America’s Top 15 Allies Post World War II

Posted on by Ben Scheffer

The United States has had many allies throughout its 245-year history, they have traded with America, fought in wars alongside America, and sometimes have fought in wars against America, and have traded goods with America in the past 3 centuries. Here are America’s top allies post World War II

Britain

Relations between Britain and the U.S. formed two years after the Revolutionary war in 1785. The two became trading partners until the war of 1812. One year after the war ended, the relations were once again established in 1815. The two countries fought beside each other in multiple wars such as World Wars I and II, as well as the Iraq war.

The Treaty of Paris, signed in 1783, acknowledged Britain’s surrender of the Revolutionary war and established boundaries between the two countries. The Jay Treaty, which was signed in 1794, established a base upon which America could build a national economy and assure its commercial prosperity. The Treaty of Ghent ended the War of 1812, restored both countries to pre-war relations, returned prisoners, and restored the U.S. as a nation.

The two countries currently trade over $260 billion in goods. Both nations are each other’s number one source of foreign direct investment totaling up to $1 trillion. Britain is America’s 7th largest trade partner. The goods traded consist of metal, stone, minerals, fuels, machinery, and electric machinery.

France

The two countries have been allies since the American Revolutionary war as they were trading partners. France also helped America win its independence from Britain and aiding them again in the war of 1812. Both countries served side by side in both World Wars.

One of the biggest treaties the countries have co-signed would be the Treaty of Amity and Commerce, which recognized the U.S. as an independent nation and set up trade relations. Another would be the Treaty of Alliance in Paris, which provided a military alliance against Britain.

Today both countries work together to combat terrorism, and both are working to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons. France is also the United State’s third-largest trading partner in Europe. The trading relationship is very strong as $138 billion in goods was traded between the two countries in 2019. The goods traded consist of medical equipment, computer software, and scientific instrumentation.

 

Canada

During the American Revolution, anti-American loyalists fled to Canada, and some Canadians worried about U.S. annexation. During the War of 1812, Canada’s borders were invaded by American soldiers. When the war ended, the border was demineralized, the U.S. never attempted to invade Canada and Britain stopped aiding Native American attacks on the United States.

The partnership between the U.S. and Canada is formed by geographic location, similar values, and common interests. The two countries share the largest trading relationship in the world. The secure flow of goods and resources is vital to both countries and their respective economies for their economic prosperity. The goods and services traded between the two countries are worth an estimated $718 billion, with exports coming out to $360 billion and imports $358 billion. In 2019 the surplus for goods and services traded between both countries totaled $2.4 billion.

The goods being traded consist of vehicles, machinery, mineral fuels, and plastic. Billions of dollars of fresh fruit, vegetables are also traded between the two countries.

Trade agreements between Canada and the U.S. consist of the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA). It creates a more level playing field for North American workers and includes improved rules of origin for cars, trucks, and other products. It also benefits North American farmers and ranchers by strengthening food and agricultural trade.

Another major trade agreement between the two countries was NAFTA. The North American Free Trade Agreement was signed by President Clinton in January of 1994, and the result was Canada, America, and Mexico became the largest free market in the world. The combined economies totaled $6 trillion and affected 365 million people. The deal also opened insurance markets, expanded trade in financial services, and increased investment opportunities.

Japan

The U.S.-Japan security treaty is designed to strengthen the bonds of peace and friendship and uphold the principles of democracy, individual liberty, and the rule of law. The treaty also promotes economic cooperation and stability between the two countries. 

The two countries began relations after World War II; 2020 marked the 60th anniversary of the U.S.-Japan security alliance. Japan provides military bases as well as financial and material support for U.S. forces. The countries coordinate on a number of global issues such as global health and environmental resource protection. The two countries also collaborate on supply chains to secure a transition to a 5G network.

The U.S.-Japan security treaty is designed to strengthen the bonds of peace and friendship and uphold the principles of democracy, individual liberty, and the rule of law. The treaty also promotes economic cooperation and stability between the two countries.

South Korea

Relations between the United States and South Korea first formed during the Joseon Dynasty under the 1882 Treaty of Peace, Amity, Commerce, and Navigation. The first diplomatic trip to South Korea in U.S. history was in 1883. The relations continued until 1905, when Japan assumed direction over the country’s foreign affairs. When World War II ended in 1945, the country was divided at the 38th parallel. The two countries fought aside each other during the Korea war for three years until the war ended in a stalemate, dividing North and South Korea at the 38th parallel. Today both countries work together to prevent North Korea from acquiring nuclear weapons.

The two countries reached over $168 billion in trade in 2019; the primary goods traded consisted of manufactured goods and agricultural products. South Korea’s direct investment in the United States has tripled since 2011 and is now worth over $61 billion, making it the United States’ second-largest Asian source of foreign investment. In the last three years, Korean companies invested in automotive components, industrial equipment, and consumer electronics.

Australia

The U.S. and Australia first formed their relationship in 1918 when they fought side by side during World War I and have maintained a strong relationship ever since. In 2018 the country’s celebrated its century-long mateship. The U.S-Australia Free Trade Agreement went into effect on January 1, 2005, which has boosted U.S. exports to Australia by 80% since 2004. In 2018 all U.S. goods and services to Australia totaled $65.9 billion, with a trade surplus of $28.9 billion. According to the Department of Commerce, this agreement supports up to 250,000 U.S. jobs in sectors that include machinery, travel services, consumer goods, and financial services. In return, Australia exports food, feeds, beverages, industrial supplies and materials, and business and travel services,

Germany

The U.S. first established relations with the German Empire in 1871; connections were terminated in 1917 when the U.S. entered World War I, reestablished again in 1921, and terminated again in 1941. When World War II ended, Germany was divided into four different parts. In 1955, the United States established relations with West Germany and East Germany in 1974; both zones were re-unified in 1990. Today Germany is one of America’s closest allies and trading partners.

In 2019 bilateral trade for goods and services totaled $260 billion, the goods being traded to Germany were aircraft and parts, vehicles, pharmaceuticals, medical equipment, and industrial machinery, with Germany exporting the very same goods to the United States. The U.S.-German Treaty of Friendship, Commerce, and Navigation provides free movement of capital between both countries. Taxation of U.S. firms within Germany is governed by a protocol for avoiding double taxation.

The Philippines

Relations with the Philippines began in 1946 and are based on a shared commitment to human rights and democracy. The 1951 mutual defense treaty between the two countries provides a foundation for a security partnership that began during World War II. They have a strong trading relationship with over $27 billion in goods and services being traded. The U.S. is one of the largest investors in the Philippines, and the Philippines is the United States’ third-largest trading partner. The key imports the U.S. receives are automobile parts, electric machinery, textiles, garments, wheat, and coconut oil. Key exports are agricultural goods, machinery, cereals, and electronics.

The two countries have had a bilateral Trade and Investment Framework Agreement, signed in 1989, that addresses bilateral issues and recognizes the importance of protecting intellectual property, and encourages technological development.

Brazil

The United States was the first country to recognize Brazil as a democracy in 1822; today, the two countries are the largest democracies in the Western Hemisphere, promoting economic growth, prosperity, and international peace. Brazil is the United States’ second-largest trading partner. In 2018 two-way goods and services totaled $103.9 billion was. Last year the United States trade surplus was $20 billion for goods and services.

Brazil’s main imports from the United States are petroleum products, aircraft machinery, electronics, and optical and medical instruments. The United States is Brazil’s second-largest export market; the primary products are crude oil, aircraft iron, steel, and machinery. The U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis reports the United States has invested over $68 billion in Brazil since 2017.

In 2011 the two countries signed the Agreement on Trade and Economic Cooperation to enhance trade between them. The deal expands our relationship by providing a framework to improve the cooperation on issues concerning trade, such as mutual concern, facilitation, and other barriers to trade.

Kenya

Diplomatic relations between the two countries began in 1964 following Kenya declaring their independence from Brittan in 1963. The two countries became closer after Kenya became a democracy in 2002. In July of 2020, the U.S. and Kenya announced a free trade agreement that would help small businesses promote inclusive economic growth. The deal would also help U.S. companies become more competitive in Kenya and other East African countries. The deal would also improve intellectual property protections and facilitate digital trade.

Nigeria

Relations began between Nigeria and the United States when Nigeria declared its independence from Brittan in 1960. Between 1966 and 1999, Nigeria experienced a series of military coups and a civil war that lasted for two and a half years that concluded in 1970, resulting in over a million casualties. Following the inauguration of a civilian president in 1999, the relationship between the two countries began to improve. Nigeria has the largest economy in Africa and has a population of 200 million people.

The two countries signed a Trade and Investment Framework Agreement in 2000.

The U.S. is the largest foreign investor in Nigeria; in 2019, Nigeria was the second-largest export destination totaling over $3 billion. That same year two-way trade goods totaled over $10 billion. U.S. exports to Nigeria include wheat, vehicles, machinery, kerosene, jet fuel, civilian aircrafts, and plastic.

South Africa

Diplomatic relations were first established in 1929, but apartheid put a strain on the established relations. When apartheid ended in 1994, the U.S. and South Africa have enjoyed a bilateral relationship. After Nelson Mandela became President, the U.S. South African Binational Commission was launched to support the rebuilding of South Africa. South Africa has struggled with many things, such as unemployment, corruption, and an HIV/AIDS epidemic. The U.S. tries to focus on improving healthcare and education, and teaching standards. Since 2004, the U.S. government has invested over $6 billion in combating HIV/AIDS via the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief.

South Africa is the largest U.S. trade partner in Africa, with a two-way goods trade totaling $14 billion. 600 U.S. businesses operate in South Africa, many of which use the country for their regional headquarters. The two countries have a bilateral treaty eliminating double taxation. In 2012 they signed a Trade and Investment Framework Agreement (TIFA) to discuss mutual interest and improving cooperation for improving trade and investment. Topics discussed range from intellectual property rights, labor and the environment.

The Development Trade Investment and Development Cooperative Agreement (TIDCA), signed in 2008, is designed to focus on trade facilitation and investment promotion between the U.S. and South Africa, as well as four other African countries such as Botswana and Namibia.

India

Relations with India began with India after India declared independence from Brittan in 1947 which led to the first meeting between the two countries in 1949. India took a neutral position during the cold war. This set the tone for the relations between the U.S. and India during that time, creating constraints. In 1959, President Eisenhower became the first President to visit India, where he met with President Rajendra Prasad and Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru. The U.S. has supported India in its war with China. When war broke out with Pakistan while Pakistan was fighting its own civil war, the U.S. sided with Islamabad.

Today the two enjoy a close relationship; in 2005, the Civil Nuclear Cooperation Initiative set guidelines for nuclear exports and nuclear trade. The relationship between the two countries is committed to freedom, democratic principles, and equal treatment of all citizens, human rights, and the rule of law. The U.S. and India trade $149 billion in goods; in 2018, India purchased over 48 million barrels of crude oil from the U.S.

Israel

The United States first recognized Israel as a state in 1948 and was the first to recognize Jerusalem as the capital in 2017. The U.S. is the United State’s closest ally, and Israel has been a close ally of the United States for decades. The two countries are united in their commitment to economic prosperity and regional security. The United States is committed to normalizing relations between Israel and Muslim majority states.

The U.S. has been selling weapons to Israel for years; in 2016, the two countries the, Memorandum of Understanding, a ten-year weapons deal worth $3.3 billion for military financing and $500 million for missile defense. The two countries also participate in research, weapons development, and military exercises together.

The two countries trade $50 billion in goods between one another annually. The U.S.-Israel Free Trade Agreement (FTA) and the Agreement on Trade and Agricultural Products, both signed in 1985, have greatly grown trade between both countries, making the United States Israel’s largest trading partner. In 2019, American exports to Israel totaled $14.7 billion, where imports are worth $19.6 billion.

Mexico

Relations between the United States and Mexico are strong as they share a 2,000-mile border together with 55 ports of entry. There is $1.7 billion in two-way trade between the two countries as Mexico’s exports rely heavily on U.S. markets. In 2019, Mexico was the second-largest supplier of crude oil to the United States, as well as the largest market for American-made petroleum products. Other Mexican exports to the U.S. include plastics, vehicles, machinery, electric machinery, and mineral fuels. The United States has invested over $114 billion in Mexico, while Mexico has invested $18.7 billion in the United States. Mexico is involved in the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement, promoting free trade through all three countries; a key stipulation of the agreement is that it must undergo a formal review every six years. Mexico is also committed to enforcing its border as they have apprehended over 145,000 people trying to migrate to the United States in the past six months.

 

What you need to know about Georgia’s new election law

Posted on by Ben Scheffer

Earlier this spring state lawmakers in Georgia passed a new law concerning how the state runs its elections which was signed into law by Governor Brian Kemp on March 31st. The decision comes just months after President Joe Biden defeated Donald Trump in the General Election and the state of Georgia as well by just 11,779 votes, making Biden the first Democrat to win the state of Georgia in a General Election since President Clinton in 1996. The new law will go into effect on July 1s.t. Here is what is in the bill

  • Special ballots will be created for non-partisan elections.
  • Ballots will be printed in black and white ink on security paper.
  • The cut-off date for mail-in ballots 11 days before a federal, primary, or general election or 22 days before a municipal general election or primary.
  • A 25-day deadline for the issuance of absentee ballots for federal, primary, or general elections or 22 days for a municipal general or primary election.
  • A Georgia state driver’s license number, ID card number, date of birth, and the last 4 digits of your social security number or another approved form of identification must be printed on the outside of the absentee ballot.
  • Conditions for rejecting absentee ballots if certain requirements are not met.

The new law is a massive piece of legislation that both its supporters and detractors have a lot to say about it. Ultimately this will affect all voters in Georgia so here is a detailed breakdown of what Georgia voters should look out for whenever they plan to cast their ballots in future elections.

How will it protect against voter fraud?

Georgia Secretary of State Brian Raffensperger spoke about the new bill and he said that it will weed out any “bogus” residents who will attempt to vote. According to the Secretary, everyone will be required to present a photo ID in order to verify their identity before they cast their ballot. The Secretary also noted that there were a total of 8,000 out-of-state residents who requested a ballot and they were given a letter from the state detailing the penalties were for voting in the state of Georgia if they were not permanent residents.

What’s in the bill?

Voters will be able to request a ballot 79 days before the election and mail it in 29 days before it, previously voters could mail ballots 49 days prior to an election. Early in-person voting will be expanded for general elections, two early-voting periods on Saturday are required for each county, with optional voting on Sunday from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. Whereas in previous elections early voting began on the fourth Monday before a primary or election and ended the Friday before election day. Depending on what county you live in you could be able to vote from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m or even 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. For some smaller counties, voters will be able to cast their ballots from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. As far as run-off elections are concerned early voting will begin as soon as possible and it will require early voting Monday through Friday prior to the election. However, counties may not be able to offer early weekend voting depending on how fast they finish the first election and move on to the second.

If you live in Fulton County you will no longer be able to use the mobile buses that were purchased a year ago to aid with long lines. While a 2019 omnibus bill allowed more early voting sites in more locations, state Republicans have written new laws that prohibit buses to be taken to the polls unless the Governor declares an emergency. Other rules in effect require a 4 by a 4-foot sign that shows where the polling locations are and that anybody except poll workers is allowed to hand out refreshments to those waiting in line to vote within 150 feet of the building. They may also not do it within 25 feet of any voter standing in line. When early voting takes place counties must keep a record of in-person voters, as well as the number of absentee ballots that were issued, used, and rejected. Early voting sites and times must also be posted publicly ahead of time.

There will also be a change in how the votes are tabulated in future elections given the fact that it took many counties a long time to release their vote totals and the general confusion is as to why the process wasn’t over on election night. One change local election officials are embracing is absentee ballots being processed two weeks prior to the election. Counties must also count all ballots non-stop as soon as the polls close at 5 p.m. Local officials will be required to report the total number of ballots cast on election day, during early voting, absentee, and provisional ballots, all by 10 p.m. on election night. This is so the public is aware of the total number of votes that were cast as the results begin to trickle in. Provisional ballots will not be counted after 5 p.m. unless the voter signs a statement stating they could not make it to their home polling place in time. Now that all of the votes must be tabulated by 5 p.m. the day after the election, lawmakers moved the certification deadline 6 days after the election rather than 10. As far as absentee ballots are concerned they will be checked using the ID information voters write on the outside envelopes.

Another change the bill would require is that there will be more flexibility for election officials concerning voting equipment for smaller races with low turnout. Officials will be required to calibrate every piece of technology used in the election. The dates and times will be posted on the county’s website, local newspapers, and the Secretary of State’s office must keep a public list. Massive polling places with more than 2,000 voters will longer waiting times and will be required to hire more workers. More than 1,500 precincts in Georgia have at least 2,000 voters. GOP legislatures also made sure that poll watchers be trained before they go to work and gives local officials the power to determine where those watchers can observe from.

There are also new rules for ballot drop boxes where a board of registrars or an absentee ballot clerk may supply one ballot drop box for absentee voters who choose to vote by mail at respected offices or voting locations. Any additional drop boxes are restricted to one box per 100,000 voters in a given county. The boxes are only accessible during advanced voting. The number of drop boxes in Georgia’s most populated counties of Fulton, Cobb, Dekalb, and Gwinnett which makes up a majority of the state’s population, will decrease drastically from 98 to 23 starting in 2022.

Another massive change featured in the bill would be that the Secretary of State can no longer serve on the election board. The new chair will be a non-partisan actor appointed by a majority of the Republican-controlled state House and Senate. The chair will not be allowed to have run for office, participate in a political party, a campaign, or have made campaign contributions in the past two years prior to being appointed. If the position were ever to become vacant the Governor would appoint a new one. The board will also have the power to intervene in state elections that are deemed underperforming. In addition to the appointed chair, the five-member board will be made up of one member appointed by the House, one in the Senate, and one appointed by both political parties. House and Senate members could also conduct an independent performance review of board members or Judges who supervise the election. According to Georgia law, this person is referred to as the superintendent. SB 202 would allow the board to suspend the multi-person elections board or probate judge and replace them with somebody else for a minimum of nine months. The Superintendent is responsible for certifying the election results, handling changes in polling places, and hearing challenges to voter eligibility. All of these must be done in a timely manner and have an unlimited number of changes. The board is limited to suspending only four members at a time.

What are critics and proponents saying about the bill?

Republicans will argue that they decided to pass the bill in order to protect the integrity of future elections against voter fraud. They support voter ID laws because if people need an ID in order to drive a car, buy alcohol, or gamble then you would require an ID in order to cast your vote in an upcoming election.

Critics of voter ID laws will argue that they are racist because voter ID laws greatly affect minority communities. 25 percent of African-Americans lack a government-issued photo ID whereas only 8 percent of whites share the same problem. Photo IDs can also be expensive for people who don’t have one. Underlying documents to acquire a photo ID when it comes to document fees, and travel expenses can add up to $75 to 175 which will greatly affect lower-income voters. Disabled and elderly voters may have to travel a long way in order to obtain a photo ID. In Rural Texas, voters may have to travel up to 170 miles to reach the nearest ID office. Voter ID laws also affect voters who live in big cities such as New York or Chicago because they might not own cars and therefore do not have a driver’s license. Voter ID laws also lower voter turnout. In 2014 a GTO study published that there was a 2 to 3 percent reduction which translates to tens of thousands of votes not being cast in a single state.

The fallout

There has also been massive corporate backlash due to the new law in Georgia. Major League Baseball for example moved the All-Star game from Truist Park in Atlanta to Coors Field in Denver. The Rockies were looking to host an All-Star game in the near future and due to Georgia’s new voter ID law, Baseball gave them a chance to do that. Prior to the change of plans, the Atlanta Braves were planning to honor the late Hank Aaron, the legendary Braves hitter who knocked 755 career home runs, who died this January at the age of 86. The All-Star game also would have given them the chance to show off their four-year-old stadium to the baseball world this summer. Hundreds of corporations have also denounced the bill including Amazon, General Motors, Google, CBS, UPS, Microsoft, Delta, Coca-Cola, and Bank of America. The CEOs of these corporations blasted the new law calling it unacceptable, they also said that the right to vote is sacred and that making it more difficult for black voters to exercise their right to vote is wrong. There are different ways you could look at the new law in Georgia, if you are a resident of the state it is important you keep all of this in mind the next time it’s time to go out and vote.

 

 

Thomas Paine & America’s Transformative Politics

Posted on by Jason Rezzonico

Thomas Paine is one of the most significant political thinkers in American history. Paine’s pamphlet Common Sense inspired a revolutionary vision and mainstreamed the concepts of democracy, self-determinism, and equality. Along with his advocacy for democratic governance, Paine’s critique of monarchy displayed its vast contradictions & illegitimacy. “But how a race of men came into the world so exalted above the rest and distinguished like some new species” (Common Sense, 11). Whether it’s Kings or Oligarchs, Paine highlights that such vast amounts of political and social inequality cannot be natural unless monarchs are a separate race from the rest of humanity, which is obviously laughable.

In Paine’s view, inequality was justified through the customs and traditions that legitimize arbitrary power. Because Paine understood these inequalities were merely a social construction of elites, rather than a result of natural inequality, he recognized the fight to expand democracy & equality was purely a matter of political will: “We have the power to make the world over again” (Common Sense, Appendix). This was Paine’s call to revolution & restructuring of our political and social order to mirror what he saw as our natural inclination of solidarity and interdependence. Paine’s rejection of tradition, questioning of authority, & the pursuit of social equality & democracy has had a profound impact on the boldest & transformative political moments in US History, including Reconstruction.

The Second Founding

The Reconstruction Era is the period following the American Civil War, in which the push for material freedoms for African Americans such as voting rights, political representation, & economic security began to take place. Reconstruction was a period of transformative politics that was meant to expand & uphold those fundamental rights of democracy, equality, and liberty for all. Although Reconstruction failed in 1877 following the white supremacist backlash & implementation of Jim Crow, it was a template for radical social & political change that Paine spoke of in the late 1700s. The attempt to redefine our economic & political systems to reflect an egalitarian worldview that recognizes the human & civil rights of African Americans, against the will of the plantation class of the 1860s, shows the influence of Paine’s ideas. The Radical Republicans understood Paine’s call to “make the world over again”. They rejected the conventional wisdom, arbitrary authority, & unjust laws that were meant to legitimize the unequal & anti-democratic reality of the United States in the 1800s. The Radicals Republicans saw that transformative economic & social change was necessary to fulfill America’s promise to African Americans, just as Paine realized during the Revolutionary Era that transformation was needed for the colonists to have the rights to self-determination & self-governance.

The Greatest Generation

Paine’s vision re-emerged once again in the 1930s, with the election of Franklin Roosevelt, the implementation of the New Deal, & a call to action for the American people to embrace their “rendezvous with destiny” (FDR quoted this original Paine quote in his re-nomination acceptance speech in 1936). The quote speaks on the connection between the Founder Revolutionaries and the Greatest Generation, both of who opposed conformity & pursued justice through transformative collective demands. Again, we see Paine’s ideas reemerge during a time of conflict & struggle but also an opportunity for change. The demands of the Labor Movement pushed Roosevelt to intact a variety of programs & policies to not only provide relief and recovery to Americans impacted by the Great Depression, but to yet again expand the American promise of democracy, equality, & liberty. Roosevelt & the Labor Movement recognized that freedom in the 20th century cannot be actualized without material economic security ( i.e. freedom from poverty, starvation wage, homelessness, etc). The establishment of the minimum wage, social security, & the right to unionize was all a product of this new & radical view of the government’s role in the economy. Some have argued that these ideologies have strongly contributed to the furthering of a socialistic framework within the progressive wing of the modern Democratic party. They argue, in order to have a free society, our individual rights shouldn’t come at the exclusion of collective security and freedom including rights to healthcare, a living wage, housing, college education, and more.

The common theme here is that the conventional wisdom of each era heavily influenced opposition to the expansion of democracy. Most politicians during the 1870s abandoned the push for civil rights and economic freedom for African Americans & mainstream neoclassical economists in the 1930s rejected the economic theories espoused by the New Deal coalition. Thomas Paine’s vision served as a catalyst to break from this traditionalist worldview, question the legitimacy of authority, & constantly demand a transformative change of illegitimate structures and systems under his reasoning. Paine saw the despotism of The Crown firsthand & wrote about the need for Revolution in Common Sense in 1776 & still, his influence lives on centuries later through the revolutionary politics of modern American history.

10 BIPOC Politicians You Should Know

Posted on by Kacey Clark

The 116th Congress represents the most diverse Congressional body in American history, with nearly 22% of its members (1 in 5) identifying as non-white. However, we still have a long way to go before Congress is a true representation of the demographics of the citizens it serves. Representation of the voices of people of color is important now more than ever in light of the Black Lives Matter movement, although underrepresentation of people of color in politics has been a systemic issue since the beginnings of the nation. Here are just a few of the politicians serving and representing black and indigenous people of color (BIPOC) in Congress and in our communities (in no particular order).

1. Kamala Harris (D-CA)

 Kamala Harris, current Democratic Senator from California and Vice President Elect, has been a champion for social justice reform since the dawn of her political career. Harris, whose father immigrated from Jamaica and mother immigrated from India, grew up in Oakland, CA and later went on to study law at Howard University and UC Hastings. Harris has previously served as the District Attorney of San Francisco and California’s Attorney General, and currently serves on the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, the Select Committee on Intelligence, the Committee on the Judiciary, and the Committee on the Budget. Several causes and measures supported by Harris include pathways for citizenship for undocumented immigrants through policies such as the DREAM Act, progressive taxation, the ban of all assault weapons for public purchase and use, LGBTQ+ and civil rights, bias trainings and body-cam monitoring of law enforcement, protection of reproductive rights, and the passage of environmental regulations and stronger enforcement of emissions standards on polluting industries. Harris will become the first female Vice President, as well as the first female Vice President of color, making her victory a huge landmark for political representation of women and people of color.

2. Raphael Warnock (D-candidate for GA Senate)

 Reverend Raphael Warnock, Democratic candidate for the Senate from Georgia, is a well-known advocate for accessible healthcare, social justice, and environmental protection. Coming from a low-income family in Savannah, Georgia, he knows firsthand the struggle many Americans face in making ends meet to afford basic needs and obtain higher education. Warnock currently serves as a pastor at Ebenezer Baptist Church in Atlanta, the same church where Martin Luther King, Jr. once preached at the pulpit. Among the many reform measures he supports, Warnock wants to strengthen and improve the Affordable Care Act and expand Medicaid, provide resources and services to marginalized communities, eliminate private prisons in favor of rehabilitation over incarceration, uphold the legalization of abortion, and aggressively pursue climate change protections and regulations with the goal of transitioning to 100% clean energy by 2050. Additionally, Warnock is endorsed by numerous prominent organizations and PACs such as NARAL Pro-Choice, the Planned Parenthood Action Fund, League of Conservation Voters, and the Human Rights Campaign.

3. Marco Rubio (R-FL)

 Marco Rubio is a household name when it comes to politics, but not nearly enough light is shed on his achievements in fighting for human rights and economic prosperity. Rubio was born to Cuban refugees who sought after and achieved the “American Dream” through their work ethic and determination. Rubio went on to earn a degree in political science from University of Florida and later, a law degree from University of Miami School of Law. Rubio has an impressive track record of political involvement, including being elected city commissioner for West Miami and serving as chairman of the Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship and chairman of the Subcommittee on Western Hemisphere, Transnational Crime, Civilian Security, Democracy, Human Rights, and Global Women’s Issues. Rubio continues to aggressively pursue human rights legislation and in just 2019 alone, he sponsored nine pieces of human rights legislation, including the Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Act of 2019.

4. Cory Booker (D-NJ)

 Cory Booker, New Jersey’s first African-American Senator, has been a tireless advocate for marginalized communities through his work both at the grassroots and federal levels. After experiencing housing discrimination firsthand as a child, he became passionate about helping other marginalized folks fight for fair housing. Upon graduating from Yale, Booker became involved in community organizing and tenants rights in Newark, NJ and was later elected as the city’s mayor. Some key issues Booker has addressed through sponsored legislation and advocacy efforts are justice for marginalized communities and people of color, women’s rights and reproductive rights, LGBTQ+ rights, environmental justice, and criminal justice reform through his sponsorships of the First Step Act and Fair Chance Act.

5. Tim Scott (R-SC)

 Tim Scott came from humble beginnings, growing up in a poor working-class family in North Charleston. As a teenager, Scott became exposed to politics and from then on became invested in it, graduating from Charleston Southern University with a degree in political science. Scott later went on to open up his own small business, and eventually, was elected to serve in Congress. Scott is one of the first three African-American members of Congress and the first African-American overall to serve in both chambers. He is well known for creating Opportunity Zones, a measure under the 2017 tax reform bill, which gives financial aid to communities in need. Committees Scott has been assigned to include the Senate Finance Committee; Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions; Banking, Housing, & Urban Affairs; Small Business and Entrepreneurship; and the Senate Special Committee on Aging. As a member of Congress, Scott is committed to addressing issues within the workforce, education, and diversity.

6. Deb Haaland (D, NM-01)

 As a 35th-generation New Mexican and member of the Pueblo of Laguna tribe, Deb Haaland is one of the first two Native-American women to serve in Congress. Haaland was raised in a military family and is a single mother, making her sympathetic to the struggles and hardships of military and single-parent households. She studied at the University of New Mexico and UNM Law School and has a long list of accomplishments and contributions, including volunteering full-time for Barack Obama’s 2008 campaign, leading the passage of SB 482 which allows New Mexican tribes in-state tuition regardless of residency, and allying with New Mexican LGBTQ+ rights activists to pass a ban on conversion therapy in New Mexico. Haaland is an advocate for Native rights, LGBTQ+ equality, environmental protection, and affordable and accessible healthcare for all, among many other causes.

7. Will Hurd (R, TX-23)

 Will Hurd is one of the only Republican African-Americans in Congress (along with Tim Scott), making him an important voice for African-American members of the GOP. Hurd grew up in San Antonio and attended Texas A&M, graduating with a Bachelor’s in computer science and a minor in international relations. He worked with the CIA for nine-years, specializing in intelligence and cybersecurity, before running for and being elected to Congress. Hurd serves within the Subcommittee on Military Construction and Veterans Affairs, the Subcommittee on Transportation, Housing, and Urban Development, and the Subcommittee on Intelligence Modernization and Readiness. He is also a member of several caucuses, including the Congressional Caucus on Black-Jewish Relations, the Roosevelt Conservation Caucus, and the Congressional Latino-Jewish Caucus.

8. Amata Coleman Radewagen (R, American Samoa)

 Amata Radewagen is the first woman to represent American Samoa in Congress and since 2012, has been the most senior member of the National Republican Committee. After receiving a degree in psychology from the University of Guam, Radewagen went on to serve as staff for several U.S. Representatives and eventually for the House Republican Conference. In 2001, she was appointed by President George W. Bush to serve as a Commissioner on the President’s Advisory Commission on Asian American and Pacific Islanders (AAPI), and was reappointed to this role by Donald Trump in 2019. She also serves on the House Veterans’ Affairs Committee, House Committee on Small Business, and the House Natural Resources Committee, as well as numerous subcommittees. She advocates for legislation regarding health, education, welfare, political status, and the rights and protections of U.S. territories as well as indigenous people.

9. Mike Garcia (R, CA-25)

 Mike Garcia, first-generation American, is the first Hispanic Republican to serve in the House since 1883. He grew up in Santa Clarita and received his Bachelor’s of Science in political science from the United States Naval Academy, later receiving a Master’s in national security policy studies from Georgetown University. Garcia served in the navy from 1998 to 2012, and from 2009 to 2018 was a business development manager at Raytheon Intelligence and Space. As a newly-elected Congressman, Garcia is assigned to the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure; House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, and House Committee on Homeland Security.

10. Rashida Tlaib (D, MI-13)

 Rashida Tlaib is the first Palestinian woman to serve in the United States Congress as well as the first Muslim woman to be elected to the Michigan State Legislature and one of the two first Mulsim women elected to Congress, along with Ilhan Omar.Tlaib grew up in a working-class Palestinian family in Detroit as the oldest of fourteen children, and went on to study political science at Wayne State University and receive a law degree from Western Michigan University Cooley Law School. Tlaib has been dedicated to social justice since the onset of her involvement in politics and advocacy. She organized the We Have a Right to Breathe campaign in response to the pollution caused by semi-trucks in her neighborhood, and also worked as an attorney at the Sugar Law Center for Economic and Social Justice. Issues Tlaib is passionate about include environmental justice, racial equality, supporting small businesses, minimizing the influence of corporations, and economic support for working-class and low-income families through passage of the BOOST Act.

The demographic  statistics are still to be analyzed and publicized for the 117th Congress, but if the 2020 Congressional election is consistent with the previous progress we have seen in Congressional representation, this may be our most diverse Congress yet. Thanks to the contributions of legislators of color, there is increasingly more hope for a truly representational government that we can wholeheartedly see as a voice for the people, by the people.

What We Can Learn From Cuban Americans About Socialism?

Posted on by Rami El-Dowek

Cuban Americans are unique in their political stances when compared to other Hispanics.  Cuban Americans, when it has come to elections and voting, mostly identify themselves as Republicans and conservatives, contrary to the overwhelming Hispanic voters who mostly vote Democrat. This happens because Cubans in particular have different experiences with the government in which they come from, Cuba, compared to other Hispanic Americans. According to a Pew Research Center survey conducted July 27-Aug. 2, 58% of Cuban registered voters nationwide say they either lean or strictly identify themselves as Republicans while only 38% affiliate themselves to the Democratic Party. On the other hand, 65% of non-Cuban Hispanic voters lean to the Democratic Party, and only 32% vote Republican. So, why is that the case?

Explaining the Cuban American Experience

As I mentioned above, Cubans, in particular, have different experiences with the government either in the United States or in their home country, Cuba. The older generation of Cubans suffered from a brutal and racist dictatorship that instituted systematic racial segregation into government and as they got older, they watched as this dictatorship was overthrown by a communist/socialist struggle under Fidel Castro. The younger generations watched as this revolution also developed into a dictatorship with very bad economic effects on the people in addition to the lack of freedom and civil rights in the law, all under the principle of socialism. For that the younger generation decided to migrate to a country that was very close to their home and also very fierce with the socialist ideas that destroyed their lives, that was the United States. They hoped for a better life under relatively more liberal laws that can make them better off economically and socially. Most of these people migrated to Florida, as it was the nearest US State to Cuba, and now, the highest concentration of Cubans is there.

For these reasons, Cubans have more at stake in this election than most countries in Latin America as Trump’s administration is trying to bring democracy and capitalism to Cuba and its socialist ally, Venezuela. Historically, Republicans have had a more hostile approach towards socialism than democrats. For example, Obama’s visit to Cuba towards the end of his presidency and his efforts to restore relations with Cuba may have been designated as an attempt towards peace and prosperity worldwide, but among Cuban Americans, it was a scary moment that the US may also be moving towards far-left ideas or getting closer with the dictatorship that once destroyed their lives. As a result, Cuban-Americans voted in numbers in 2016 to award the State of Florida and its 29 electoral votes to President Trump who campaigned an anti-socialist rhetoric in Florida to win the state.

Cuban Voter Behavior in Florida

In 2020, with the Anti-Trump tone that was sweeping the country before the November 3rd election, Trump campaigned heavily in Florida way before the elections.  His administration repeatedly visited Florida to announce sanctions on Cuba from there, they stepped up their own anti-socialist tone to appease the Cuban American population in Florida, and as the election approached and the democratic nominee became Former VP Biden.  Republicans in Florida used President Obama’s ties with Cuba to hit Joe Biden and label him as the socialist candidate among the Cuban population which led to a huge turnout in the Cuban-American population in Florida; awarding the heavily contested battleground state to incumbent President Trump.

In the end, President Trump needed the win at the State of Florida, so he did everything possible to achieve that; he wanted to keep Senator Marco Rubio in office to keep Cuban-Americans happy, he even invited veterans of the embarrassing Bay of Pigs invasion to the White House to “reaffirm our ironclad solidarity with the Cuban People” according to the president. Luckily these policies were in line with the demands of the Cuban people who were worried about the effects of an Obama 2.0 administration on them, so they voted for Trump and gave him the state.

 

 

Understanding Generation Z (born 1995 and 2015) in Politics

Posted on by Arundhati Oommen

Generation Z currently comprises 10% of the American electorate and 4% of likely voters. Gen Z has grown up post-9/11 and has aged through the Trump Administration. This year, the stakes are even higher: with 2020 marked as a year of reckoning with racial unrest, rioting, and a global health crisis.

Generation Z has been widely hallowed as the most liberal generation of all time, but, in reality, much of Gen Z is opposed to the long-held “binary” choices given to the American electorate: that of the Democrat and Republican parties.

Gen Z is currently twice as likely to vote Biden – rather, its clear that they are voting against Trump, and not for Biden. Gen Z is looking for a candidate that encompasses a global perspective and shows foresight and quick actions into key issues that have been mounting for decades: climate change and racial inequality – neither of which is highlighted in the current presidential candidates. For these reasons, Gen Z is more hesitant to identify as part of the Democratic Party and some choose to vote independent which could be the sign of a rising tide towards the end of the two-party system. (Politico 2020 poll takeaways )

Crucially, younger voters historically have a habit of not showing up to the polls. But with the rising amount of youth-led activism with voter registration, may suggest that turnout may be higher this November. With nationwide protests and national reckoning sparked by the murders of George Floyd and Breonna Taylor, young people can’t afford not to vote (Pew research center).

In terms of priority, the top issue for the majority of Gen Z voters is synchronous with older voters: 30 percent say is the most important and 20 percent say it’s healthcare. In regards to the economy, the majority said the country should move away from the current capitalist standard towards a more socialized economy (Politico 2020 poll takeaways).

While presently much of Gen Z is ineligible to vote this year, waves are starting to form and as more young people come of age and turn to the polls, there will be wide rippling changes for American politics as we know it.

 

The Forgotten Heat of Texas District 7!

Posted on by Rami El-Dowek

In the 2018 Midterm Elections, GOP Rep. John Culberson was dramatically ousted from office in Texas District 7 after being the district’s representative to Congress for 18 years. 2 years later, his replacement, Congresswoman Lizzie Fletcher (D) TX-07 faces a heated contest for re-election against a rising Republican star; Wesley Hunt.

 

Wesley Hunt is a native son of Houston and a decorated veteran of the US Army. After he graduated from West Point with a degree in mechanical engineering, he served his country for 8 years in which he flew combat missions in Iraq, for which he received a combat service medal, and served as a diplomatic liaison officer in Saudi Arabia. Now a husband, a father of 2 baby daughters, and a real estate developer; Wes decided to continue his service for this country by running for United States Congress in his home state and in his native city for Texas District 7.

As a candidate, Wesley Hunt promises to restore opportunity to Texas District 7 while protecting Houston’s and Texas’s important energy industry and increasing the security of our immigration system. He also promises to protect struggling middle-class families in District 7 by defending Houston from burdensome federal taxes and improving the affordability of quality health care. But most importantly, Hunt promises to protect Houston from flooding issues resulting from hurricanes and heavy rain. Hunt is also very critical of Congresswoman Fletcher’s left radicalization since she entered Congress and broke her promise of working as an independent for the 7th district of Texas.

On immigration, Wesley Hunt believes in tighter border security with higher funding in order to crack down on illegal immigration and thinks there shouldn’t be amnesty for illegal immigrants already in this country and attributes this to the notion of the “Rule of Law.” However, Wes is very welcoming when it comes to legal immigrants as he believes they contribute a lot to this country.

With regards to the Houston economy, Hunt promises that he will hit back at Washington’s increasingly hostile rhetoric towards Houston’s Energy Corridor by standing against Speaker Pelosi’s Green New Deal and her tough energy/environmental regulations. This way, he will save hundreds of thousands of jobs in Houston’s energy sector. He will also stand by middle-class families in District 7 by fighting to protect the 2017 tax reform bill and make it permanent. He also wants to eliminate the Special tax interest tax breaks which he thinks are unfair.

As a native Houstonian, Wes understands the increasing suffering of his fellow Houstonians with Flooding resulting from poor infrastructure and unconscious and unnecessary spending of the City’s budget. To fight that, he promises to reform the city’s infrastructure so that the excess water from heavy rain and hurricanes can flow smoothly through Bayous and tunnels into the gulf.

With the election approaching and the race tightening, both campaigns raise more promises but with the incumbent already exhausting her chance, should the rising red star get his?

How the Bill of Rights is Being Ignored in the U.S.

Posted on by Claudia Morales

In order to protect the liberties of American citizens, the Bill of Rights was incorporated into the Constitution to prevent the government from abusing their authority. However, several of these rights are being ignored.

Freedom of Speech

The First Amendment claims that there should be no law that prohibits the “Abridging the freedom of speech, infringing on the freedom of the press, or interfering with the right to peaceably assemble”.  This amendment is critical in allowing citizens to express themselves. However, this year amidst the protests that involved the Black Lives Matters Movement, this amendment was not applied in a particular case. The American Civil Civil Liberties Union filed a lawsuit on behalf of journalists who were attacked by the Minneapolis and Minnesota police. The journalists were covering the protests, but were wrongfully arrested, injured, and harassed. According to Forbes, the ACLU will file similar lawsuits in other states where journalists have found themselves in these situations.

State’s Rights

The Tenth Amendment claims that the powers that are not delegated to the United States are reserved to the States. This allows the states to decide whether they want to integrate a particular law by enforcing it. For example, this amendment plays a role in legalizing marijuana. There are some states that only allow marijuana for medical purposes while others, like Colorado and Washington, allow it to be used for recreational purposes. On the other hand, the state of Oregon is facing a difficult situation while trying to handle the recent protests. They filed a second lawsuit against the Trump Administration’s deployment of federal officers in Oregon. The state of Oregon claims this is a violation of the tenth amendment.  KOIN 06 mentioned how  Oregon State Representatives claimed that, “The purpose of this lawsuit is to stop the federal government . . . from depriving Portlanders of the right to be policed solely by those the Constitution permits, and who are accountable to Portlanders and Oregonians”. The state of Oregon wants to be in control on how to handle the protests regarding George Floyd’s death and not be solely governed by the federal officers.

Religious Freedom

When Congress passed The Affordable Care Act in 2010, which is known as Obamacare,  it required insurers to cover at least one form of contraceptives. Furthermore, employers were obligated to provide insurance coverage for contraceptives to their employees. Since then multiple lawsuits have been filed claiming that this contradicted some businesses and religious organization’s beliefs. One of highest profile cases involving this issue was Little Sisters of the Poor v. Pennsylvania.  In 2017 the Health and Human Services department integrated a broader religious exemption to protect religious non-profits, which included the Little Sisters of the Poor, a group run by Catholic nuns. They were no longer obligated to provide contraceptives that they morally objected to provide. However, the lawsuits did not end there because the Pennsylvania court interfered and the case was ultimately brought to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court recently ruled in July 2020 that the Trump administration has the authority to provide exceptions to this regulation, although, according to Politician Compare, Biden is still leading  Trump  in the polls. Therefore, depending on the 2020 election if Biden wins the presidency his administration could overturn this.

The Right Against Unreasonable Searches

The fourth amendment grants citizens the right for them to be secure in homes and against unreasonable searches. It has been through cases like Roe v. Wade and Kelly v. Johnson that emphasized the right to privacy guaranteed by the fourth amendment. Furthermore, this right includes protection against government intrusion like collecting private information through a variety of databases due to suspicions and the right not to have personal information to be disclosed.  However, since 2014 the National Security Agency (NSA) has made headlines due to the controversial actions of Edward Snowden. Snowden leaked classified information from the NSA in 2013 while he was working for the CIA. This led to the public knowledge of global surveillance programs that were being conducted by the NSA and sparked numerous discussions about national security and individual privacy rights.

“What is your Life’s Blueprint?” -Martin Luther King

Posted on by Arundhati Oommen

Six months before he was assassinated, Dr. Martin Luther King spoke to a group of students at Barratt Junior High School in Philadelphia on October 26, 1967.

Martin Luther King remains one of the most hallowed orators in American history. With a voice so imbued with power, King often delivered eloquent speeches with broad ideas on the national stage. This speech, however, was delivered in a high school gym.

In his speech, Dr.King speaks to high school teens regarding their futures and the fight to keep those dreams alive. King’s speech gave so many Black teenagers across America the motivation to continue their educations, their belief in their own self-worth, and the tenacity and strength to be the best they could possibly be.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AjkmW8MxopU

The school where King delivered his speech, Barratt Junior High, was later transformed into a middle school, and subsequently demolished in 2011 due to declining student enrollment. Though the building may exist no longer, Dr. King’s blueprint has remained a focal point for Black youth in America.

Beyond Black youth, Martin Luther King’s speech also speaks to the youth of every race. This fight for equality is all of our fights. It is up to every single community to get up and fight for this movement on the behalf of us all. We can no longer keep our heads down as it comes to racism.  In Martin Luther King’s own words: “If you can’t fly then run, if you can’t run then walk, if you can’t walk then crawl, but whatever you do you have to keep moving forward.”

“Float like a butterfly, sting like a bee”: Muhammad Ali, the making of a rebel. His thoughts on religious freedom, equality, and inspiration.

Posted on by Arundhati Oommen

Muhmmad Ali was the inspiration of a generation. Fighting within the ring and out, Ali inspired countless American youth with the will of his own tenacity and strength. Ali remains one of the most influential athletes of all time.

Through his entire career, Ali never failed to keep his moments lighthearted. A Triple threat, Ali had a gifted sense of humor. Before his fights, he would often put together rhymes and catchphrases, the most iconic of which is his “float like a butterfly, sting like a bee”. During his numerous press conferences, Ali would often invite the public to see him compose poetry, a scene often filled with laughter.

Ali’s rhymes were often directed at his opponents but still remained perhaps the most evolved, undoubtedly hilarious form of trash talk.

“Joe’s gonna come out smokin’, But I ain’t gonna be jokin’.

This might shock and amaze ya, But I’m going to destroy Joe Frazier.”

— Before losing to Joe Frazier in their first fight March 8, 1971.

“I got speed and endurance. You’d better increase your insurance.”

— To Larry Holmes before his one-sided loss in a bid to become a heavyweight champion for the fourth time Oct. 2, 1980.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2m_t4pquUyk&feature=youtu.be

Ali on Religious Freedom

Muhammad Ali didn’t just fight on stage, he fought on a civic level as well.

In 1967, Ali was brought to court for evading the Vietnam war draft. Ali’s court case made him the most high profile draft evader in American history. Muhammad Ali based his case in part on his own religious freedom on his faith of Islam: “I’m not trying to dodge the draft. We are not supposed to take part in no wars unless declared by Allah or The Messenger. We don’t take part in Christian wars or wars of any unbelievers.”

When Ali was interviewed in court he responded by saying, “My conscience won’t let me go shoot my brother, or some darker people, or some poor hungry people in the mud for big powerful America.  And shoot them for what,” he said. “But I have said it once and I will say it again. The real enemy of my people is here. I will not disgrace my religion, my people or myself by becoming a tool to enslave those who are fighting for their own justice, freedom and equality. If I thought the war was going to bring freedom and equality to 22 million of my people they wouldn’t have to draft me, I’d join tomorrow. I have nothing to lose by standing up for my beliefs.”

For the next three years, until his case was overturned, Ali was barred from boxing in the United States. Following a unanimous court decision in 1971, Ali was permitted to return to the ring.

As his career heightened, Ali never let go of his faith and humanity, championing for the release of detained journalist Jason Rezaian. Ali released a statement of support for Jason Rezaian, then jailed in an Iranian prison. Rezaian was released and spoke to the words of Ali, saying that “It was a turning point for [him]. The public acknowledgment by Muhammad Ali, one of the most unifying figures in the world… believed [he] was innocent of any wrongdoing meant everything to [him].”

In the years preceding his death, Muhammad Ali continued to fight for his faith, he received the medal of freedom, and raised awareness for the cause of his own internal struggle, Parkinson’s disease.

Muhammad Ali was rebel in all the rings, from the physical, the political, and the inspirational. Almost four years after his death, Ali’s legacy as a rebel continues to live on.

Is Religious Freedom a Social or Economic Issue?

Posted on by Casey Reeder

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances,” reads the First Amendment of the United States Constitution. The Bill of Rights, or the first ten amendments of the Constitution, are some of the most protected and principal rights of Americans. However, none are more prominent and well known than those mentioned in the First Amendment. First Amendment rights include religion, speech, press, to peacefully assemble, and to petition unjust governmental actions.

What makes these rights so important is that they are indisputably just and enable freedom of choice. They allow people to freely believe in and pursue their own opinions and ideas. They are designed to prevent suppression of opinions and to protect, not restrict, take away, or harm the rights of anyone else.

The first right mentioned is Freedom of Religion. Rights, such as Freedom of Religion, are often correlated with harmonious societies. However, there are positive, unanticipated consequences that result from granting the Freedom of Religion, and this matter has seldom been studied.

Economics of Religious Freedom

An article written by Brian J. Grim from Georgetown University titled, Is Religious Freedom Good For Business?: A Conceptual and Empirical Analysis, explores the economic impact religious freedom has on countries.

The study explores several different areas in which religious freedom benefits society and how religious restrictions serve as a detriment to society.

Grim wrote about how religious freedom creates peace and stability which will directly allow for more fluent business operations as well as greater socioeconomic results. As well, most countries that exercise freedom of religion are likely to grant other freedoms. “Religious freedom is also correlated with one of the key ingredients of sustainable economic development: lower corruption,” he wrote. Where there is freedom of worship and religion, there is seemingly less incentive to malfeasance.

Establishing his belief that religious freedom allows for better economic outcomes, Grim mentions six theories as to why this may be. The most accurate of his claims is the religious economy model which implies that religious activity is economic activity. “Religious freedom results in more religious activity, hence more economic growth.”

Several areas are studied within the inquiry such as GDP growth, competitiveness, and economic outcomes. The data accumulated in the study suggests that from a business and economic perspective, religious freedom is quite beneficial to society. It triggers global competitiveness as well as GDP growth.

Along with the uncoverings found within the study, religious freedom engenders more opportunities for businesses to thrive. If the freedom of only one religion is granted, the proscriptions of this religion would become the prominent focus of business opportunities. When religious freedom is unanimously granted, business opportunities remain everywhere.

What the findings suggest is that there are unforeseen results for people and politicians to advocate for religious freedom other than from a human rights standpoint.

Advocating For Religious Freedom

“Our Founders understood that no right is more fundamental to a peaceful, prosperous, and virtuous society than the right to follow one’s religious convictions,” said President Donald Trump who values “America’s first freedom.” President Trump believes in safeguarding religious freedom including allowing prayer in schools along with equal treatment of all practices and organizations. However, some have accused Trump of acting differently than his words, favoring Christian freedom over other religions.

An editorial from the Los Angeles Times suggests that while Trump claims that he favors religious freedom for all, he mainly favors it for Christians. The editorial explains how Trump has created an illusion through this “religious freedom initiative” that Christians in America are under attack and that action must be taken to prevent further harm. Part of the initiative is a reminder that voluntary prayer is allowed in schools which is a reaffirmation of an already existing law. The editorial insists that Trump has made this law appear as his own in order to secure a crucial Christian conservative vote in the 2020 election.

President Trump’s voiced decision to protect religious freedom, in this case, was made in terms of a freedom standpoint, and the data analyzed by Grim would only stoke President Trump’s support. Donald Trump runs a business and economic-based presidency and taking into account the great economic benefits that religious freedom rewards would only strengthen his stance on the issue.

Another prominent name in Politics, Ted Cruz, who ran for office in the 2016 election is a strong supporter of religious freedom. “I do not think the federal government should be able to force Catholic nuns or Priests for Life to pay for abortion-inducing drugs and others. I think that violates their free exercise rights,” said Cruz in 2018 at a hearing titled Threats to Religious Liberty Around the World. Cruz went on to mention circumstances beyond that of Christianity such as Jehovah’s Witnesses, Seventh Day Adventists, and Orthodox Jews. “To attack religious liberty is to attack the dignity of a person,” was his underlining remark. Cruz believes in protecting religious liberty at its fullest extent.

President Trump’s opposition in this upcoming election, Joe Biden, a Roman Catholic, also claims to support religious freedom but his record and presidential plans prove otherwise.  He said in his plan to advance LGBTQ+: “Religious freedom is a fundamental American value. But states have inappropriately used broad exemptions to allow businesses, medical providers, social service agencies, state and local government officials and others to discriminate against LGBTQ+ people.”  Biden’s statement indicates his desire to limit religious freedom in several aspects which opens the door for future exploitations on religious freedom including institutions potentially not being able to withhold membership priveledges of the LGBTQ+ practicing communities. Biden said in response to his Athenagoras Human Rights Award from The Greek Orthodox Church in 2015. “We defend religious liberty, not just because it’s a moral imperative because it improves and will improve the security of people everywhere against violent extremists.” Biden believes that religious freedom is not only important for those who practice it, but implies peace and tolerance, two virtues that the United States was founded upon.  Conservatives have been apprehensive in supporting Biden’s religious freedom policy.

Exceptions to Religious Freedom

In a modern, American society, opposing the freedom of religion as a whole would be a very difficult political stance. However, the issue is not typically regarding one’s individual practices, but how they impinge on the practices and beliefs of others. Examples of this include refusing service to LGBT members or refusing to pay for birth control due to religious practices, similar to Biden’s stance. Politicians may favor the freedom of religion across all circumstances and others may believe that business cannot discriminate due to religious reasons.

Senator Kamala Harris from California, also under consideration for Biden’s running mate, believes that the government has the power to force non-discriminatory actions despite religious beliefs. This includes fighting Hobby Lobby’s supreme court petition for a religious exemption to not require the company to provide contraceptives to all of its employees pursuant to Obama’s contraceptive mandate.

Elizabeth Warren, another politician, that supports religious freedom in the same way that Kamala Harris does. Warren believes in religious freedom without the right to discriminate and believes attacks on women’s birth control access are an attack on women’s economic freedom.

In any of the political stances mentioned above, it is important to consider the findings in Grim’s article when making these decisions especially considering the fact that religious restrictions have increased globally from 2007-2017 according to PEW Research.

So what do these findings mean? The study suggests that religious freedom is not only something that should be supported due to its benefits but is easy to support. It suggests that religious freedom is not just a social issue, but an economic one as well, and provides the underlying fabric to a fully functioning democracy that provides a moral framework to help entice people to do good. In the political stances noted above, every statement considers the issue a social one. Typically issues are separated into the category of social or economic. For example, LGBT rights, gun rights, are social issues while tax rates and healthcare, are economic issues. Religious freedom can now be considered both. Religious freedom should not only be seen as a basic right and America’s first freedom but an economic catalyst as well.

How Hard Should It Be To Vote?

Posted on by Matt Di Sandro

With the 2020 presidential election quickly closing in, voting rights are once again coming to the forefront of debate. Some worry that the obstacles to vote are far too great to guarantee equality in access and ability to exercise the right to vote. Others are not sure about eliminating barriers due to concerns about the possibility of increasing instances of voter fraud. As equal representation persists as a fundamental ideal of democracy, the question of how voting rights should be protected is pressing.

The Right to Vote

In the United States, voting laws are dictated by Article 1 of the Constitution. The text assigns states the authority and responsibility to oversee federal elections. In addition, constitutional amendments have been passed that broaden suffrage to women, African Americans, and citizens over the age of 18. Despite the explicit decision by the Founding Fathers to take a federalist approach to elections, legislation and mandates have been enacted at the federal level in the form of anti-discrimination provisions in the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act of 1965. However, within the system of checks and balances, the Supreme Court decision in Shelby County v. Holder invalidated the Voting Rights Act’s requirement for states to receive federal preclearance before changing their voting laws. Ultimately, this curbed the power of the legislative branch and returned power to the states.

While many see the federal government’s inability to dictate voting standards as a failure to guard against voter suppression, allowing states to dictate their own laws simply creates a diverse legislative engagement with voting rights. Controversial requirements such as voter ID regulations are enforced differently and to varying extents, depending on the state.

Types of Voting Suppression

In order to understand many Americans’ desire for better voting rights protections, it is important to understand the different aspects of voting suppression. Voter suppression occurs when certain individuals are unable to exercise their right to vote. The most famous form of disenfranchisement is voter ID requirements. States who institute voter ID laws require some form of ID in order to vote. Although over two-thirds of states have ID regulations at the polls, the vast majority of these states do not maintain a strict requirement of photo IDs, instead only requesting an ID or accepting a non-photo ID. By nature, these laws inhibit citizens without a valid government-issued ID (about 21 million Americans) from voting. Furthermore, those wishing to do away with such regulations point out that citizens without IDs are disproportionately low-income and as a result, a specific subset of potential voters are under-represented. Advocates of voter ID laws point out that without being able to identify a voter, there is no way to guarantee that people are voting in the right area or voting just once. By reducing voter fraud, some see these policies as empowering the right to vote due to the fact that fraudulent balloting would dilute the impact of voters abiding by the law.

Another potential form of voter suppression comes from voter registration requirements. Depending on the state, some citizens are required to register many days before they vote and those who do register may be subjected to restrictions. During the 2016 presidential election, 90,000 New Yorkers were unable to vote because they did not register 25 days before the election. As a response to rigid registration guidelines, many Americans believe that same-day voter registration should be made available to anyone at the polls. However, proponents of maintaining current registration requirements point to the necessity of cost-intensive technology to implement same-day registration.

Voter purging is a much subtler form of voter suppression. When a citizen is purged from the voter roll, they are marked as ineligible to vote. Purging voters is an essential part of voting administration as people move, die, or become otherwise ineligible to vote in certain elections and jurisdictions. However, an increase in purges for illegitimate reasons has been reported by the Brennan Center for Justice. In this way, those who wish to discriminately suppress subsets of the voting population are able to effectively eliminate eligibility under the guise of falsified data.

Moving Forward

According to Pew Research Center, the majority of Americans (67%) support doing everything possible to make it as easy as possible for citizens to exercise their right to vote. However, despite the apparent desire to diminish voter suppression, the issue of voting rights remains partisan and gridlocked. Democrats call for loosening ID/registration requirements and granting more federal jurisdiction in the realm of conducting elections. In response, conservatives argue that loosening regulations would compromise the integrity of elections and result in an increase in voter fraud.

Conservative sentiment towards voting rights is echoed in Republican Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnel’s refusal to allow the Voting Rights Advancement, which seeks to reinstate federal preclearance requirements for local election laws, to be voted on in the Senate. On the other side of the aisle, Democrat Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer argues that voting rights must be restored by Congress. With conservative voters traditionally reporting higher percentages of voter turnout, liberals criticize the GOP for bolstering support for their own party at the expense of many potential Democrat voters that are barred from participating in elections. Bipartisan progress seems unlikely in the context of a divided government. So, Americans will probably have to wait for a common partisan majority in both chambers of Congress before advancement in voting rights is achieved.

In addition to the long history of voting rights advancement, the COVID crisis presents a contemporary opportunity for progress. Physical attendance to polling locations is questionable. As a result, mail-in voting has emerged as an intense topic of debate, and could be a likely solution in 2020 for the need for social distancing due to the COVID crisis.