(Photo Credit: Rush Jagoe) Oil workers' bar in Louisiana.

Living in the South for this past summer has made one thing clear—  the Gulf Coastal states feel marginalized, and perhaps rightfully so, considering that Mississippi, Louisiana and Alabama are among the poorest states in our nation. A human development study conducted by Oxfam comparing states in matters of health, education, and income concluded “that people in last-ranked Mississippi are living 30 years behind those in first-ranked Connecticut.” Similar results are shown for other coastal states. Revenues from offshore oil royalties would supply more than enough resources to develop schools, hospitals and other institutions.  Yet the 37.5 percent of shares allotted to the states in 2006, including $650 million per year to Louisiana alone, are not to begin until 2017.  Until then, the coastal states will feel the effects, yet none of the benefits, of offshore oil drilling. With the fishing industry crippled, a moratorium on oil drilling and BP’s lag with paying clean-up volunteers, too many have lost their sources of income. Residents’ reactions range from outrage to apocalyptic hysteria. Their very livelihoods have been destroyed by the largest marine water oil spill ever.

As the summer of disaster winds to a close, locals are concerned with more than simply making ends meet.   Hurricane season threatens to shake up the damaged region yet again, and human development has worn away at the coastal wetlands that naturally provide flood control.

Coastal wetlands act as ‘horizontal levees’ by weakening a hurricane as it makes its way towards inland cities. Ultimately, these natural storm buffers are the best and most effective method of hurricane protection. However, the coastal land loss in Louisiana alone is staggering. As described in a story by National Geographic, “despite nearly half a billion dollars spent over the past decade to stem the tide, the state continues to lose about 25 square miles (64.7 square kilometers) of land each year, roughly one acre (4,000 square meters) every 33 minutes.”

Since canal digging began nearly 60 years ago, for petroleum exploration and ship traffic, a dangerous doze of salt water has been introduced into the fresh water marshes. In native vegetation such as cypress trees, roots are unable to hold onto soil in salt water, which leads to erosion. Fresh layers of river sediment are no longer deposited from the Mississippi to replenish this loss. Levees are the culprits. They force sediment past soil starved marshes into deep ocean waters.  These same levees, that exist to protect the city of New Orleans, were deemed by a national panel of experts as  ‘designed to fail’ and responsible for most of the $81 billion worth in damages associated with Hurricane Katrina.

The BP oil spill isn’t good news for anyone. This spill will doubtlessly echo for many more years in its impacts on our environment, energy and seafood cravings. However, the people living in this mess are the ones who suffer and will suffer the most.  But is it a coincidence that the poor, less educated of the world, in this case the United States, are stuck bearing the environmental injustices of natural resource exploitation? Are natural resources coincidentally found only in the poorest of the world’s regions, or are there other factors guiding the decision of drilling in one place versus another?

Admittedly, the Gulf of Mexico makes up the largest chunk of the 115.1 billion barrels of total untapped crude oil available on Federal Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) territory. However, in the same surveys done by the Mineral Management Service (MMS) and United States Geological Survey (USGS), it was found that the Los Angeles area contains sizable onshore and offshore oil fields. To be more specific, the southern California coast reserves are comparable to that of western coastal Florida oil fields in the Gulf of Mexico, not too far from the location Deepwater Horizon was operating. In addition, the New England coastline sports an equally promising potential sites for offshore drilling. What are the chances that companies would start drilling on those sites once the Gulf of Mexico is drained of petroleum? I can post this question another way— is it just as easy to exploit wealthier and more well-educated states as it is the poorest in our nation?

On November 3^rd, 2010, Barack H. Obama will still reside at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, but offices at the other end of that particular street might begin to move. Recently White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs let forth the earth shattering notion that Democrats might not control both chambers of Congress after the election. Not particularly surprising to anyone who has been paying attention…but rather poorly received by House Democrats. Indeed Speaker Pelosi (yikes!) lambasted Gibbs in a meeting with her Democratic colleagues.

No matter your current level of interest, I am here to tell you that the midterm elections should be of interest to you. What follows (hopefully) will be a persuasive argument as to why you should turn on (TV, internets, radio, twitters), how you should tune into House races, and why this all matters.

What about the Senate? For a variety of reasons (which I am happy, even eager, to discuss elsewhere) the Senate Majority Leader has no where near the control over his fellow members, legislative calendar, or policy, as the Speaker of the House does. Individual Senators and Committees, by practice and procedure, have much greater power in the upper chamber than in the lower. As a result, I would submit it is the Speaker of the House that is the second most powerful office in the land.

And it’s up for grabs. As Gibbs noted (despite his rather unsurprising ‘walking back’) the House is up for grabs. “Speaker Boehner” is a phrase which sends chills up the spines of Democrats everywhere, much as the mere utterance of the words “Speaker Pelosi” cause the average Republican to fret and avoid eating for some time.

So what should you pay attention to? There are, broadly speaking, two schools of thought. The first, and easier to track, is national indicators. The state of the economy, the unemployment rate, the ‘national mood,’ and other metrics are all fair rough metrics of what is likely to happen. The alternative is to predict on a race by race basis how elections are likely to turn out and tally those predictions. (For those of you reading this to waste time and are really looking for an excuse not to get stuff done, you can read this piece or this one on forecasting).

So where to tune? The Cook Political Report is an invaluable source as a guide to which races are competitive and how they compare. His House Race charts can be found here. For those of you looking for a bit more content, and World Cup references, The Washington Post’s Chris Cillizza is a must read. For those of your truly addicted, there are many more resources but a new one that I am quite fond of is a twitter feed @FECTweets run by Reid Wilson at National Journal’s Hotline. The feed just broadcasts the quarterly fundraising results (2Q were due July 15) so less useful now, but good to have in the future.

There’s also the option to drop out. I’m not necessarily advocating you leave CMC for a semester to work on a campaign, though you could do worse things. You can phone bank from anywhere with Skype or a cell phone, and you can always write a check. If you do plan to go the cash route, I will not use this space to tell you who to send money to, but I will say this: go small or go home. Money you send to a House race in Idaho (Democrat/Republican) will go a lot further than dollars you spend to Illinois (Democrat/Republican).

Why does it matter that Nancy and Robert couldn’t play nice? It matters a great deal because the Speaker of the House is the second most powerful person in the nation and the White House Press Secretary is the public voice of the President.

Now you might retort ‘No, Jesse. I learned in Govt. 20 that it goes President, Vice President, Speaker of the House….’ Well, simply put, that’s just not true. The Vice Presidency of the United States of America, august title and all, is just not that important. Vice President Garner once said the Vice Presidency was “not worth a bucket of warm piss,” hardly the description of an all powerful office.

There are two principle reasons why this is true: a) the Vice President has no natural area of responsibility, except for those given to him by the President, and b) the Vice President has no vote (except in rare Senate ties) and has no natural power base or constituency to call upon.

Given our age, I am sure the comments section would fill with comments about Dick Cheney, was he not powerful? First it is worth noting that Cheney is the exception far more than the rule. Second, and more substantively, Cheney’s power within the Bush administration derived from his close, almost Chief of Staff-like relationship with the President. All politicians have close aids and allies who have their ear, and whose judgment the principal trusts. Vice President Cheney filled that role for President Bush, but unlike most advisors, his name was also on the ballot.

What is the point of this tangent? If we accept that the Vice President is not all that important, there is a vacancy in the number two slot…meet the Speaker of the House. The Speaker consolidates the powers of the House of Representatives in large measure in the Speaker’s office, has direct (if not de facto) control over what bills come to the floor, and just as importantly which bills do not. The Speaker can exercise an effective veto over legislation, and has a greater power, more than any other single member of Congress, to effect policy and political changes. This power is amplified when the Speaker is of a different party than the President as the Speaker also becomes in effect the voice of the ‘out’ party (see Gingrich, Newt).

Bottom line: November’s election matters a great deal. Control of a very powerful position is up for grabs, and this will have significant implications for the rest of President Obama’s term, for the course of the nation, and for national politics for the next few years. If that is something that interests you, there are a number of ways to get information. If you want to do more than read passively, you can get involved in a meaningful way.

Decisions are made by those who show up, will you?

OBVIOUS BIAS ALERT: The author of this post worked in the Fall of 20o9 and this summer for House Republican Leader John Boehner. Notwithstanding this fact, this article contains useful advice ensconced in a whimsical and yet powerful writing style.

Those of you who know me know that I am obsessed, likely to an unhealthy degree, with all things politics. I love the ephemera most of all. Sure we could have a substantive policy discussion about the relative virtues of the Senate and House versions of the Child Nutrition reauthorization bill, the merits and scope of ‘doc-fix,’ or the finer points of PEPFAR…but Viagra jokes and dorky white guys are just more fun.

Now, I do not claim that this is an exhaustive list of Congressional foibles, but they made me laugh.

This being my second summer in DC I thought I would take this opportunity to share with you some of  gems spewed forth by certain members of Congress. Often times Washington is criticized as “Hollywood for ugly people,” well CMC it’s time for you to meet some of the starlets. Let’s take a gander at what the series of tubes has offered us as of late.

Hank Johnson (D-Crazytown): As you will soon see, it’s not a good idea for Rep. Johnson’s staff to let him go off-script. It is, however, fantastic for everyone else when he does.

The Congressman has a knack for asking the questions that no one else has thought to ask, like will Guam tip over if we built a Navy base there…seriously, he asked that.

Ok, but everyone asks a weird question once in a while, right? Don’t you dare underestimate Hank.

Here’s Hank Johnson wondering if his microphone might need some encouragement to stay up. (Yeah, it’s a dick joke)

Here’s Hank Johnson musing about the virtues of our civil justice system. For example, “if you want to know…how many times your neighbor has beat his wife” you can find that at the courthouse… truly strange and well worth the 6 minutes of your time.

Steve Cohen (D – Funkytown): Now as you all know, Jews are world renowned for our dancing abilities. Whether it be getting up on a roof, or throwing people out of chairs, my people know how to get down. That’s why it was so disapointing to see this video of Rep. Steve Cohen. Cohen represents Tennessee’s 9th Congressional District which is almost 60% black (look, a fact!) and so Steve Cohen must be ever vigilant in his quest to show that he is ‘down’ with the people; this man knows how to boogie.

This is why Jews (sorry Matisyahu and Eric Scott) shouldn’t rap. Sweat drenched polo shirt and dockers, blackberry on his hip, this fella is hood.

Yes, there’s more…

Bob Etheridge (D – Smackdown): You might be a redneck if you get suddenly violent when college-age video trackers ask you if you “support the Obama agenda”?

Rep. Etheridge, proof that steroids can ruin any sport…

Congressional Black Caucus (Ethics Watchdogs): The Congressional Black Caucus has picked a fight, locked in their sight is the Office of Congressional Ethics (OCE). Who is leading this valiant effort? Rep. Marcia Fudge. What possible motive could Fudge have to pick this particular fight? Well, her Chief of Staff  Dawn Kelly Mobley was admonished by the House Ethics Committee for counseling an outside group on how to circumvent House disclosure requirements.

So these members might have a gripe, what’s the funny part? Well, one of the co-sponsors is Rep. Alcee Hastings. That name familiar? Well it should be Alcee Hastings, while serving as a federal judge, was impeached by the House and removed from office. One of only 6 judges in US history to be impeached and removed from office. Wow.

Other CBC members who have been investigated by OCE, the Ethics Committee, or the Department of Justice include: Reps. Rangel, Jefferson, Thompson, Clarke, Payne, Kilpatrick, Christensen, Hastings, Jackson Jr., Watt, and Senator Burris.

Alright, now before I get a series of angry comments pointing out that both parties are guilty of ethical lapses, I grant your point….

But seriously folks, Alcee Hastings talking about ethics is like:

• (a) Michael Jackson talking about child care
• (b) Osama bin Laden practicing non-violent protest
• (c) Dora smiling
• (d) John Edwards not being scum of the earth
• (e) all of the above

Take your pick, CMC.

Last week, Rolling Stone Magazine published an article by Michael Hastings entitled “The Runaway General,” a provocative portrait of four-star General Stanley McChrystal.  The article is a compelling narrative filled with vulgarities, booze, and down-right arrogance, reading more like the plot summary of Hollywood’s next big action movie than a critical analysis of the man in charge of the Afghanistan war effort.   Ultimately, the administration responded harshly and the General was dismissed from his role as top commander of American forces in Afghanistan

This, however, is not the first time an American President has had to deal with a sharp-tongued rebel as a military commander.  General McChrystal seems to be the 21st century reincarnation of the man who was arguably World War II’s most famous and tactically brilliant general – General George S. Patton.  Patton, like McChrystal, possessed an infamously brash attitude and a penchant for vulgar language.

Patton was also a public relations nightmare for his administration.  During supply shortages in WWII, he was quoted as saying, “Men can eat their belts, but my tanks gotta have gas.”  In 1943, following an aggressive and very successful campaign to capture Sicily, Patton lost his notoriously red-hot temper with two of his soldiers.  The General dismissed the soldiers’ complaints of “battle fatigue,” considering them cowardly.  During his notorious tirade, General Patton slapped both soldiers across the face.  When the story was published on the home front, Americans were outraged.  President Eisenhower pressured General Patton to release a public apology, and then assigned Patton to serve in occupied Sicily.  In other words, Eisenhower temporarily sidelined Patton until he could learn to stay put and shut up.  Eventually, Patton returned to a prominent role in the U.S.’s war efforts, leading an important mission on D-Day.

Unfortunately, President Obama was not nearly as lenient on General McChrystal.   After the release of the article, the General was immediately summoned from Afghanistan to the White House for a meeting with the President.  That meeting lasted a mere twenty minutes.  Just a few hours later, around 1pm on June 23rd,  President Obama announced that General McChrystal had been relieved from his role as the top commander in Afghanistan and that General Petraeus would be taking over his command.

The 1970 film Patton provides an intimate look at the brash general.   The movie was a huge critical success, winning six Oscars that year.   The film is so well made that it continues to appeal to audiences today.  (In fact, if you have yet to have seen this film, I order you to go watch it immediately or else I might have to slap you, Patton-style.)   This scene provides a particularly poignant look at the General’s personality.

I fear that the Rolling Stone article and the film Patton share one thing in common – they are more caricatures than realistic portrayals.  Upon close reading of the article, one begins to notice that the majority of the salacious quotations are attributed to his aides, not the General himself.  While I’m certainly not suggesting that Hastings fictionalized some new character that is “the General McChrystal,” I do believe his actual behavior was probably embellished for theatrical appeal.   After all, isn’t that the stuff that sells magazines?

I find it unsettling to know that the commander of all American forces in Afghanistan, a man who was hand-selected by President Obama to lead thousands of troops in an effort to eliminate insurgency from the ruins of a crumbled country, was dismissed after an article in an entertainment magazine.   The man who was once considered the most competent man for the job is now suddenly ineligible due to some comments in a magazine which, although may not have been entirely innocuous, were mostly made by his staff.  Yes, there are some vulgarities, but wasn’t it just last week that the President himself stated, with the regards to the BP Oil spill, that he wanted to know “whose ass to kick?”

This leads me to a simple plea: Mr. President, next time you have the power to decide who is going to lead our troops in a dangerous insurgent fight overseas, please do not do it on the basis of his diction.  I must implore you to consider one thing and one thing alone – which General will send the smallest number of American soldiers home in body bags.

I hope these were not the “best” four years of our lives, but they may have been the most fun. You have to believe life gets better, but nothing will beat free Snack at 10:30 PM every school night. I’ll never forget the first time I went to snack. Prospie Josh thought he had floated himself into heaven. And it wasn’t even mozzarella sticks night. This was back when the fro-yo machine was always on and Gavin ruled the World Wok. I’ll miss Collins.

It’s one thing to say you will “miss” college and another to wake up Sunday morning after graduation, have to move out of your apartment, and start picking health insurance. I don’t remember high school graduation being this bittersweet, but that’s probably because I knew life would get much, much better in college. For many of us, the future is completely unpredictable.

I had a lot of ideas about what to write for a “Goodbye from the Class of 2010″ post. It’s my last written assignment for college, so there is a lot of pressure to not disgrace myself or give the anonymous commenters any reason to go on some crazy tangent. Speaking of which, someone should write a thesis about CMCForum.com’s anonymous-optional comment section. “Thesis ideas are everywhere.” Tangential advice: Don’t let anyone tell you your thesis is “more than just a paper.” It is just another paper.

I was going to work with friends to release a music video, That’s So North Quad, to chronicle the end of the college era. At least that’s what I tell people it would have been about. But our expectations were too high. We had a great script, but we didn’t write it down. No evidence. It would have been to the tune of a Broken Bells song remix. Or this song.

I was going to plan a senior prank, but the prospect of going to white collar prison scared me. I don’t believe they actually let you wear (and they definitely don’t let you pop) white collars in those places.

I was going to write a number of Forum posts (see list below) and I was going to compile “The Class of 2010′s Guide to CMC.” It would have come with a free CD-ROM version of That’s So North Quad.

I really wanted to make sure I passed down all the knowledge and information I had for the Class of 2014, but there’s only so much you can put into words. Too bad I gave up on CMCPedia.com. Maybe someone can get that going again?

I was going to write something like David Nahmias’ (CMC ’10) goodbye letter but took issue with the suggestion that I should pick up my own toys. Why don’t we just attach a claw to the gigantic Kravis Center crane and use that to solve the problem? Yeah, that would probably solve the toy litter problem, David.

On a more serious note, I’m a little concerned about how things at CMC are going to change in the future. For one thing, CMC is going to get a lot, lot richer. With money comes responsibility. Responsibility is a downer. As I wrote that sentence, a man walking with a baby in a stroller passed by our senior week beach house in Mission Beach. As he glanced at us, he noticed girls in bikinis, a keg, loud music, and people having a great time on our front porch. He did not look happy to have “responsibilities.”

Not sure what the future will bring, but John Faranda will keep us updated. And the Siegel Swimming Pool (where Phillips Hall currently sits) will come with a large trampoline.

I was going to write a goodbye article about graduating, life, etc. I had some thoughts about Claremont Confessions, CMC’s Dean of Students’ office, the RA system, and a multi-paragraph rant about the Admissions Office. But it doesn’t matter anymore. We’re finished with college. Time to move on.

We’ll miss you, CMC.

At the risk of breaking up the rhythm of this shoddily-written, nonsensical, unstructured goodbye post, I’ll divide the rest of this post into “Top Five Regrets” and “What I’ve Learned.”

Top Five Regrets

1. Not Coming to CMC Until Sophomore Year

Although my situation was unique, I feel bad for anyone who misses freshman year at CMC. Transferring to CMC as a sophomore (or worse, junior) puts you at an immeasurable disadvantage to the rest of the school.

2. Not Partying More

I went to Slippery When Wet at Mudd for the first time this semester. I went to my first Pitzer party a few weeks ago. I have never played Tuesday Night Beirut. I guess I fooled myself into thinking partying more would hurt my academic career at CMC. It’s just not true — nobody looks back at CMC and regrets not studying more.

3. Not Creating More Stuff

I started a website called Claremont Confessions last year. The name wasn’t my idea, but I take responsibility for the damage that ensued. I won’t go into details here, but you can see the Facebook group someone started in protest here and read a bit more about it here and here. What I regret is shutting down the site instead of using it as a springboard to launch a site that actually did something to bring the 5Cs together for more than gossip.

Another example is this website (cmcforum.com). I revived the site from its print deathbed my sophomore year, but didn’t act on or complete a lot of ideas for additional features for various reasons (couldn’t figure out how to implement it, would have taken up too much time, etc.). It was also impossible finding anyone willing to help. Thankfully, The Forum has gotten to the point where finding competent people to help, write, and run the site isn’t a major problem. I hope the site gets stronger, but as we’ve seen in the past and with any organization, one year of bad leadership could ruin it all. It might be a good idea to put some institutional controls in place for the future.

4. Drafts

Over the past couple years I’ve started drafts of articles I never published on this site. I regret not finishing more. Some were just a few sentences, most were longer. Here are some of my favorite unfinished drafts:

• “Top 10 CMC Moments in the Past Four Years”
• “What I’ve Learned About CMC’s “Problems”
• “Things I Thought I Was Promised When I Came to CMC”
• “Honnold Mudd in 2020″
• “Things I Didn’t Know About CMC”
• “Rants from a Nostalgic Senior, Part I”
• “How to Be a Good Professor at CMC”
• “Stop Whining, CMC”
• “Student Health Services Is Unhealthy”
• “The Case for the Block Plan at CMC”
• “You know it was a long night when…”
• “Computer Science Should Be Mandatory”
• “RDS Advertises on Facebook? Seriously?”
• “Ferris Wheel in North Quad”

5. Not Figuring Out What I’m Interested In

I am an economics major. I’m not interested in academia. I have a job next year in which the major appeal is having no specific focus or industry. I have interests, but I don’t have a calling yet.

What I’ve Learned

A few random thoughts:

• I agree with Patrick — leisure time in college is too valuable to spend too much of it studying. If you are at the very top of your class, I think you are doing something wrong. Or a Lit major. (That was a joke, Lit majors.)
• It’s strange that only a small number of students are allowed to e-mail the entire student body and are given no guidelines about what is or is not acceptable use.
• John Faranda and much of the Development Office are very good at their job; the Public Affairs office is not. Why don’t we have any CMC alumni working in the Public Affairs office? I bet their incentive would far exceed their salary.
• If you stop worrying about putting any information about yourself, your thoughts, etc. on the internet and start making sure that what you’re putting on the internet isn’t really stupid, you’ll be fine.
• As we’ve seen in the past few years, the print media is an industry prone to consolidation. As a microcosm, the Port Side, The Forum, and Claremont Independent struggle because our campus is too small to support three major newspapers.
• An unintentional offspring of CMC moving to Google for e-mail has been the widespread popularity of communicating through GChat. It could be improved.
• Our education system is incredibly inefficient. We spent 22 years learning what we could learn in far fewer.

But one thing I can say with confidence is that I don’t regret refusing to play the game.[i] I have been rejected from more things than I can count, and I am painfully aware of each and every one. Princeton: thin envelope. Rhodes: no dice. These two things are probably related. Grades do matter. And you should write application essays keeping in mind what the judges want to hear. Yet there’s something more to life than success through these narrowly defined metrics.

That thing, of course, is called actually living. Life is a beautiful, magical, and–much as we young people hate to admit it–a transitory thing.  So when I hear a freshman stressing about his summer internship plans or some sophomores trading tips about the LSAT, I die a little inside. I desperately want to tell them, loudly and with my fist clenched around their shirt: “You’re freaking 18, 19 years old. Go bond with friends over a thirty rack of natty light. Go read a great book that will shatter your worldview. Go do something, anything, except wallow in such self-imposed misery.” The point is not so much that they need to get a life, but that they have already chosen not to live one.

I can’t say I blame them for their choice; it’s eminently understandable. The presence of the meritocracy is all around us. In many ways, it is the defining aspect of our generation and of Claremont McKenna. That’s not a bad thing, but it, like anything, does have consequences. The characteristics that define CMC affect who we are as CMCers. There are clear barriers to get in here, and there are objective ways to measure how far we’ve come when we get out. Grades. Test scores. Internships. These are the symbols through which we adjudicate success in our overachiever environment.

Those measurements, however, are just one set of lines that run through the totality of life. They do not reflect the quality of our friendships, the depth of our integrity, or the sincereness of our devotion to family, God, or country; they measure everything, in short, except that which makes life meaningful. And they tell us everything about ourselves except that which will make us fulfilled to be who we are.

Acknowledging the lack of perspective I have with my brief, fake-world life, I think I’ve found my passion. I love California more than any one person should, and man is it fulfilling. So with a heap of hesitation and a dash of self-awareness, I’d like to give you some advice:

Don’t be merely a function of social exigencies.

Don’t forget to ask the big questions.

Don’t be afraid to make mistakes.

Never be entirely consumed by what people consider “practical.”[ii]

Never let people tell you to stop dreaming.

Those are the things that have helped me to start figuring myself out–to parse away the layers of norms, expectations, and lies we tell ourselves to figure what we really want. Finding that–the thing that keeps you awake night after night and for which you are willing, even happy, to work for hours on end, day after day–is a big part of what makes life worth living. Some of you may disagree,[iii] but I will say this: try asking yourself what you really, truly, deeply want out of life.  I’m certain you won’t regret it.

[ii] Please don’t take that as an invocation to become a dirty Pitzer hippie. (And for goodness sake don’t take that as anything but a playful poke at our beloved neighbor to the North.) 

[iii] Here I’m envisioning some disgusting happiness-monger saying something along the lines of “Ignorance is bliss” or invoking some sort of perpetual sensory pleasure machine. But I’m not willing to accept an existence analogous to highly evolved slime. Purpose, meaning, fulfillment, all flowing from the distinctively human capacity of cognition–those are things that are worth talking about.

Myth #1. There’s a magic bullet that will lift poor people out of poverty.
Economists and donors have spent a lot of time searching for the one instrument that’s going to lift people out of poverty. It’s not likely that one exists. Here are some examples of false cures.

• In the 1960′s, we thought we could get growth by filling the gap between a country’s savings rate and some necessary amount of investment. That was a mistake, because countries had an incentive to save less.

• Then we thought that providing primary education for everyone would lift people out of poverty. Now, we have almost universal primary education around the globe, but it’s had virtually zero effect on growth.

• Then we thought that poor people were having too many kids, dividing their nation’s resources too many ways. It turns out that people everywhere are having about as many kids as they’d like to.

• Then we tried to withhold aid unless a country made certain reforms that would help growth. But Western governments weren’t happy that their foreign aid budgets weren’t being spent, so they often gave the money to poor countries anyway.

• Now people are saying microfinance is going to give people the loan they need to build a business and get out of poverty. There’s no doubt that microfinance is helping, but it’s not true that people need one BIG loan to get out of poverty. Most poor people borrow or lend small amounts throughout the year, to meet their cash flow needs.donors want low overhead, most charities do not evaluate their programs to see where money’s being spent effectively and where it’s being wasted. Without feedback, they’ll waste far more money on their programs than on administration. Low overhead ratios also lead charities to favor high cost programs over cheaper ones that are as effective.

If you’re worried about wasted money, be more wary of unhelpful programs than bureaucratic spending. Overhead is not a good way to evaluate charities.

Myth #2. Earmarking money for “sexy” projects helps.

Sexy projects are buzzwords, tangible items that get donors really excited, like building orphanages, houses, donating modern technology, or microfinance. Unfortunately money for these causes is often wasted.  After the tsunami in Thailand in 2005, everyone wanted to give money for orphanages and boats. Much more money was spent on these causes than was actually necessary. Orphanages had trouble finding enough orphans to house, and some families actually abandoned their children at orphanages because they couldn’t afford to feed their children. If the money was not earmarked, it could have gone to helping those parents afford to keep their kids.
NGO’s also built way more boats than were actually lost in the tsunami, leading to overfishing and waste.
Money is fungible, so the only result of earmarking your donation is that certain sexy projects will be over-funded. There’s a whole lot of boring work that goes on in aid, like logistical support, and helping people apply for government services. Beware of giving money for projects and causes that sound innately sexy.

Myth #3. Gifts in kind are useful donations.

The only people who know what an area actually needs are the people that are on the ground in that area. Most gifts in kind may not be appropriate for the season, or culture; for example, warm clothes for Haiti, expired medicines, or shoes. Disaster areas need to import a lot of urgent equipment, as fast as possible. Sending over your old goods can clog up ports and prevent more urgent shipments from getting through. NGO’s also have to pay someone to go through all the gifts and sort the useful ones from the non-useful ones.
More generally, sending gifts in kind can increase aid dependency, or destroy local markets. For example, someone who made or sold shoes in Haiti would not be able to compete against free shoes from abroad.
Maybe you’re concerned that if you give cash, the aid agency won’t spend it effectively. But if you don’t trust the agency with your cash, then why are you willing to give them your donated goods? And they might simply decide to sell whatever goods you’ve sent along and buy more useful ones.
Unless you’ve spoken to someone in the region and they’ve specifically requested gifts in kind, it’s better to give cash.

Myth #4. Brain drain is a bad thing.
Some people worry that poor countries waste money training workers who plan to emigrate, or that when skilled workers leave a poor country, they leave that country worse off. These assumptions are false. Wages in the West for skilled workers are often ten or twenty times as high as they are in the home country.¹ These high wages give workers an incentive to invest in education, which they wouldn’t have if they couldn’t migrate. Earning a higher wage allows skilled workers to send more money back home than they could ever make if they hadn’t left. Workers retain close ties to the nation of their birth, and many move back home later on. These workers often have leadership skills. For example, 46 current heads of national government received their education in the United States.
From a human rights point of view, people everywhere have a right to freedom of movement. Allowing skilled workers to migrate to rich countries is not “stealing” labor from poor countries. More migration encourages more people in the home country to develop skills in the first place.

Myth #5. Foreign aid is the best way to help poor countries.

We’ve been doing development and foreign aid for fifty years, without having much effect on a poor country’s level of growth. There are two things that have made poor countries better off: Free trade, and immigration.
Free trade makes US consumers better off because the increased competition lowers prices. It also gives producers in poor countries access to markets around the world, and lets them compete with richer producers in the US. Free trade’s effect on unemployment in the US is mostly short-term, and must be compared with the benefits to producers in poor countries and to consumers around the world.
Right now the economy of Haiti is destroyed. The best way to help Haitians is to allow them to immigrate to the United States, where they could find jobs, and send money to people who choose to remain in Haiti. That will help the Haitian people much more than billions of dollars in development and foreign aid money. But our government is more interested in sending money than actually helping Haitians.

Myth #6. We know better than the locals.

A lot of Westerners assume that because we are wealthier and we have fancy educations, that we know better than the people we’re trying to help, and if only we could teach them, if only they would listen to us, they could escape their desperate situations. This is a dangerous belief; if it was easy for people to escape poverty they would have done so a long time ago. It’s extremely difficult to make things any better without an extensive knowledge of the local culture, the language, and the people. The people who know best what to do are those closest to the affected areas. Our job should be to help them out.
So, be really careful about believing you can take a trip to India, or Africa, and change the world.

Here are some ways we can do better. The most important thing is to be aware of the difference between showing that you care and actually caring. Many people give money, or wish to go volunteer, because they’re interested in showing other people that they care about the poor. It’s good to want to show other people that you care, but it’s important to do it in a way that helps reduce poverty.

Showing that you care:

Disaster relief
Volunteer tourism
$0.10 donation
Sending your old clothes

Caring:

Disaster preparedness
Paying a local
$4 donation
Giving cash

Most importantly, do some research for yourself, hold charities accountable, and spread the word about how to be smarter about foreign aid.

For more, take a look at the GiveWell project, which evaluates the effectiveness of aid organizations, and Bill Easterly’s blog about foreign aid follies, aidwatchers.com.

1 Bill Easterly, The Elusive Quest for Growth: Economists’ Adventures and Misadventures in the Tropics.

2 Daryl Collins, Jonathan Morduch, Stuart Rutherford, and Orlanda Ruthven, Portfolios of the Poor: How the World’s Poor live on $2 a Day (Princeton University Press, 2009).

Hurricane Stagthena

A freshman at Scripps in one of my classes recently told a harrowing story regarding CMCers’ poor attitude towards cleaning up. After attending an event on CMC’s campus, she tried to be courteous, straightening up the disaster left behind. To this, a CMC student responded arrogantly, “This is CMC; we don’t clean up.”

The general attitude on campus seems to be of ill responsibility when it comes to cleaning up.  I’ve heard students brag about their ability to simply drop their trash wherever they are standing. Though we have a phenomenal grounds crew, this does not give CMCers the license to completely disrespect our campus.  We parade around campus, smugly behaving like children fed by a silver spoon.   Instead of taking the initiative to keep our campus clean, we simply place the burden of our hard-partying lifestyles on the backs of the hard-working dorm maids.  In the midst of the Thursday Night Club fiasco, Dean of Students took note of our nonchalant attitude towards cleaning up. On March 24, students received an email from ASCMC stating that DOS would like to see students “taking the initiative to clean up after events.”  I believe the general consensus is that we should do everything we can to prevent TNC from being canceled.  So if DOS wants us to clean, I say we clean.

There may be some preconceived notion that because students are under the influence of alcohol, they do not have to take responsibility for their actions.  Next time you are in that situation, I must ask, are you so incapacitated that you cannot place your trash in a proper receptacle?  And if you are, why on earth are you out walking around on campus?

Have we already so long forgotten those values which were once taught to us by a giant singing purple dinosaur?  I think Barney really hit the nail on the head when he uttered those immortal words – “Clean up, Clean up. Everybody do your share.” (Even this girl knows what’s up.)

Supposedly, we are a bunch of kids that are really good at economics and accounting.  Dorm damages have already amounted to over $20,000 this year. Call me crazy, but this may not be the best allocation of our financial resources. Cleaning up better won’t make all of those penalties go away, but it will help cut down on those mysterious dorm damages for lounge cleanup that get passed along to the entire residence hall.

So, CMCers, take the two seconds to throw away your cup to preserve TNC – even in its now limited capacity. At the least, cleaning up is worth several more nights  of raging.

Don't talk to him.

I emailed Dean Spellman to inquire if any information was to be given on why we were to be wary. She only repeated that he had been banned from HMC and if seen, we should contact Campus Safety.

I responded that I understood, but asked whether we as CMCers – and as adults – should be allowed to know background, or reasoning. Spellman responded, “I do not have more information to share with you.  The context is that this person was banned from the HMC campus.  This does not really involve CMC but I thought you and the rest of the community should know about it.  In the unlikely event that you see someone who looks like this person, please call Campus Safety.” Of course, her statement can be taken two ways: that she (and others around her) simply had no information, or that they just didn’t want to share.

Taken either way, I was very surprised at the given “answer.” Firstly, it was not believable that they would have no detailed information and that HMC would fail to provide them with further explanation. And secondly, I wondered how they could be so comfortable denying students information related, even loosely, to the safety and well-being of 5Cers.

I found out quickly that both concerns were founded. Scripps and Pomona students were forwarded all of the details and more by their deans (Pitzer: unknown). For some reason, the CMC administration either thought we would be safer in the dark or that their job was to share the bare minimum.

Here are the details that were sent out from other 5C deans that, for some reason, CMC’s Dean of Students Office either doesn’t want students to know, or doesn’t think students need to know.

Date: April 28, 2010 4:04:06 PM PDT

Subject: Alumni Weekend Security Preparations

Dear Faculty, Staff, and Students,

I am writing to let you know about an issue the College is facing regarding our upcoming Alumni Weekend and how we intend to deal with it.

In March 2010, Scott Wilbur, HMC alum, was issued a court-ordered permanent restraining order that prohibits him from being within 100 yards of the entire HMC campus.  The restraining order resulted from a threat he directed at me.  Since then we heard that he has made threatening remarks directed at a small number of our senior staff and a member of the Alumni Board of Governors, which included mention of a firearm.

Unfortunately, Mr. Wilbur has repeatedly stated that he would attend Alumni weekend which begins on Friday, April 30 and ends the evening of Sunday, May 2. In order to ensure the safety of our campus community and guests, we have taken extra security precautions.  The College has hired security officers from Campus Safety and has also hired a private security firm.  The Claremont Police Department has also been notified and will have a presence on campus during the entire weekend.

If you see Mr. Wilbur on campus please contact Campus Safety immediately by phone at 72000 (909-607-2000).  A recent photograph of Mr. Wilbur is attached.   Several alternative possible images are presented as well since we believe he may attempt to change his appearance before coming to campus.  If you cannot open the attachment, it is also available at the following internal website: http://www.hmc.edu/issues/hmconly/scott-wilbur.html

Please remember that Mr. Wilbur is directing his threats towards me and a few members of the senior staff.  However, it is always a good practice to be familiar with the College’s internal safety procedures and they are available on the Emergency Preparedness website : http://www.hmc.edu/about/administrativeoffices/emergencypreparednessandsafety1/prep1/procedures1/emergproced.html

The College’s primary focus in this matter is the safety of our faculty, staff, alumni and students.  The security precautions we are putting in place are intended to help ensure all of our safety and we wanted you to know about these precautions beforehand.  Due to previously scheduled commitments I will be traveling over the next two days, but if you have any questions please contact Bob Cave, Maggie Browning, Andrew Dorantes, Joseph Vaughan or Cynthia Beckwith who can easily contact me as needed.

Sincerely,

Maria Klawe

President

After learning about this, I called CMC DOS to inquire who made this decision to withhold and deny information and for what purpose. I was put into touch with Dean Huang’s assistant who said that Dean Spellman and unnamed “others” had spoken and decided it was unnecessary to forward the extra information. Even if they didn’t think the photos (let’s face it, they were funny) and HMC president’s letter were necessary for us to see, the thing is they didn’t even want to provide one sentence of context like, “He has threatened the life of several members of the HMC senior staff”— which might have been enough to satisfy most CMCers.

There are a number of user-submitted joke photos, including this one on Scott Wilbur's newly-created Facebook fan page.

Ironically, by trying to minimize attention drawn to the incident by witholding and denying information when asked, the administration made the incident into a huge deal. The conversation has moved from Ryal and Collins to Facebook. The “cryptic” and “sketchy” email, and the unsupported warning to “watch out for Scott,” has become the butt of a great many jokes on campus. Some students have switched their profile photos to photos of Scott Wilbur, a Facebook profile has been created for him, and as of yesterday a hilarious Facebook group has been started called “joking about the terrifying possibility of encountering Scott Wilbur.” It appears that CMC students have had a large part in contributing to this group, so I think it’s fair to say that DOS’ calculated decision backfired.

The way the administration is handling this situation strikes a familiar chord. However subtly, DOS officials continue to widen a rift between themselves and the students they work for by misinterpreting the way we work, play, think, and even protect ourselves. How could more information possibly increase the threat, more than it would increase our caution? This is simply another awkward, confusing decision that the administration has made this semester. Instead of Scott Wilbur creeping me out, now it’s DOS.

Going into the weekend, all Dean Spellman and “others” do want you to know is to watch out for Scott Wilbur. They won’t tell you who he is or why, but watch out. Oh— and remember not to talk to him.

Editor’s Note: The author of this opinion piece has requested it be published anonymously, due to the nature of the Wilbur threat.

Rejoice! For we have achieved a great victory, possibly the greatest, milestone of our species. This past week, one of our own, Christina Hendricks, was listed as “the hottest woman ever” by Esquire Magazine.

Christina Hendricks, famous for her portrayal of Joan Holloway in Mad Men, is the hottest woman ever, according to Esquire.

This is a breakthrough of the highest sort and an important step on our path to full civil rights for our people. (To be fair, she is a fake ginger, having dyed her hair since the age of ten, but we will take it!)

Sure enough, it hasn’t been easy for us. We have had precious few role models. Indeed, ask yourself, when was the last time you saw one of us positively depicted. Carrot Top? Chuckie Finster? Ron Weasley? Groundskeeper Willie?

None of these rise to the level of a power role model on par with Ms. Hendricks, but even she is depicted as the buxom, Joan Holloway, the conniving, manipulative office harlot on Mad Men.

Indeed, the greatest show on television depicted our people most recently as terrorists. Sure, it’s fine to libel an entire people soulless, but insult the prophet, and Comedy Central will censor the show. Trey Parker and Matt Stone set our people back 50 years.

This depiction is why we are thought to have no soul. Now, this was elegantly rebutted in a recent viral YouTube video, but it shouldn’t distract us from the cause: the establishment of a separate ginger center on campus where we can stay in a safe space where no one will call us soulless. Which ginger has not been asked if the carpet matches the drapes? If the toppings match the furbelow?

We have long been a marginalized people. You know what it’s like. You see a fellow ginger and you give the nod of shared oppression. You know that our women are desired and thought to be sex freaks; our men thought weak due to freckledom. We must unite now so that we can keep our numbers stronger.

Of course, to guarantee that we have adequate numbers of red heads on campus, we must have preferential treatment.

Simpsons character Groundskeeper Willie: angry, poor, and ginger.

If South Park episodes alone weren’t enough to justify preferential treatment for gingers, allow me to point out several facts:

• We were burned at the stake for being witches. Nothing tops that.
• The Nazis debated whether redheads should be allowed to marry, lest their degenerate offspring hurt the gene pool.
• Others have been forced from their homes, stabbed, beat up, made fun of at Christmastime, or sexually harassed in the workplace.

For these reasons, we must have a support center and a mentor program. It’s just so hard living in multi-haired community.

True, it may not seem as if we need it. After all, some of mankind’s most famous and influential people have been gingers or daywalkers. I refer, of course, to Sir Winston Churchill, Vladimir Lenin, Galileo Galilei, Mark Twain, James Joyce, Calvin Coolidge, Vincent Van Gogh, Thomas Jefferson, Emily Dickinson, Oliver Cromwell, Napoleon Bonaparte, L. Ron Hubbard, Margaret Sanger, Judas Iscariot, and of course, Squeaky Fromme. Truthfully, we control the world.

Several years ago, Rose Haig engaged in ginger-baiting when she ran for Pomona’s Student Body president. Her slogan? “Red Heads Are Feisty.” I confess to having engaged in a little bit of this ginger-baiting  myself during my campaign speech and some have even questioned my loyalty to the cause for dating Asian women. (Asians, reportedly, also do not have souls, so it works out.)

And so we are. Our toughness comes from years of teasing and an above normal tolerance for pain. In point of fact, researchers at the University of Louisville discovered that, on average, people born with red hair require about 20 percent more anesthesia to be properly sedated. That tolerance for pain is what has kept us strong these years, as we move forward towards our eventual goal of a separate ginger country.

Until that day comes, fair redheads, take a page from one of our greats, Sir Winston Churchill, and “never, never, never surrender.”