age, gender and heritage.

In January the nation stood rocked by sec-tarian violence in Alexandria, and images such as that of Coptic Christians holding mass in the middle of Tahrir Square protected by a ring of Muslims became powerful symbols of Egypt’s unity. Similarly, the protestors have been seen arresting plain clothes police involved in looting or posing as pro-Mubarak supports, tying them up, and turning them over to the army to deal with. These examples of protestors attempting to maintain order amidst the uprising contrast those of a desperate government creating cha-os in a weak attempt to justify its own existence. The police were called from the street – more meaningful in Egypt than in the U.S., as there are normally police posted on every corner.

Some policemen were even reported to have released prisoners with instructions to empty into the city or go to Tahrir to join the ranks of plainclothes police posing as pro-Mubarak sup-porters and brutally attacking their opponents. For many Egyptians, even these extreme gov-ernmental actions were obtuse and predictable; surely the sign of a government so secure in its power that it had even stopped hiding its brutal-ity.

Over the course of almost three weeks, pro-testors stood strong in the face of this cruelty and deception. The reality of life under such a stifling regime was one of the most striking parts of my experience in Egypt. The govern-ment simply chose to cut off all forms of easy communication and applied a curfew for the majority of the day; there was nothing anyone could do but stay inside or risk detention, re-gardless their intentions. Realistically, I expe-rienced only the fringe effects of government crack-down. Still, as an American who grew up assured of her civil liberties and rights, even these actions were shocking. We so often take so much for granted – the right to protest, to speak and move freely, to associate with whomever we wish; how powerful it is to see people standing up and demanding rights that we apathetically let slip through our fingers.

The past three weeks have demonstrated an Egypt – and, indeed, a Middle East – that es-capes Western prejudices. A modern movement fueled by social networking and driven by di-versity eclipses many stereotypes of the Arab world, its people and its politics. No one can say what the next six months, year, or decade will hold for Egypt. There are legitimate reasons for concern in the face of the legacies of a thirty year dictatorship and an immense power vacu-um. Should this inclusive energy that strove for coalition between opposition parties and digni-fied restraint as the basis of legitimacy contin-ue to thrive, however, there is also much reason for hope.

At the time protests broke out in Egypt, Kelsey was studying abroad in Cairo.

Best of the Blog Protests Rock Egypt and Defy Expectations

22 The Hill

The Last Word

On Jan. 5, a cross-eyed schizophrenic burst through a crowd in Tucson, shot six people and swept his pistol across the rest of those congregated before a man pinned him to the sidewalk. In the days after the murder, a fearful na-tion whipped back with ferocity. The columnist David Brooks called for rational people to crack down on the “increas-ingly disruptive mentally ill.” The blogging mobs were even more adamant. An amateur philosopher in The New Repub-lic’s comments section sneered at the notion of “rights” for “psychotics.” This anony-mous sage undoubtedly thought he was making a clever joke, but he was more insightful than he knew. A hundred and fifty years after the Asylum Movement and half a cen-tury after JFK’s Community Mental

Health Program, the insane still hide in plain sight, fenced off from “the rest of us,” denied full citizenship by a society that views them as threats. Public hostility has sent the mentally ill to “social death,” in the words of Harvard’s Arthur Kelman.

Communities shun mentally ill peo-ple because they misperceive psy-chiatric disorders as contagious and, following evolutionary instinct, peg their carriers as threats. Mental ill-ness cannot be transmitted by liquid or air, but this fact eludes people who

do not understand science. And con-sidering that 87 percent of Ameri-cans say they learn about mental illnesses from the movies, their igno-rance of epidemiology is unremark-able. How could someone who had only seen a schizophrenic hacking

up Hitchcock’s Marion feel safe around the mad? Unless she knew that most mentally ill people won’t murder her in the shower, she couldn’t. If she hadn’t seen the data, the Tuc-son massacre would only con-firm her fear. But Jared Loughner’s tar-gets were the victims of an unlikely rampage. According to the journal Schizophrenia,

the chance of being killed by a men-tally ill person is 14 million to 1. Ac-cording to a study in Health Affairs, Americans who have personally known mentally ill people under-stand that their troubled friends are harmless. Even if they didn’t know the figure, the fact that only 3 to 5 percent of violent crimes can be at-tributed to mental illness wouldn’t strike them as outlandish. But un-less the informed inform the unin-formed, Hollywood will keep writ-ing its lurid script and our consumer society will never recognize the mentally ill as fully human. I’m not being melodramatic. Neuroscience studies find that college students do not recognize the chronically home-less—of whom the chronically men-tally ill make up a disproportionate share—as human beings. A class whose images light up the wrong places in citizens’ brains is unlikely to receive full rights. They don’t. In 2000, resi-

“After the Ball and Chain”Tucson and Mental Health

On Jan. 5, a cross-eyed schizophrenic burst through a crowd in Tucson, shot six people and swept his pistol

across the rest of those congregated before a man pinned him to the sidewalk.

February 2011 23

The Last Word

Want to have the last word? Send your guest column (750-800 words, please) to thehillpr@gmail.com or sound off on our blog at chapelhillpoliticalreview.wordpress.comThe Hill

The Last Word on

dents of Maine voted to keep in place a constitutional statute by which the legislature could, in principle, revoke the voting rights of individuals with mental illnesses. In a less extreme but far more common example, apa-thetic communities provide minimal care to people who suffer from poor mental health. The Center for American Progress reports that mental illnesses account for 33 percent of sick days, yet only 6 percent of health dollars go to psychiatric care. Years of insufficient treatment wither mentally ill people’s overall health, so 3 out of 5 die of preventable con-ditions. Thus premature death ends their life-long ostracism. Ridiculed by the culture,

uncared for by the state, and need-lessly left to die, the mentally ill live in exile from our nominally demo-cratic nation. The condition of the mentally ill has bettered since Doro-thea Dix first exposed their plight in 1841. Compared to the ball and

chain they used to wear, the re-straints upon the mentally ill have tapered into mildness. Given how their condition has improved, one might expect the mentally ill to be

satisfied. But complacency is only an excuse to stall progress. The mentally ill still face high barriers to happi-ness in life. 80 percent of people with long-term mental illnesses lack a job, and and they live in a society whose vernacular dismisses illogical things

as “insane” and playfully calls intemperate people “lunatics.” Until Americans accept mental illness as a malady, not a char-acter trait, the lonely suffering of the insane will go on and no mentally ill person will stand, unashamed, as a full citizen.

Alex Jones is a sophomore majoring in business and political science.

Ridiculed by the culture, un-cared for by the state, and

needlessly left to die, the men-tally ill live in exile from our nominally democratic nation.

WORK FORTHE HILL!

email thehillpr@gmail.com

Interested in joining our staff as a writer, blogger, editor, designer, or artist?

PAY TO THE ORDER OF

MEMO SIGNED

DOLLARS

1:125000258: 12345678: 0101

1234

$

DATE

Donate to The Hill

email us at thehillpr@gmail.com