Congressional Hearing on Haiti

The Subcommittee on the Western hemisphere organized a hearing yesterday on “The Crisis in Haiti: Are We Moving Fast Enough?”

TransAfrica Forum and several other NGO’s had the opportunity to testify and respond to the question, “Are We Moving Fast Enough?” in regards to the Haiti earthquake response. Everyone agreed that despite the quick efforts in Haiti, there are many obstacles slowing down the recovery and reconstruction process. The key problems faced by people living in internally displaced persons camps include: insufficient washing and sanitation facilities, inadequate security, minimal job and education opportunities, and inadequate transitional structures. Also the lack of coordination between NGO’s and Haitian civil society has limited the civil society groups from taking leadership roles in the rebuilding process. The discussion included the need for direct leadership, talents, and expertise from the Haitian diaspora in the recovery, reconstruction, and development process. We should not look towards the Haitians with pity but understand that they are people to be admired. Haitians need to be front and center in the decision making process. All the NGO’s stressed that Haiti must be built for Haitians and by Haitians.

When the earthquake first happened the media was very responsive. Six months later most of the cameras are gone even though suffering continues. I hope that foreign governments and NGO’s will include Haitians more in the decision-making process. In economic development, often, foreign institutions create models for developing countries but they do not address the specific needs of each population.

-OI

Bird's Eye View of DC

I was invited by the curator of my program to go up to the top of the Washington monument. At 555 feet in the air, we had an excellent view of the DC area in all four cardinal directions (and a great opportunity to use the panorama option on my camera). The monument was constructed between 1848 and 1884, with a two-decade long break in which construction ceased due to lack of funds. A change in the color of the stone around the 150 foot level marks the place where they resumed construction. Although visitors were once able to climb to the top of the monument, today's visitors take the elevator, with special permission needed to take the stairs (and usually only granted for those trying to break the speed record).

The interior of the monument has 193 carved memorial stones, including stones for States, cities, individuals, and countries. Unfortunately, today's visitors are only allowed to see about six of the carvings, which become visible when the glass on the doors of the elevator are electronically transitioned from opaque to clear.
-KS

The Courts and the Arizona Immigration Law

We talked about this in class today, but I decided to blog about the Arizona law a bit tonight too since then a judge issued a preliminary injunction on 4 parts of the Arizona law. This leaves the vast majority of the law intact, only siding with the administration on 4/6 provisions that they had asked for the injunction on. Regardless on my feelings toward the merits of the law, I decided to focus more on the constitutional side of things.

I decided before I'd blog about the ruling that I would read her order. I encourage all of you to do the same, its relatively easy to read. You can access it here. Although it is a bit lengthy, it provides great background info on the law and Bolton's legal reasoning for her injunction. Her opinions actually did somewhat change my mind on the constitutional issues.

So the injunction covers sections of the 2nd, 3rd, 5th, and 6th provisions (below in the smaller print) of the law as potential violations of the supremacy:

2- requiring that an officer make a reasonable attempt to determine the immigration status of a person stopped, detained or arrested if there is a reasonable suspicion that the person is unlawfully present in the United States, and requiring verification of the immigration status of any person arrested prior to releasing that person

3-creating a crime for the failure to apply for or carry alien registration papers

5-creating a crime for an unauthorized alien to solicit, apply for, or perform work

6-authorizing the warrantless arrest of a person where there is probable cause to believe the person has committed a public offense that makes the person removable from the United States

Bolton's order points to a 1941 Supreme Court case, Hines v Davidowitz, that ruled that mandatory carrying of registration papers by PA was unconstitutional as it went against the methods created by the federal government violating the supremacy clause. With this in mind I absolutely agree with the second part of the injunction that covers section 3. Also I'm leaning toward the possible unconstitutionality of the first part covering section 2 specifically in regard to stopping and detention. This is because taken in conjunction it would require aliens in Arizona to carry papers on a regular basis, which according to Hines is unconstitutional… So, I changed my view on these parts of the law.

Then for sections 5 of the law, I disagree with Judge Bolton who makes the argument that Congress has already regulated this area violating the supremacy clause. However, AZ has a decent 10th amendment case to make since employment is often regulated at the state level and because Congress did not regulate unauthorized alien employees who apply for work.

For section 6, I agree with Judge Bolton in part, as she makes the case that the provision is too complex and confusing in context of other AZ and US laws, thus in her thought process violating the Hines precedent. However I think it burdens the state of AZ rather than illegal aliens because Judge Bolton points out law enforcement can do this already anyways. Although I think this provision would have little effect on the law as a whole whether it is struck down later on or not…

Ultimately, I believe that the Supreme Court will have to get its hands dirty although they are reticent to involve themselves in "political" issues. I like to at least try to keep an open mind and I'm glad that I did because its changed some since reading the injunction order. So, I encourage you all to read the order, its a good read with good information.

-Sean F

More on the 'Broken Branch'

An interesting article in the NYT today which has some relevance with our discussion on the 'Broken Branch." The article reports efforts by the Obama administration's former budget director, Peter Orszag, to pry away at Congress' authority on the budget. The link is copied below but a few excerpts that I thought were particularly interesting:

"As much as anyone, Mr. Orszag has promoted and carried out an effort by the White House to pry away from Congress some of the responsibility for making hard decisions, especially when it comes to the budget. In the process, he has signaled that an administration populated from the top down by Capitol Hill alumni is intent on altering the balance of power between the branches of government. "

"In other words, the Medicare Board isn’t only a means of cutting government spending; it is a means, too, of wresting the constitutional responsibility for budgeting away from powerful committee chairmen."

"Somewhere along the way toward wooing Congress, however, Mr. Obama seems to have decided that the problem, at least where reducing the cost of government is concerned, is Congress itself. There is a sense that the legislative process just isn’t set up to work, either because of the severe partisanship in both chambers, or because lawmakers tend to run from painful choices, or because of rules that make it easy for a minority party — in this case, the Republicans — to sabotage legislation."

-Shawn

Boy Scouts Descend Upon The Capital

http://www.scoutbags.com/photo-album.htm

This weekend, thousands of Boy Scouts traveled from all over the United States to see the sights and learn a little bit about the history of our nation's capital. The massive act is in celebration of the 100 years of tradition that the Boy Scouts of America has had within our country. As a former boy scout, i both applaud for and empathize with the representatives in the District this weekend. Temperatures have risen above record highs and the combination of reflective architecture and sticky black black-top work together to cook you from the inside out. I hope the experience is memorable for these young lads and not for the wrong reasons. If you were lucky enough to be blocked up in traffic at 1 today, calm down, at least you were in an air conditioned car. Give a little respect to one of, if not the, oldest fraternal youth organization in the United States.

AS

Behind the scenes at the Zoo

Thanks to the Smithsonian Internship Program, I was able to go on a tour behind-the-scenes at the Smithsonian Zoological Park. Before the park opened, we were taken into the big cat housing area and shown around by the curator of that area. While the animals spend most of their time in the habitats, at night they are taken to an indoor housing area. We were able to stand about five feet away from the lions during this tour (which was intimidating, fence or not!)

The curator's discussion was quite interesting. One of the major issues the zoo is currently facing is getting some of the rarer animals to breed, so he discussed the process of introducing mating pairs and some biological issues of breeding them. He also discussed the personalities and quirks of the different breeds and the individual cats, and described his own path to becoming curator (which began with the Smithsonian Internship Program!)

This was a great experience, and the zoo itself is quite impressive. It houses over 400 species, including the popular pandas. The zoo is right on the red line, and is free to the public.

-KS

The Wall

Last weekend I visited he Vietnam Veterans Memorial. The wall honors U.S. service members of the U.S. armed forces who fought in the Vietnam War, those who died in service, and those members who were unaccounted for during the war. The memorial consists of three parts: the Three soldiers statue, the Vietnam Women's Memorial, and the Vietnam Veterans Memorial Wall, but it is the wall of names that resonates with me. Its magnitude and its simplicity leave little to be said.

The Vietnam War was one of the longest and most controversial wars in U.S. history. For this reason, the goal of the memorial fund was to avoid commentary and to serve solely as a memorial to those who served.

Perhaps it strikes me because of how many peoples' names are on that wall or the hundreds of people that go to visit each day. Maybe the architect was just a genius. But, I can't help wonder if it really hits me because one day there may be a similar wall with names I actually know and people I actually spent time with to commemorate our soldiers fighting a war on terror.

I used the directory to look up Titus's. There were several; 3 were from Ohio. Then I found their names and stood in silence for a few brief moments. There was nothing more to say.

On my way home I had to cheer myself up with a Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtle popsicle, but it was a site I had to see.

lt

Old Post Office Pavilion

Yesterday, I visited the Old Post Office Pavilion on Pennsylvania Avenue. I was able to go up into the tall clock tower and catch a spectacular view of D.C. from the top. There aren't any windows on two of the sides, just wires, so you can get a feel of "really being up there". The Pavilion was originally used as a Post Office to revitalize the area between the Capitol Building and the White House. In 1970, the demolition of the building was approved, but it was saved by advocates who admired the architecture. The building is now home to federal offices, a food court and several shops. You can also visit the Bells of Congress on the 10th floor of the tower. The Congress Bells were a gift from Great Britain for our national bicentennial in 1976. The bells are replicas of the 400-year-old set in London's Westminster Abbey. They are only rung on special holidays. The tours are free and quick and the view is entirely worth the effort. However, I would suggest avoiding the swarms of Boy Scouts that have taken over the city. -Haley

Oil Lobbying

According to the Washington Post, three of every four lobbyists who now work for oil or gas companies originally began working with the federal government. Often these lobbyists have served as aides to Congress men and women on Capitol Hill or as part of an executive branch agency before being offered their lobbying post. Many of these ex-aides and ex-agency lobbyists have ties to important committees and members on the Hill, which may play a role in their ability to communicate their company's needs regarding oil and gas. The article states that many of these men and women were contacted to comment on the topic but opted not to speak. The conclusion of the article notes that some of these lobbyists have been convicted for various schemes related to money.

This morning's Politico ran an article stating that the Big Oil companies have increased their spending on lobbying in the second quarter of 2010. Spending was up roughly one million dollars from $1.3 million in the first quarter to $2.3 million in this quarter. The American Petroleum Institute paid lobbyists to work on the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund and fought efforts to raise liability caps on oil companies.

Contrary to API's increased spending on lobbying, BP, who is a member of API, amended their reported spending from $3.5 million to $1.6 million in the first quarter, which seemed to show a decrease. The company says this decrease is related to a change in the definition of "lobbying" that they used to file their report. By switching from the IRS definition of lobbying to the one provided in the Lobbyist Disclosure Act, BP was able to reduce the amount of money it spent on lobbying. Their second quarter report shows $1.7 million spent in the second quarter, which corresponds with the oil spill.

I find these articles very interesting because fo the way that they portray lobbyists. The first article seems to allude to a sinister connection between ex-Hill and ex-agency workers moving to lobbying firms. However, for a company in need of a lobbyist, the sensible action is to hire someone who has worked on the Hill or with the agency that the company plans to lobby. Often these individuals know how the system works and are going to be more efficient in their jobs. Just like one would hire an optometrist to prescribe glasses, one should hire an ex-Department of Energy worker if he or she plans to lobby the Department of Energy.

As for the Politico article, any time a company has an interest in current legislation, the company is likely to increase its lobbying of the Hill. If Congress is not working on anything of interest to this company, then it has less reason to visit the Hill.

Often lobbyists have a bad reputation, and I think that it stems from articles like these. While they are reporting true data, the presentation of the information makes it seem as if the companies employing these strategies are being deceitful. However, the companies appear to be transparent in reporting their spending and are completely within their rights to lobby. In addition, these lobbyists provide another piece of the puzzle for Congress members who must make decisions about regulations. These oil companies employ many people, and in a time where jobs are limited, crushing oil companies could do just as much damage to the economy as the oil spill has done to the ocean. Thus, Congress members need to hear both sides of the argument, leading to a need for lobbyists. - Kelly F.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/21/AR2010072106468_2.html?hpid=topnews&sid=ST2010072105484

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0710/40052.html

Air and Space Museum

So its been a little while since we actually visited the Air and Space Museum but I finally got around to blogging about it…

So the museum was created in 1946 through legislation as the National Air Museum. The museum opened in the Arts and Industries building over by the Castle. However the collection was so massive it could not be held in 1 building alone. It only grew as its mission expanded to include the Space Race as well. Finally in 1976, the building opened on the mall although even it does not have near enough room to include the entire collection. Some of the major highlights in the museum include the Wright Flyer, the Spirit of St Louis, a V2 rocket, Friendship 7 (Senator Glenn's orbiter), the Apollo 11 capsule, and a large collection of World War I and II era aircraft.

So we got to touch a moon rock, and explore the museum a lot. It was really neat getting to see the actual Wright Flyer as I saw the copy that they have in Kitty Hawk. Also apparently Lindsey "I Sank the Titanic" Titus apparently grew up near the Wright brother's home in Dayton.

-Sean F, Lindsey T, Meredith, and Haley

White House Tour

The Smithsonian offers a number of events for their summer interns, one of which was a tour of the White House. Although it was a "self guided" tour (and we weren't allowed to take pictures inside), we were able to explore some of the beautiful rooms and the guards were standing by to answer questions.

We entered from the East and viewed the library, Vermeil room, and China Room, then moved upstairs to see the East Room being prepared for a lunch event; although we were with one of the first tour groups, the staff was already preparing to close the area to the public. The East room is slightly larger than the State Dining Room, suggesting that this might have been an event for quite a few people. The building is filled with historic objects, paintings, and furniture, and is beautifully and lushly decorated. The majority of the rooms we saw, such as the Blue, Green, and Red rooms, are used primarily for receptions and special events, and they definitely accomplish their primary purpose- to impress. -KS

photos

Check out what the Glenn fellows have been up to!

Ohio Society Annual Summer Picnic

On Saturday Shawn, Meredith, Mallory, and Kelly F. volunteered with the Ohio Society at their annual "Back to Your Roots" Summer Picnic. We arrived early in the afternoon at Montrose Park to assist with the picnic set up and organization of tables and tents.

Once the set up was complete, we were guests of the picnic along with people from all over Ohio. We enjoyed meeting the many Ohioans living in the Washington area, and Shawn and Kelly even had the opportunity to hang out with people from work (Senator Voinovich's staff and Ohio State University Federal Relations staff). We also dined on some Ohio favorites including Montgomery Inn barbeque, Cheryl & Co. Cookies, Graters' Ice Cream, and Skyline Chili.


At the end of the night we watched the raffle prizes of two airline tickets and two Ohio State-Indiana football tickets be awarded to two very excited Ohioans. After taking a picture for Laura, the four of us set off for our Capitol Hill home, feeling less homesick after our warm Ohio welcome to the DC area. - Kelly F., Shawn, Meredith, and Mallory

Habeas Works

Today I attended a briefing on Habeas Works, a report issued by Human Rights First and the Constitution Project. The event took place at noon in SVC 202 and was followed with a short Q&A session. C-SPAN was there to film the event.

I was charged with the duty of manning the check in table and taking notes for HRF.

The report examines two years of habeas litigation with the position that it is unwise and unnecessary for Congress to become involved. The system, as is, carefully monitors both issues of national security and civil liberties.
Panelists: Judge Lewis (appointed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit by President George H. W. Bush; served 1992-1999) & Doug Spalding (council in habeas litigation for three Guantanamo detainees)

Judge Lewis: outlined the issue by dividing it into a “right and a wrong approach.” The wrong approach comes from those arguing for new laws regarding habeas cases. His stance is that those individuals either do not understand the limits of Congressional power or do not understand the nature of the judiciary process. The totality of allegations cannot be spelled out in a code or statute (ex: detainee at a training camp—how long was he there, did he leave out of his own free will?, statements under coercion, admissibility of hearsay). The right approach is the jurisprudence surrounding Guantanamo detainees, as is. The current process protects national security and detainee interests.

Doug Spalding: Also offered no objections to the process of the judges in Habeas cases. Spalding cited the record of how judges have decided habeas cases as a suggestion that the process is an appropriate one in which facts are weighed against one another and decisions are made accordingly. His only frustration is with the delay in the process, but not with the federal district courts. Spalding also emphasized that these cases involve real “flesh and blood.”

Both panelists were adamant that the Federal Courts have proven their capacity to handle Guantanamo cases. Overall, the briefing offered interesting discussion and with over 70 people in attendance was a PR success.

LT

Earmarks for Education

While we have not talked about earmarks yet in seminar, earmark legislative reform has been going through Congress and a recent article entitled “New Earmark Limits Make Universities Desired Partners, but Some Just Say No” in The Chronicle of Higher Education provides an interesting take on earmark reform. Earmarks are funding tagged by Congress for specific projects that otherwise may not receive federal funding. An example of an earmark would be funding by Congress for a bridge repair in Columbus. In an effort to make earmarks more transparent, the House Appropriations Committee has banned for-profit companies from applying for them. Non-profit companies, like universities, are still able to apply for earmarks. Thus, some for-profit companies have set up non-profit entities. Others have teamed up with universities who conduct research. Many universities benefit from this partnership, as it contributes to their research missions. The University of Toledo, one of our Ohio neighbors, is one of the biggest benefactors of these types of partnerships and is currently set to benefit from five of the seventeen earmark requests for non-profit entities under consideration. However, the University of Kentucky is refusing to partner with a California company on the grounds that the earmarked money will not directly benefit the university. Instead, Kentucky would rather gather funds for basic research without being linked to a for-profit company.
As Ohio State is a research institution, we are constantly looking for ways to finance research. This change in earmark legislation may play a role in funding our research now. I look forward to continuing to follow this reform and its effects on university research. – Kelly F.

Learning From Failure-By Root or by Branch at Work

When we have a problem, we often think rationally within the parameters of the problem/solution scenario, which for the most part leads us in the right direction to finding an answer to the problem we are trying to solve. Even within the hard sciences, however, rationally only goes so far before we find ourselves only halfway to the desired outcome. So where does that leave those whose job depends on the social sciences, where there are innumerable variables and new and changing outcomes every day? The Urban Institute held a forum last Friday that addressed just that. The answer: learning from failure.

Greg Berman, who has spent the last three years working on a policy inquiry into failed criminal justice experiments shared four lessons of failure that he has learned that can be applied in management: failure is in the eye of the beholder—meaning that we cannot take a pass/fail approach to most things. Some programs will work for others, some will not. The second lesson is that things fall apart. Just because something works once, does not mean it will work again. The third lesson is that context matters. Similarly, just because something works in one place, does not mean it will work somewhere else. The last lesson, which is the hardest of them all, is to be weary of the seductive power of unrealistic expectations.

Olivia Golden has a somewhat different angle for tackling failure that is not so much focused on the failure itself, but on the incremental successes that are learned from failure. When efforts to learn are focused in a public setting it creates a political culture that is focused on failure, thus attitudes that are hostile toward it. Learning becomes impossible when people are afraid of being blamed if things go wrong, which is why Olivia says it is important to focus attention on organizational change.

In a few final remarks, Martha Burt gives some bits of insight on how it might be possible to get to that desired outcome—that is the relative success of the public sector: leadership, coordination, getting data, tracking progress, fixing things as problems happen, and dogged determination.

**Last Friday a coworker and I went to a forum on failure in the public sector at the Urban Institute, and this s a draft of what you will see on GOVERNING.com of my blog about it. I thought it was very pertinent to our policy paper and our class in general about gradual change...the branch method just keeps coming back.

A. Braden

The French Controversy

In current event news, this past week The French Parliament passed legislation that would ban women from wearing full-face Islamic veils in public. The National Assembly, France’s equivalent to The House of Representatives, approved the legislation 335 to 1 and is scheduled for a vote in the Senate in September. If passed, the legislation would impose a $185 fine on women caught outside their homes wearing the full-face coverings. It sets a fine of $38,000 and a one-year prison term for anyone convicted of forcing women and girls to wearing the veils. This fine reflects a widely shared belief in France that Muslim women are forced to cover their faces by their fathers or husbands.

While other European countries have discussed similar legislation, the French ban of the burqa has been a story that has caught international attention. Tuesday's action makes France only the second Western European nation, after Belgium, to move toward banning what has become the most prominent symbol of the Muslim presence across a continent rich in traditions of secularism and Christianity. A recent survey by the Pew Research Center showed that 82 percent of French citizens polled support the prohibition within their country.

France's Interior Ministry has estimated that fewer than 2,000 women wear full-face veils in France, a country of 64 million people, about 5 million of who are Muslims. Still, the issue has become a rallying point for those who say Muslims should work harder to integrate into French society if they choose to live here.

To some, this issue might seem trivial. But in France, if you don’t act, dress, or speak as the French do, you will stand out. As an American who has lived in France, I have seen firsthand the prejudice against those who aren’t French or those who don’t try to assimilate to French culture. If you are purposely distinct within a crowd, the French society sees it as a form of disrespect to French culture. While Americans would see the ban of the burqa as violation of the first amendment, the wearing of the burqa is cited in France as a limit to free speech. Most people in France believe that women are forced to wear the headscarf. Under this assumption, Sarkozy stated, “we cannot have in our country women who are prisoners behind netting, cut off from all social life, deprived of identity.” The only way they will have freedom is if the headscarf is not worn.

If this law is passed, it will be interesting to see the subsequent laws that are proposed in other countries. A survey also found that 71 percent of Germans, 62 percent of Britons and 59 percent of Spaniards would back similar bans in their own countries. France has been the precedent on the issue but is it only a sign of what is to come across Europe? It will be interesting to see the effect of this new French law on other European countries legislation within the next few months.

If you’re interested in learning more about this topic and the history behind the controversy in France, the book “Politics of the Veil” written by Joan Wallach Scott helps give more perspective to this debate.

-M.A.

National Geographic Museum

Today I visited the National Geographic Museum. The Museum changes their exhibit every few months and during the summer the exhibit is "Da Vanci: The Genius". The main part of the exhibit showed some of Da Vinci's many sketches and real life models of what the sketches would have looked like. I found the video explaining 'The Last Supper' the most interesting part of the exhibit. The museum was also inspiring because da Vinci created so much in his lifetime. He was so interested in all aspects of the world. He was a sculptor, a painter, a musician, a mathematician, a scientist, an architect, a writer, and many other things. His "unquenchable curiosity" led to incredible inventions and timeless artwork. My favorite quote from da Vinci is, "I have been impressed with the urgency of doing. Knowing is not enough; we must apply. Being willing is not enough; we must do." This is a good quote to live by and I think we can all learn from it in our internships, our studies and our lives.

The other part of the museum had examples of inventions that are designed for the 90% of the world that does not have the resources to live a sustainable lifestyle. This part of the world is not able to have good education systems, healthy drinking water, or even shelter, so a lot of inventors have created way to cook without fire, distill dirty water, or keep mosquitos away from beds. I didn't realize that so much of the world was uneducated or had such problems like not being able to drink water. I'm thankful that I've never had to worry about things like this but it did put an outlook on my career in public service. I would like to one day be a part of an organization that helps to diminish the problems that 90% of the world have.

- Haley

Journalists--Civil Servants?

Drew's presentation on Radio Free Europe got me thinking about the importance of the media in society. Hearing how honest journalism can make such an important difference to the public helped me realize the journalist ' s role as a civil servant in their own way.

Earlier this week I went to a seminar about investigative journalism put on by the Huffington Post Investigative Journalism Fund. They showed us a video that brought up the issue that many in Baltimore are having ; specifically, people are losing their homes due to small , unpaid water and utility bills. The journalist explained the investigative process from getting the initial tip to finding and reporting on the in-depth information featured in the video. Another journalist in the room raised their hand to ask, "Why didn't you just help her pay her bill so she didn't have to get kicked out?" While this idea sounds good in theory, this is not the role of a journalist. The speaker explained that a journalist is not a player in the situation and therefore cannot actively participate in fixing the individual problem directly. However, they are not simply spectators either and that the value they bring and the impact their job can have is to bring issues like this to the public's attention. This is particularly important because there are likely more than a single individual with this same issue. Raising public awareness can effect a more broad reaching and longer term solution to the problem.

This concept of uncovering issues and bringing them to the surface is an extremely important role of the journalist. While our government is set up with a system of checks and balances, journalists also work to keep the government held accountable by holding up to public scrutiny issues that need to be addressed. While journalists do not create or pass laws , they are constantly participating in the process for the public good.

-M.T.

Yet another interesting day at the Freer

When I learned that Dr. Robert Thurman, a preeminent Indo-Tibetan scholar, was giving a lecture in DC, I knew I had to attend. I frequently reference Dr. Thurman's books in my own research (and he just happens to be Uma Thurman's dad). Luckily for me, the Smithsonian makes these kinds of events available to the public for free at the Freer Gallery of Art.

The Freer and Sackler Galleries house numerous Asian Art collections, including a rare Tibetan religious artifact collection. Dr. Thurman's lecture described this collection and topics of Tibetan Buddhism in general. Dr. Thurman teaches at Columbia University, and has been a personal friend of the Dalai Lama for forty years. A pioneer in his field, he cleared the way for others interested in studying Tibetan issues. I was lucky enough to talk to some of his (past) students in the lobby, and was able to meet him as well.

Somewhat surprisingly, the Freer has been a hub for me during my stay in DC. I've toured it, attended two events (the other was an Indian music event), and spent over an hour there while the festival was closed for a thunderstorm (during which the lobby became quite festive. There is a video on my facebook page for those interested). It seems that- dare I make a pun here?- the best things in life are at the Freer.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/15/AR2010071501395.html?hpid=topnews

According to The Washington Post, the CIA abducted and paid Iranian nuclear scientist Shahram Amiri upward of $5 million to inform the U.S. about Iran’s nuclear program. Amiri was taken from Saudi Arabia where it was hoped that he would give the US valuable information on Iranian nuclear capabilities. Even though he was just a researcher, he was given larges sums of money that may reflect the value of the information gained. Although he does not have to return the money he will lose access to the funds after breaks what was called “significant ties.”
The compensation Amiri received is part of the clandestine CIA program called the "brain drain." Its goal is to use incentives to induce scientists and other officials to produce information.
Iran continues to claim that its nuclear program has strictly peaceful purposes.
That is all I am at liberty to say.
A. Braden

The Smithsonian Museum of American History

Helene:
The Smithsonian Museum of American History is a great resource to find similarities with the past and the present. This “No Stamp Act” teapot is equivalent to political buttons I regularly pin to my clothes to make a statement.


Coming from a Sociology and Film Production education background, I am fascinated by the relationship that society, specifically the culture of a society, has on Public Policy. I am sure that seeing beloved Disney characters ready to fight Nazi Germany creates a different culture for children of the past compared to the children of current times that watch Dora the Explorer. But how can that be connected to Public Policy? Will immigration policy be more important for the children that watched Dora and the children of the past who watched Donald the Duck go to Europe to fight in WWII? The variations of the types of policies that have been passed or advocated for throughout time show that culture has changed with the time.

H. Holstein

Adrianna:
Admittedly, one of the most impressive exhibits to me (and many other people given the size of the crowd) at the Museum of America History was the display of the dresses of the First Ladies at the Inaugural Ball, which speaks to our American values. We value the things that we are wearing in the time and space that an event occurs. Even at the National Gallery of Art that we visited as a group, artists were meticulous about how they portrayed grace and class in the garment that subjects were wearing.


Throughout the years, the First Ladies have become in a sense more real—by that I mean Martha Washington must have worn a size four shoe, while Michelle Obama might wear my size eight in her stunning Jimmy Choo. And Mary Lincoln’s waist might have been the size of a small mixing bowl, while I may have been able squeeze into Jackie Kennedy’s gown.
All that to say, the donation of the Inaugural gown is one that reflects the tradition of elegance and poise of our First Ladies, one that is sure to continue.
A. Braden

Teleworking Legislation

http://thehill.com/homenews/house/108291-dems-push-teleworking-cite-februarys-monster-snowfall

This article by Russell Berman is in the 'The Hill' online and was posted today. It goes along with a seminar I had to attend for Senator Voinovich's office last week about Teleworking legislation being worked on in Congress. Having not known much about the bill before attending the seminar, I have been interested in learning more about it now. I was surprised to find out that mainly Democrats are pushing for this legislation, because Senator Voinovich (a Republican) is also in support of teleworking and was a co-sponsor for S.707, which passed in the Senate unanimously.

Being a younger person that will soon be looking for a job in the federal workplace, I don't see why teleworking is such a controversial issue. If I was able to work from home or during hours which are convenient to me, I would be more attracted to certain jobs that I might not usually take into account. I would also keep schedule flexibility and the ability to work from home in mind when I decide to start a family. According to supporters of the bill, teleworking allows the federal government to stay millions of dollars and would dramatically increase productivity. However, some opposition states that it would actually end up costing taxpayers around $30 million dollars.

A main component of a teleworking bill would be to train managers who would be worried about loss of productivity from their employees. However, if they were trained correctly, teleworking would save money, increase productivity and allow their employees to balance their life with work.

Since I don't know much about teleworking besides what I learned in the seminar and some articles concerning the bill, I would be interested in other opinions for and against the legislation.

- Haley

Guantanamo Bay: Close or Keep Open?

On June 30th, I was able to attend the film screening of “The Response” with Haley and Lindsey. The documentary was shown at a Congressional Building on Capitol Hill. In addition to screening the film, we were also able to sit in on a panel discussion with actors from the film, policy analysts, and retired military personnel who have personally dealt with the controversial issues associated with Guantanamo Bay.

“The Response” is a courtroom drama based on the actual transcripts of the Guantanamo Bay military tribunals. In the film, three military officers must decide the fate of a suspected enemy combatant. Is he guilty of providing material support to Al Qaeda and responsible for the deaths of several American soldiers? Or is he an innocent victim of circumstances as he claims? The film is leaves the audience with the responsibility of making a decision on the frustrating case.

While the movie was captivating, I found the discussion following the film more worthwhile. To be in the same room as other politicians, sitting in the middle of their discussions really caught my attention on the issue of Guantanamo Bay. The point that I found particularly interesting was the discussion on the question of keeping Guantanamo Bay open and if it is being used as a recruitment tool for terrorist organizations. Furthermore, does the existence of the camp help fuel an anti-American sentiment in the Middle East?

While I’ve never had a deep interest in Guantanamo Bay’s issues, the movie and discussion gave me more perspective on the issue and made me realize the benefits of closing the camp outweigh the costs to keeping it open.

M.A.

Propaganda

This weekend I took a guided tour (given by a holocaust survivor) of an exhibit at the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum entitled State of Deception: The Power of Nazi Propaganda in which we were taken through four time periods of Nazi deception: 1918-1933, when the use of propaganda helped propel Nazism into the largest extremist organization in democratic Germany, 1933-1939, when the Nazi Party “sold” Nazism denouncing Jews, Gypsies, and all non-Aryans, 1939-1945, when propaganda helped to gain support for the war and alienation and indifference for undesirable groups in Germany, and 1945-present during efforts to cleanse Germany of Nazi propaganda. The Nuremburg Trials argued that words could kill, can they? Millions of solders’ commitment to Hitler committed the genocide of innocent people in numerous countries. Mass communication has the power to mobilize not only people, but minds, ideas, and ideology.

Propaganda is defined as biased information spread to shape public opinion and behavior. Its power depends on message, technique, and means of communication.

Last week we debated the factuality of The Politics of Global Climate Change: A Guide to the Debate, which poses the question in my mind, is this work simply a thorough work of scientific and political propaganda aiming to shape public opinion and behavior of public officials and others? There is no question that there is in fact climate change, but to what extent do we have the power to stop it, and are we (humans) really one of the central causes of the climate change? These are central questions that frame the debate around how policy should be enacted in the future. Furthermore, whatever policy is produced, many will be affected well and bad—company budgets will be affected, wildlife will be restored. These are all cost-benefit analyses to be considered based on the factuality of printed works.

History has shown us, albeit on a much larger scale, how propaganda can drastically change the lives of millions of people, which is why we should critically consider and also challenge any work that could influence the decisions of lawmakers.



A. Braden

It smells too much like hipster

Thursday, Haley, Zach and I attended a free concert at Fort Reno Park. Just looking for something to do after work, we ended up having a really nice evening. There were three bands playing. The headliner was a band called "Tereu Tereu", who we had never heard of but really ended up enjoying.

The weather was great, the music was good, and the chips and salsa we picked up at Whole Foods on our way over were delicious. A lot of the other attendees at the concert were interesting in their own ways. We really felt a community vibe in the park and tried to fit as with the locals (without looking too lost).

Surprisingly enough, Fort Reno is also the highest point in the city and was involved in the only Civil War battle to take place in the District of Columbia. After doing some research, I found that the fort saw action July 10-12, 1864, when the Confederates attacked. Zach informed us that, during this time period, people didn't believe the war was real and often picnicked near the war, as if it was common entertainment. After the war, the fort became a "Freetown" for freed slaves and later a reservoir. Today, it's a park open to the public. The actual Fort is in the background of the stage where the musicians play, and it gives a surreal feeling to the atmosphere.

All in all, it was a good time. I'd definitely recommend attending one of the summer's other free shows. The summer's complete schedule is listed at the link below. The shows are usually on Monday and Thursday nights, from 7:30 - 9:30 p.m. The park is about a block from the Metro station and very easy to find.

Fort Reno 2010 free outdoor shows all summer long!

-LT & HC

"How to read research papers" - Foreign Policy

Figured it would be useful to post this piece because of our discussion on how politicians can discern good science from crap science. This also functions as a pretty useful checklist for how to approach writing our own policy papers.

I personally find Dessler & Parson (that climate book we read) pretty compelling on this point. Their advice is to consider peer review, qualifications, all that jazz... BUT ALSO to practice healthy skepticism. Skepticism towards the science, the politics and the agendas.

Enjoy the read,

-Drew

------------------

How to read research papers

by Dan Drezner | Foreign Policy

Ezra Klein made an interesting observation a few days ago about how opinion journalists readpapers by experts:

[T]his is one of the difficulties with analysis. Fairly few political commentators know enough to decide which research papers are methodologically convincing and which aren't. So we often end up touting the papers that sound right, and the papers that sound right are, unsurprisingly, the ones that accord most closely with our view of the world.

To which Will Wilkinson said "Amen":

This is one of the reasons I tend not to blog as much I’d like about a lot of debates in economic policy. I just don’t know who to trust, and I don’t trust myself enough to not just tout work that confirms my biases. This is also why I tend to worry a lot about methodology in my policy papers. How much can we trust happiness surveys? How exactly is inequality measured? How exactly is inflation measured? Does standard practice bias standard measurements in a particular direction? Of course, the motive to dig deeper is often suspicion of research you feel can’t really be right. But this is, I believe, an honorable motive, as long as one digs honestly. Indeed, I’m pretty sure motivated cognition, when constrained by sound epistemic norms, is one of the mainsprings of intellectual progress.

One way to weigh competing research papers is to consider the publishing outlet. Presumably, peer-reviewed articles will carry greater weight. Except that Megan McArdle doesn't presume:

Especially for papers that rely on empirical work with painstakingly assembled datasets, the only way for peer reviewers to do the kind of thorough vetting that many commentators seem to imagine is implied by the words "peer review" would be to . . . well, go back and re-do the whole thing. Obviously, this is not what happens. Peer reviewers check for obvious anomalies, originality, and broad methodological weakness. They don't replicate the work themselves. Which means that there is immense space for things to go wrong--intentionally or not....

This is not to say that the peer review system is worthless. But it's limited. Peer review doesn't prove that a paper is right; it doesn't even prove that the paper is any good (and it may serve as a gatekeeper that shuts out good, correct papers that don't sit well with the field's current establishment for one reason or another). All it proves is that the paper has passed the most basic hurdles required to get published--that it be potentially interesting, and not obviously false. This may commend it to our attention--but not to our instant belief.

This jibes with a recent Chonicle of Higher Education essay that bemoaned the explosion of research articles:

While brilliant and progressive research continues apace here and there, the amount of redundant, inconsequential, and outright poor research has swelled in recent decades, filling countless pages in journals and monographs. Consider this tally fromScience two decades ago: Only 45 percent of the articles published in the 4,500 top scientific journals were cited within the first five years after publication. In recent years, the figure seems to have dropped further. In a 2009 article in Online Information Review, Péter Jacsó found that 40.6 percent of the articles published in the top science and social-science journals (the figures do not include the humanities) were cited in the period 2002 to 2006.

None of this provides much comfort for the layman interested in navigating through the miasma of contradictory research papers. How can the amateur policy wonk separate the wheat from the chaff?

Below are seven useful rules of thumb to provide you. These are not foolproof -- in fact, that's one of the rules -- but they can provide some useful filtering while trying to discern good research from not-so-good research:

1) If you can't read the abstract, don't bother with the paper. Most smart people, including academics, don't like to admit when they don't understand something that they read. This provides an opening for those who purposefully write obscurant or jargon-filled papers. If you're befuddled after reading the paper abstract, don't bother with the paper -- a poorly-worded abstract is the first sign of bad writing. And bad academic writing is commonly linked to bad analytic reasoning.

2) It's not the publication, it's the citation count. If you're trying to determine the relative importance of a paper, enter it into Google Scholar and check out the citation count. The more a paper is cited, the greater its weight among those in the know. Now, this doesn't always hold -- sometimes a paper is cited along the lines of, "My findings clearly demonstrate that Drezner's (2007) argument was, like, total horses**t." Still, for papers that are more than a few years old, the citaion hit count is a useful metric.

3) Yes, peer review is better. Nothing Megan McArdle wrote is incorrect. That said, peer review does provide some useful functions, so the reader doesn't have to. If nothing else, it's a useful signal that the author thought it could pass muster with critical colleagues. Now, there are times when a researcher will bypass peer review to get something published sooner. That said, in international relations, scholars who publish in non-refereed journals usually have a version of the paper intended for peer review.

4) Do you see a strawman? It's a causally complex world out there. Any researcher who doesn't test an argument against viable alternatives isn't really interested in whether he's right or not -- he just wants to back up his gut instincts. A "strawman" is when an author takes the most extreme caricature of the opposing argument as the viable alternative. If the rival arguments sound absurd when you read about them in the paper, it's probably because the author has no interest in presenting the sane version of them. Which means you can ignore the paper.

5) Are the author's conclusions the only possible conclusions to draw? Sometimes a paper can rest on solid theory and evidence, but then jump to policy conclusions that seem a bit of a stretch (click here for one example). If you can reason out different policy conclusions from the theory and data, then don't take the author's conclusions at face value. To use some jargon, sometimes a paper's positivist conclusions are sound, even if the normative conclusions derived from the positive ones are a bit wobbly.

6) Can you falsify the author's argument? Conduct this exercise when you're done reading a research paper -- can you picture the findings that would force the author to say, "you know what, I can't explain this away -- it turns out my hypothesis was wrong"? If you can't picture that, then you can discard what you're reading a a piece of agitprop rather than a piece of research.

7) Fraudulent papers will still get through the cracks. Trust is a public good that permeates all scholarship and reportage. Peer reviewers assume that the author is not making up the data or plagiarizing someone else's idea. We assume this because if we didn't, peer review would be virtually impossible. Every once in a while, an unethical author or a reporter will exploit that trust and publish something that's a load of crap. The good news on this front is that the people who do can't stop themselves from doing it on a regular basis, and eventually they make a mistake. So the previous rules of thumb don't always work. The publishing system is imperfect -- but "imperfect" does not mean the same thing as "fatally flawed."

With those rules of thumb, go forth and read your research papers.

Daniel W. Drezner is professor of international politics at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University.