text:
New Free Expression Tools from Google Ideas
October 21st, 2013 - 1:27pm
As long as people have expressed ideas, others have tried to silence them. Today one out of every three people lives in a society that is severely censored. Online barriers can include everything from filters that block content to targeted attacks designed to take down websites. For many people, these obstacles are more than an inconvenience-they represent full-scale repression.
This week, in partnership with the Council on Foreign Relations and the Gen Next Foundation, Google Ideas-our "think/do tank"-is hosting a summit in New York entitled "Conflict in a Connected World."
The summit brings together "hacktivists," security experts, entrepreneurs, dissidents and others to explore the changing nature of conflict and how online tools and can both harm and protect. We're also assessing what might be done to better protect people confronting online censorship. With our partners, we will launch several new products and initiatives designed to help:
- Project Shield is an initiative that enables people to use Google's technology to better protect websites that might otherwise have been taken offline by "distributed denial of service" (DDoS) attacks. We're currently inviting webmasters serving independent news, human rights, and elections-related content to apply to join our next round of trusted testers.
- The Digital Attack Map is a live data visualization, built through a collaboration between Arbor Networks and Google Ideas, that maps DDoS attacks designed to take down websites-and their content-around the globe. This tool shows real-time anonymous traffic data related to these attacks on free speech, and also lets people explore historic trends and see related news reports of outages happening on a given day.
- uProxy is a new browser extension under development that lets friends provide each other with a trusted pathway to the web, helping protect an Internet connection from filtering, surveillance or misdirection. The University of Washington and Brave New Software developed the tool, which was seeded by Google Ideas. To learn more about the challenges uProxy aims to address, watch our video.
Information technologies have transformed conflict in our connected world, and access to the free flow of information is increasingly critical. This week's summit-as well as Shield, the Digital Attack Map and uProxy-are all steps we're taking to help those fighting for free expression around the globe. View post.
Posted by Jared Cohen, Director, Google Ideas
Gen Equity Federal PAC of Gen Next Endorses Pat Maciariello for United States Congress
September 29th, 2013 - 12:28pm
45th DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Gen Equity PACs of Gen Next nd the Gen Next National Board of Directors unanimously endorse Pat Maciariello for Congress, and the PACs are donating a max-out PAC contribution of $10,000 to his campaign. In support of this unanimous decision, Gen Next National Chairman Paul Makarechian and Gen Equity PAC Chairman John Rydell released the following statements:
Paul Makarechian:
"Pat is exactly the kind of leader that the country needs in the United States Congress. In an age when too few of America's best and brightest citizens are willing to sacrifice their careers, their resources, and their time to put their name on the ballot, Pat is doing just that. He is a husband, a father, and someone with exceptional career success in the private sector. In short, he does not need this job. Rather, we need his skill set in Congress.
As a 38-year-old investor and Partner of the Compass Group, Pat has sat on the boards of six companies and is a significant investor in numerous others, including CamelBak, ERGObaby, and Fox Racing Shox. Pat is a graduate of Columbia Business School and the University of Notre Dame, and he has the policy knowledge to "move the needle" where it counts. Pat will bring private sector decision making to our national economic challenges that require some very hard choices. He is a leader that is capable of putting our national interest and our national balance sheet ahead of interest groups and political ambition."
John Rydell:
"The Founding Fathers never envisioned a permanent political class. They envisioned America's best citizens taking a break from the private sector to come and serve the public with the leadership talents they developed outside of government.
Pat is running for Congress as a decision maker that knows how to run companies that actually make things. America needs to do a better job making things, and our Congress needs to make better policy choices to get government out of the way so American companies can put Americans back to work.
We need a representative that is more than just a reliable vote. We need a representative with the leadership skills and credibility to persuade other people to vote the right way. We need a real leader to lead on the economic issues that will decide America's future. We need Pat Maciariello."
To learn more and support the Pat for Congress campaign, please click here.
# # #
GN Member Seth Stodder: Fix legal and illegal immigration
February 19th, 2013 - 11:23am
Filed under Economy
Taken frm the OC Register:
Immigration reform is in the air. Tantalizingly close during the Bush administration, the planets have aligned yet again, and it's about time. Let's finally fix our long-broken immigration system.
"Comprehensive" reform raises various questions, but the heart of the debate centers on two: First, what do we do with the 11-12 million people here illegally? Second, if we legalize them, how can we establish the rule of law and prevent another wave of illegal immigration, as happened after the last reform in 1986?
Article Tab: Angelica Rodriquez holds a sign as she joins a group of protestors Friday, Feb. 15, 2013 at the Frank E. Moss Federal Courthouse, in Salt Lake Ciyt, as U.S. District Court Judge Clark Waddoups hears final oral arguments on constitutionality of HB497, Utah's immigration enforcement law passed by the Utah Legislature in 2011.
Angelica Rodriquez holds a sign as she joins a group of protestors Friday, Feb. 15, 2013 at the Frank E. Moss Federal Courthouse, in Salt Lake Ciyt, as U.S. District Court Judge Clark Waddoups hears final oral arguments on constitutionality of HB497, Utah's immigration enforcement law passed by the Utah Legislature in 2011.
No matter how or why the undocumented population got here, most are here to stay. As a practical matter, this nation is not going to deport a group of people bigger than the entire state of Ohio; nor should it. The undocumented are our neighbors, our friends and our families - indeed, over 4.5 million U.S.-born children have undocumented parents. Most are hard-working, law-abiding people, and it would make no sense to kick them out.
So, what do we do? Some say the undocumented are law-breakers who should never be allowed a path to U.S. citizenship. Instead, they should be left in a legal netherworld - tolerated, but not welcomed as Americans. This view was expressed by some Republicans during a recent hearing of the House Judiciary Committee.
While this position is understandable, it is the wrong approach. The last thing we want is a huge population of permanent second-class "guest workers" - like the Turks in Germany or the Pakistanis in Dubai - feeling alienated without any chance of integrating into our society. On the contrary, we want people who live, work and raise families here to be patriotic Americans, enriching our melting pot and revitalizing our economy, as every generation of immigrants has done throughout our history. And we should have confidence that our institutions can absorb them, as they have time and again.
So, a path to citizenship is essential. Of course, we must kick out criminal aliens and other threats. And undocumented migrants must pay any taxes before they "get to the end of the line" for permanent residency status. This should not be a blanket "amnesty."
But the promise of citizenship must not be empty. Given current caps on legal immigration, the "line" for migrants from certain countries, such as Mexico, can be decades long. So, for a "path to citizenship" to have any meaning, we must also fix the legal immigration system, so that any such "path" is not illusory.
Which leads to the second question - how do we avoid the mistakes of the 1986 reform, which gave amnesty to 3 million, but in the process, encouraged a new wave of illegal immigration?
First, we must fix the legal immigration system so it reflects our country's economic need for more immigrants, and the desire of people to better their lives in the land of opportunity. As a result of our broken system, people who should be coming here legally are blocked from doing so, so many cross deserts to come illegally.
One obvious way to reduce illegal immigration, then, is to allow more to come legally - through fixing the country caps, reforming how we lure skilled migrants, and broadening the ability of businesses to hire workers temporarily.
Second, we must end the illegal hiring that fuels illegal immigration - a key failure of the 1986 law.
A secure system exists (E-Verify) to solve this, providing immediate verification of work authorization for employers. This system must be improved and made mandatory. In addition, we must impose severe penalties on employers who still break the law, and devote sufficient enforcement resources to carry this out.
Finally, we must continue our efforts to secure the border. Since 9/11, we have more than doubled the size of the Border Patrol, deployed new technology like UAVs and sensors along the borders, and built hundreds of miles of fences.
In addition, we have fostered unprecedented cooperation with Mexico to combat violent drug trafficking and secure the North American perimeter from terrorism. But more must be done.
At a minimum, we must not undermine ourselves though mindless budget cuts - such as those threatened by the "sequester," which may result in approximately $1.5 billion axed from border security and workplace enforcement.
Through these efforts - fixing legal immigration, ending illegal hiring and securing the border - we will be in a much better position than after 1986 to prevent a new wave of illegal immigration. We must focus on all three.
But this should not slow the legalization of the undocumented population, for it is unhealthy, inhumane and a security risk to have 11-12 million people living and raising families in the shadows of our society, working in an underground economy. It is time to welcome them out of the shadows, and begin the process of making them Americans.
Seth M.M. Stodder served in the Bush administration as Director of Policy and Planning for U.S. Customs and Border Protection.
Chairman Royce Op-ed in Orange County Register: Putin, others eye Internet control.
February 11th, 2013 - 1:21pm
Filed under International Security
By ED ROYCE / For the Register
History is replete with armed conquerors and brutal dictatorships. But great danger to liberty can also come from obscure corners. In fact, a new and high-stakes struggle has begun, one in which every American has a stake.
The continuing freedom of the Internet is threatened by a relatively unknown organization: the International Telecommunication Union, a branch of the United Nations. For many decades the ITU served a largely positive role in facilitating such routine tasks as setting technical standards for global telecommunications systems. But it has never had any role regarding the Internet.
However, at the most recent ITU conference in December, a coalition of governments, including many of the most repressive, hijacked the agenda and opened the door for the ITU to begin regulating the Internet. One of their aims is to control the Internet's content and any access to it by their citizens.
The U.S. representatives to the conference, along with our allies and most other developed countries, strongly resisted this grab for power and refused to sign the final conference document. But a majority of ITU members, led by China, Russia and developing countries, signed enthusiastically.
Soon the ITU will begin to exercise its new authority and slowly but steadily extend its reach. The camel's nose is now under the tent.
First, we must understand that this struggle will extend far into the future. Those seeking to bring the Internet under their control will never stop. As Russian President Vladimir Putin has said, their goal is to establish "international control over the Internet."
Fortunately, we have strength in numbers. Opposition to this new threat is almost universal among Internet-related companies, such as Google, Microsoft and Apple. A wide range of public and private organizations working in this area also oppose the ITU's expanded role.
Congress has taken notice. Last year, a resolution I strongly supported stressed the need to keep the Internet free from international regulation and maintain the enormously successful model by which it is governed, essentially laissez-faire. It passed both the House and Senate unanimously.
But there is much more to do. This year, legislation I am helping to develop will soon be introduced to help ensure that U.S. policy remains firmly opposed to this and future assaults on Internet freedom.
Congress can also help by shining a spotlight on those who seek to do their work in the shadows. That is why three subcommittees of the House Foreign Affairs Committee and the Energy and Commerce Committee came together this week in a rare joint hearing to highlight this grab for power and its dangers. Witnesses at the hearing encouraged us to quickly pass legislation opposing the international attack on Internet freedom.
The Internet, born in freedom, made possible the innovations that have transformed virtually every aspect of our lives, from the economy to the workplace and even how we interact with the world around us. If the creativity that produced these wonders is to continue, it will require that we defend that freedom.
The truth of the axiom, "The price of liberty is eternal vigilance," is being demonstrated once again. At stake is nothing less than the free flow of information and commerce - a cornerstone of our society.
Rep. Ed Royce, R-Fullerton, is chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee.
Battlefields And Boardrooms - Taking The Smartest From Both And Putting Them Together
January 24th, 2013 - 10:24am
By: Former Gen Next Guest Speaker Eric Basu
Taken from Forbes.com
Military intelligence – the most commonly offered oxymoron. But is it really an oxymoron? Although there are things that the military, like any large bureaucracy, does that could only be classified as, well, stupid, the people in our military are not. There are those with an ideological bent against anything military that love the stereotype of the mindless soldier who can only take orders and never think for themselves (a favorite staple in most hollywood flicks), but our military today is better trained and more carefully selected than ever before in history. The days of "join the Navy or go to jail" are long gone. Many enlisted personnel have college degrees (or have joined to earn the money to get one) and many senior enlisted and officers have both undergraduate and graduate degrees. Our senior leaders, in addition to 20+ years of experience in their field, have often received one or more post graduate degrees from the military postgraduate schools or Ivy league schools as part of their educational career path.
I had the honor of speaking at an event last week called "Battlefields and Boardrooms". It was formed by two organizations, Gen Next and Disruptive Thinkers. Gen Next is a group that describes its members as "accomplished individuals–executives, entrepreneurs, doctors, authors and diplomats–who represent a spectrum of industries, such as technology, energy, fashion, finance, entertainment, hospitality, real estate, and more."
What makes an entrepreneur? Eric Basu Eric Basu Contributor
How to run a startup like a SEAL Platoon Eric Basu Eric Basu Contributor
10 Rules From the Trenches to Help Build Your Business Eric Basu Eric Basu Contributor
Does A Military Background Help Or Hurt In StartUps? Eric Basu Eric Basu Contributor
Disruptive thinkers describes itself as a group that "influences global leadership by disrupting existing public policy conventions through crowdsourced solutions, capturing the best military and entrepreneurial perspectives. We act as a catalyst for societal and market-based innovation." Several of the founding members are F/A -18 Hornet pilots, one of the most selective and challenging jobs one can perform in the U.S. military.US Marine Corps (USMC) Captain (CAPT) Kevin Re...
Huh. Pretty big words and lofty ideas for military folks with more brawns than brain…or maybe the Hollywood stereotypes are not only outdated but just plain wrong.
I was very impressed with the people that I had the opportunity to meet. They were smart, creative, and enjoying the results of employing those skills in ways that gave them validation and success. The concept behind Battlefields and Boardrooms is to pair forward ("disruptive") thinking military personnel with successful entrepreneurs and successful business folk so that both parties can learn from the other. I think this is brilliant. As anyone who has read more than a couple of my blogs has inferred, I believe that there are critical skills that military personnel can bring to corporations that are not found as frequently, nor honed as well, as they are in the military. Leadership and teamwork are two of the traits that military personnel have developed and can bring to corporations that are just not selected and trained for as intensely in the corporate world.
On the other hand, the ability to look at an industry and find the new product that turns college kids into billionaires is not the type of skill that is typically selected for or heightened in the military, where rigorous discipline can make the difference between life and death. Does this mean it has no place in the military? Not at all. There was an experiment several years ago where business folks were put against junior military officers in computer based wargames. The business folk, amazingly, had a much higher "win" rate in these wargames once the rules were explained to them. Although there are likely several reasons for this, and the sampling size might not qualify this as a statistically significant result, I would offer that if you approach a game with the idea of how to work around the rules of the game in increase your odds of winning while your opponents are simply following the rules, your chances of winning will dramatically improve. This is not a new concept in warfare, Sun Tzu alluded to changing the battllefield so that the enemy is now fighting your game instead of his in "The Art of War." The concept applies equally well to a couple of software developers cutting out the middle men by shipping their cutting edge first person shooter video game directly to the consumer ("Doom") as it does to taking a land war and turning it into a guerilla war and destroying an enemy who has far superior numbers and weapons by forcing them to play your game. The trick is to look at a business opportunity or battlefield, with the idea of how the rules of the game can be changed in one's favor to create an insurmountable advantage. The person who can do that will succeed, more likely than not, in any situation.
JustLuxe Does Q&A w CEO of Gen Next
November 8th, 2012 - 1:02pm
Filed under Miscellaneous
The next generation of Americans and global citizens are sure to face challenges currently brooding across the world. So what is the current generation doing about it? Gen Next, an exclusive group of elite (and enlightened) executives across America are placing their bets on some issues likely to deflate or propel future leaders. In this interview, JustLuxe sits down with Michael Davidson, CEO of the future-focused non-profit organization.
JustLuxe: Gen Next is an organization for those "dedicated to learning about and becoming engaged with the most pressing challenges facing future generations." What are those pressing challenges?
Davidson: Each generation faces their own unique challenges. We want to be sure that (a) future generations don't experience challenges we punted on, and (b) they are prepared to realize their full potential. Parents understand this in a personal and visceral way with their kids. Americans have historically understood this, and it's part of what has made this nation great. But there are some alarming generational trends that suggest that tide could be slowing or reversing. For example, this generation is likely to be less educated than the generation prior. The US is sliding on educational, competitiveness, freedom, and other related ambitious indexes. In a globalized world, we are potentially less prepared.
Broadly, we group generational challenges in terms of economic opportunity, global security, and education-the bread and butter. More specifically, we include competitiveness, energy security, tax, trade, entitlement reform, high skilled immigration, education reform, countering violent extremism, and much more. Clearly, we're interested in rolling up our sleeves to tackle as much as possible while being as strategic and impactful as possible; after all, time is short. We are fortunate that our Members, and people like them, have risen to that challenge.
JustLuxe: Gen Next is an exclusive organization with limited membership across a few national chapters. Why? And why is such a limited number of Member's part of your strategy for making an impact on the challenges you mentioned before?
Davidson: Organizations are created because of a need or a demand beyond the scope of one person's abilities. History tells us that often a relatively small and organized group could literally change the world. Part of our mission is to find, select, develop, and fulfill the people who will help us make a difference for future generations.
As a practical matter, we can't be everything to everyone and Gen Next is not for everyone. At a more strategic level, we have to be focused and our culture and members help self-police us. Not everyone is an example of the success of a free enterprise system. Not everyone is forward thinking and curious. And not everyone is fun. Those variables dramatically influence how effective we are in the pursuit of our mission.
And most importantly, we believe in the talent and resources of our members. They're proven leaders in their own walk of life. Given the magnitude of challenges we face and that we must be focused, we need the best for us. In order to keep our Members engaged, we deliver a high level of service, access, and impact.
Diversity of talent and perspective also matters. We attract accomplished individuals who represent many walks of life. We have the Head of Google Ideas, the former U.S. Ambassador of War crime and Genocide, the swimwear industries leading house of fashion, manufacturers, technology innovators, and much more. Our Members, their passion and curiosity and vision for the future, are what make us impactful.
Like a business or a team, we are selective about our talent. We owe that to our Members, and we owe that to our mission. Each Member goes through a nomination, selection, and invitation process, and there is a minimum annual contribution of $10,000.
JustLuxe: Some of Gen Next's speakers are top government officials from both parties, as well as influential CEOs (such as of McDonalds and Fisker). What do speakers bring to the group and what's the impact, other than a discussion?
Davidson: Our programs could be viewed as thought provokers, conversation starters, educational resources, or project incubators. At a basic level, give our Members access to decision makers, thought leaders, and information like no one else can give. Few groups can claim to work through the biggest issues of today and tomorrow with Navy SEALs, C-Level executives at world-renowned multi-nationals, and the highest levels of political leadership.
Our programs tend to enrich the way our Members view an issue we present, so they're better informed among peers. Information from programs adds to the way a Member thinks through one of their own passions, so they're better decision makers. Programs also get a Member excited about a particular issue, and they discover a way to be impactful through a means they never thought imaginable.
Moreover, the Gen Next Foundation's project with Google Ideas and the Institute of Strategic Dialogue on countering violent extremism; our work on energy security; and our work on high skilled immigration (to name only three) all had their start in a GN program.
JustLuxe: Gen Next is not a political group per say, but your organization supports "policies that promote entrepreneurship and company growth - especially in cutting-edge industries - and supports free trade; energy security and independence, etc." How do members support such goals?
Davidson: I mentioned a little bit of our work above. But, in addition to our membership organization, we work philanthropically through the Gen Next Foundation, and we work politically through the Gen Equity PACs of Gen Next. The former is a 501c3 that shares a similar mission to Gen Next in terms of generational opportunity and leverages a vast network to seed and scale innovative, bold, and systemic solutions to economic, education, or global security challenges. Incidentally, Members who wanted to be more philanthropically active and use their unique skill sets created the foundation. The fact that it was inspired by our Members' passion, vision, and skill sets is pretty remarkable. Gen Equity PACs is a family of political committees that supports political leaders who demonstrate political courage, are forward thinkers, and prioritize our issues and share our values. Philanthropy and politics are two avenues to make a difference, so we've set ourselves up to leverage both.
Against Violent Extremism is one of our most recent philanthropic projects. Gen Next Foundation and GN Members are collaborating with Google Ideas and the Institute for Strategic Dialogue in The Against Violent Extremism (AVE) Network, a unique and powerful new global force in the ongoing struggle to tackle violent extremism-Islamism, street gangs, right wing nationalism, and more. Former violent extremists and survivors of violent extremism are empowered to work together to counter extremist narratives and prevent the recruitment of 'at-risk' youth. But we don't just connect formers and survivors with each other; we connect them with private sector leaders who can accelerate the success of their efforts with practical resources and expertise. This is the first-ever online tool that is working towards creating systemic change leveraging technology to connect people working to keep us safer. You can visit the site here.
GN Members have started to take action.GN Member Micha Mikailian, using his eBoost team and resources, has made a generous in-kind donation of services designed to support formers and survivors as social entrepreneurs. GN Member Aaron Bare, after hearing about the need for social media integration and nonprofit start- up incubation, gathered his team at BuzzMouth and is also donating six figure in-kind support for a different former or survivor each quarter. GN Member Chris Relth, being the owner of an IT exec search firm, is developing a curriculum to help coach former gang members on getting back into the work force, developing interview skills, and resume building. Each of those Members will tell you that they never thought they'd be impactful or philanthropic in this way. And many other Members have stepped up to participate in this bold form of philanthropy.
JustLuxe: In terms of education, Gen Next's goals vast, ranging from prioritizing teacher effectiveness to closing the education gap between demographics. Again, how do your members support such national issues?
Davidson: The short answer is that we leverage our network, support political leaders who prioritize and lead on the issues, and we work with the Gen Next Foundation. The longer answer could be gleaned.
JustLuxe: With an organization so focused on the next generation, what's the plan for Gen Next in 2013, goal wise?
Davidson: Where to begin! We're an ambitious bunch, but I'll keep it simple. We plan to expand into New York City, Las Vegas, and other major metropolitan markets throughout the US. Currently we have full time operations in Los Angeles, Orange County, San Diego, Seattle, Scottsdale, and we have Members across the country. We obviously want to expand that footprint.
But, what does that mean? It means a lot of things but two basic ones are that we'll have a network of individuals who don't just want success; they want to make a difference, and they're investing the time and resources to make themselves better educated and better leaders on these issues. There are organizations that are comprised of networks of individuals who are similar to our members on paper. Our Members are set apart by a shared purpose. We intend demonstrate that such a network can exist and will make a difference. For any individual who qualifies for Gen Next and wants to do and be better, we are the place to be.
On top of that, we want to improve the way GN has an impact and delivers an unparalleled experience for our Members in the context of our mission. Therefore, we must put on more great programs, engage our Members, and honor our mission with long-term thinking and leadership.
PATRICK WADE: Prop. 32 prevents unions from buying votes in Legislature
November 1st, 2012 - 11:19am
Filed under Economy
Taken from the Bakersfield Calfornian
Proposition 32, the Stop Special Interests Initiative, has garnered much attention from both corporations and unions. This initiative will prohibit unions and corporations from contributing to local and state candidates directly, much like what is already in place at the federal level. This proposition will also prohibit companies who contract with local governments from contributing to candidate campaigns. Lastly, Prop. 32 will ban the political use of money deducted from paychecks by unions or corporations.
This initiative will prohibit companies who contract with local governments from contributing to candidate campaigns. This seems like a fair deal. If unions cannot buy votes from those who negotiate their contracts, then companies who do business with the county should not be able to buy votes either. This is a fair compromise for the unions, so that they are not the only ones being affected by this proposition.
Prop. 32 will prohibit unions and corporations from contributing to local and state candidates directly. This is something that has already been in place for years at the federal level. Federal candidates are prohibited from taking "dirty money," or money that comes from corporations as well as unions. Unbelievably, state and local candidates are currently allowed to accept dirty money for their campaigns.
By accepting dirty money, the campaign process in California has inevitably become just as dirty. Too much money is given to candidates by various types of special interests, silencing the voice of the common voter. This initiative is a step toward better government, only allowing campaign contributions to be "clean," or from individuals.
We need more of these types of good government initiatives in order to take back California, which has been poisoned by special interests. Prop. 32 will level the playing field for those citizens who currently feel disenfranchised by California's corrupt system. Under collective bargaining, unions must negotiate their contracts with the elected officials. Therefore, you have elected officials on one side of the bargaining table, and unions on the other. But, these negotiations are skewed when the unions have paid for the political campaigns of the elected officials. As it stands now, the balance of power is weighted significantly to benefit these special interests. This is simply not fair to the general public. Elected officials are to represent the taxpayer, their constituents, and not just the unions who paid for them to be in office.
Finally, Prop. 32 will ban the political use of money deducted from paychecks by unions or corporations. This is fair for the employee as it gives individuals more control of where their money goes. There are countless employees that are members of a union (many of whom do not have the option to not be in a union) who vote for one candidate, while their union has monetarily supported the opposing candidate. The unions are using that employee's union dues, which come directly out of his paycheck, to contribute to a candidate whom the employee does not support. Why is that employee's money going to one candidate while his vote is going to another?
Thus far, more than $50 million has been poured into either supporting or defeating this campaign. Union members, in their letters to the editor, have stated on multiple occasions that corporations have poured ungodly amounts of money into this campaign. But what they fail to mention is that almost $40 million of the $50 million total comes from unions who oppose Prop. 32. Unions have also convinced their members that Prop. 32 will strip away collective bargaining rights. This is an outright lie. This measure will not take away collective bargaining rights, which are guaranteed by the Constitution. This will, however, prohibit unions from buying the votes that sit on the other side of that table, as they have done for decades.
Prop. 32 is a major step in the effort to curb special interests in the state of California. Look at the facts: This proposition will bring transparency and limit special interests that have garnered too much power. We, as voters, need to learn the facts and not be swayed by pressure groups. Prop. 32 is common-sense legislation that will level the playing field and bring about change to fix California's broken political system.
Patrick Wade is a local entrepreneur, fifth-generation Bakersfield resident and co-founder of Kern Citizens for Sustainable Government.
AVE; Our Work Highlisghted in Wired
October 11th, 2012 - 3:44pm
Filed under International Security
Wired Magazine delves into one of the major generational security challenges we face today: countering violent extremism. Three GN Members and two GN projects were included in the feature. Violent extremism as understood today is a very complex, expensive, relatively new phenomena, and the US government and allies are wrestling with how exactly to measure success. No important cause is easy and we are proud to be on the good side of such a necessary struggle. We hope you are too, without the support and participation of our Members, we would not be able to play such an integral role on CVE.Below please find some excerpts from the article.
Muslim Rappers, 'Google Ideas': Inside the Flawed U.S. Campaign to Fight Militant Memes
Published October 9 2012 - Wired Magazine - BySpencer Ackerman and Noah Shachtman
During those 11 years, the U.S. has become exceptional at hunting and killing Islamic extremists. But it still does not know how to undercut the basic appeal of Islamic extremism. Until it does, all the drone strikes and commando raids can do is keep terrorist attacks at bay. So experts inside and outside the government are working on an inchoate effort to supplement counterterrorism called CVE, for Countering Violent Extremism. It seeks a durable end to al-Qaida, through dissuading people from becoming terrorists in the first place.
"With CVE, the spectrum starts at prevention, with the regular Joe on the street," explains Humera Khan, who runs a number of such prophylactic programs and who spoke at the Sept. 12 event. "The idea is to increase the barriers to entry, so that he never goes down that radical path."
The idea, its advocates explain, is that the U.S. government can't actually provide a resolution to the problem of Muslim extremism; Muslims communities themselves, with the indirect support of the government, have to do that. Much of the energy behind CVE work comes from outside government - these days, from an initiative spearheaded by Google.
In late June 2011, Google's in-house think tank, GoogleIdeas, convened a set of meetings in Ireland called the Summit Against Violent Extremism. The conference was an extension of an initiative that GoogleIdeas founder Jared Cohen had in his previous life at the State Department: unite former extremists from all over the world with victims of terrorism; and connect them all to people with juice in the business, new media and philanthropic communities.
But since it ended, GoogleIdeas has built a collaboration with a philanthropic collective called the Gen Next Foundation, a collection of young business executives that GoogleIdeas invited to the conference. Along with a London think tank, the Institute for Strategic Dialogue, the partnership seeks build a global movement of "Formers," a term for people who broke from the terrorist groups or gangs they used to belong to. The theory is that Formers are the most credible, viable voices to convince at-risk youth not to be about that life.
That movement, still in its infancy, resembles a counter-gang program applied to the problem of terrorism, and on a global scale. The Formers play the role of community activists, starting organizations like London's Quilliam Foundation, a de-radicalization think tank founded by Noman Benotman, a Libyan ex-jihadist.
Bare, a member of the network, is involved in creating a digital marketing campaign for a forthcoming video created by the Muslim Public Affairs Council. The video, which isn't public yet, promotes the Syrian filmmaker Moustapha Akkad, who helped produce the Halloween franchise as well as Hollywood films that showed Islam in a positive light, like 1977′s The Message with Anthony Quinn. Akkad was killed in a 2005 Jordan bombing - which the video uses to underscore al-Qaida's tendency to kill Muslims. That was a message the government spread when it released selected musings of Osama bin Laden found during the raid that killed him.
Juan Zarate, now with the Center for Strategic and International Studies, looks at whether there are "more groups forming, more conferences," indicating a grassroots movement against extremism, and how extremist messaging shifts in response. Frenett says "the success metric is to change and influence the dialog."
An adviser to the U.S. military is more blunt. When asked how to measure CVE, he answered, under condition of anonymity: "You don't, immediately." Any victories will take decades to materialize. "If we're really playing the long game, we have to play long."
"Part of challenge here was, how do you foment a grassroots countermovement to al-Qaida?" Zarate remembers. "How do you enlist and empower credible voices?"
Gen Next Gets Ink in Phoenix Business Journal
September 28th, 2012 - 12:41pm
Filed under International Security
Business Development Group Works to Help Former neo-Nazis, radical Islamists
by Mike Sunnucks Phoenix Business Journal Published: Thursday, September 27, 2012 | 2:21pm PDT
A California business development and entrepreneur network with a growing chapter in Phoenix is partnering with Google Inc. to help former white supremacists, neo-Nazis, Jihadists, anarchists and other radicals into mainstream society and find jobs.
Newport Beach, Calif.-based Gen Next and Google will also help victims of extremist violence and terrorist attacks with jobs, careers and business investments.
Gen Next CEO Michael Davidson was in Phoenix earlier this week talking about the program at an event on the federal debt at the Arizona Chamber of Commerce & Industry.
Gen Next is a business development group for technology and other entrepreneurs, but it is also looks to engage its members and business start-ups with political and economic causes.
The group also has chapters in Los Angeles, Seattle, San Diego and Orange County, Calif.
The Southern Poverty Law Center lists more than 1,000 hate and extremist groups in the U.S. as of 2011.
That includes 17 in Arizona, 84 in California, four in Utah, 12 in Nevada, 15 in Colorado and four in New Mexico.
SPLC lists polygamist Mormons in Colorado City, the Nation of Islam in Phoenix and various skinhead and anti-immigrant groups among the extremists in Arizona.
Understanding Entitlement Reform
September 13th, 2012 - 11:56am
By: Bailey Cuzner, Director of Misson Programs
When trying to understand our great country's biggest threat to economic growth, one must explore the Everest that is Entitlements. Since not all of us are as well-versed in political mumbo jumbo, I thought I'd outline the issue.
The most basic and yet largest of Entitlements include Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security. This tough triad is lumped together under the moniker of "entitlements" because they are spent with no regard to cost. Regardless of a budget (should one exist), Entitlements are paid for no matter what.
One of the reasons that this is so dangerous is that this "mandatory spending" is expected to increase due to structural issues in the programs and demographic changes. In 2011 total government unfunded liabilities were up to $65 trillion. Unfunded social insurance programs of Medicare and Social Security make up $46 trillion according to David Walker, former Comptroller General. The updated numbers are in this: http://keepingamericagreat.org/educate-yourself/learn-the-facts/trifold/.
So, if the problem is Entitlements, then the solution would be Entitlement Reform. Reform could take many shapes, but essentially would be introducing legislation that updates the program to current demographics.
Read the rest of her article here.
Online Tracker Follows Syria's Defections
August 10th, 2012 - 2:41pm
Filed under International Security
Online Tracker Follows Syria's Defections
Movements.org, an organization that three Gen Next members started and Gen Next supports, helped to develop an online tracker that follows the defections of Syrian senior military officials (generals and colonels), members of parliament, and diplomatic officials.
Gen Next Supports Comeback America Initiative: $10 M A Minute Bus Tour
July 31st, 2012 - 6:03pm
Filed under Economy
Putting our federal finances in order is one of the most critical challenges facing our nation, for both today and tomorrow. No matter what progress we make to improve economic growth and generate jobs, our nation's current fiscal path puts our collective future severely at risk: jobs, education, health care, a secure retirement, infrastructure, national security, mortgage rates, and the success or failure of thousands of businesses. A U.S. debt crisis could destroy all that we hold dear. And yet many of our politicians have been pressing and pandering for partisan or ideological solutions that have resulted in a stalemate in Washington. We need timely and sensible solutions that presently support our nation and all future generations. We need leadership - and we need it now. The 2012 elections provide an excellent opportunity for voters to challenge our leaders to actually lead. If we put fiscal sanity over partisan politics, our country can avoid catastrophe. We support the $10 Million a Minute Tour and its mission to educate voters about fact-based, non-partisan solutions to restore fiscal sanity.
Former Elected and Public Officials
Hon. David Abshire - CSPC CEO
Admiral Thad Allen - USCG Retired
Hon. Erskine Bowles - Former Chief of Staff to the President
Former Sen. Bill Brock - Former RNC Chair
General Mike Carns - USAF Retired
Former Rep. Tom Coleman
Former Sen. Pete Domenici
Former Rep. Harold Ford, Jr.
Hon. Alan Greenspan - Former Chairman of the Federal Reserve
Former Sen. Judd Gregg
Former Sen. Bob Kerrey
Former Sen. George LeMieux
Former Sen. Mel Martinez - Former RNC Chair
General Montgomery Meigs - BENS CEO, USA Retired
Former Sen. Sam Nunn
Hon. Paul O'Neill - Former Treasury Secretary
Former Gov. Ed Rendell - Former DNC Chair
Former Gov. Tom Ridge
Hon. Alice Rivlin - Former OMB/CBO Director
Former Gov. Roy Romer - Former DNC Chair
Former Sen. Alan Simpson
Hon. Paul Volcker - Former Chairman of the Federal Reserve
Business and Organization Leaders
Ernie Almonte - Former Chairman of the AICPA
Norm Augustine - Former Lockheed-Martin CEO
Bob Bixby - ED of the Concord Coalition
Stuart Butler - EVP of The Heritage Foundation
Mike Cook - Former Deloitte CEO
Mike Critelli - Former Pitney-Bowes CEO
Steven Crystal - Crystal Foundation CEO
Michael Davidson - Gen Next CEO
Carly Fiorina - Former CEO of Hewlett Packard
Hon. John Hamre - CSIS CEO
Marie Hollein - FEI CEO
Nancy Jacobson - No Labels CEO
Former Gov. Frank Keating - American Bankers Association CEO
Maya MacGuineas - CFRB CEO
Mike Maxsenti - Co-Founder of Rebellious Truths
Barry Melancon - AICPA CEO
Bill Novelli - Former AARP CEO
Hon. Peter G. Peterson - PGPF CEO
Rob Rodriguez - First Pacific Investors CEO
Herb Shear - GENCO CEO
David Beaumont Smith - Executive Director of the National Conference on Citizenship
Andy Stern - Former SEIU CEO
Paula Van Ness - Connecticut Community Fund CEO
Rev. Jim Wallis - CEO of Sojourners
Josh Weston - Former ADP CEO
Mort Zuckerman - Boston Properties CEO
Morgan Fairchild - Actress and Activist
H. Ross Perot, Sr. - Former presidential candidate
Taken from:KeepingAmericaGreat.org
Google Ideas: Joining the Fight Against Drug Cartels and Other Illicit Networks
July 17th, 2012 - 10:23am
Filed under International Security
By: GN Member Jared Cohen, Head of Google Ideas
Violent illicit networks represent a trillion-dollar problem that affects every society in the world and claims hundreds of thousands of lives each year. For example, more than 50,000 people have died in the past five years as a result of the ongoing war in Mexico between rival drug cartels. And although data on this subject is scarce and often unreliable, in 2003 the UN estimated the value of the illicit drug market to be nearly $320 billion, greater than the gross domestic product of 88 percent of countries in the world—and that was almost 10 years ago. It's clear that illicit networks—particularly those that are violent and coercive like drug smugglers, arms dealers and human traffickers—have a devastating human and financial impact on every nation.
We think Google can help. Eighteen months ago we launched Google Ideas with the belief that Google is in the unique position to explore the role that technology can play in tackling some of the toughest human challenges in the world. Our first area of focus was counter-radicalization; last year we convened the Summit Against Violent Extremism with former gang members, right-wing extremists, jihadists and militants as well as survivors of violent extremism. Among the many outcomes of the summit was a platform that we established as a one-stop shop for tackling violent extremism through formers and survivors.
Recently, we've expanded our focus to include violent illicit networks such as narco-trafficking, human trafficking, organ harvesting and arms dealing. We believe that technology has the power to expose and dismantle global criminal networks, which depend on secrecy and discretion in order to function. And for the past few months, we've been working with people fighting on the front line to gain a better understanding of what drives these networks and how they function.
This week, in partnership with the Council on Foreign Relations and the Tribeca Film Festival, we're convening Illicit Networks: Forces in Opposition (or the INFO summit) in Los Angeles, Calif. Too often illicit networks are seen only in the silos of those who study them. This summit aims to break down those silos by bringing together a full-range of stakeholders, from survivors of organ trafficking, sex trafficking and forced labor to government officials, dozens of engineers, tech leaders and product managers from Google and beyond. Through the summit, which lasts until Wednesday, we hope to discover ways that technology can be used to expose and disrupt these networks as a whole—and to put some of these ideas into practice.
GN Members To Help Online Activists in Authoritarian Countries
June 12th, 2012 - 10:29am
Filed under International Security
Published in the New York Times
By: Scott Shane
Published: June 11, 2012
WASHINGTON — From Egyptian bloggers to Russian Twitterati, activists around the world have turned the Internet into a tool for political change, even as governments have learned its usefulness for surveillance.
Now two small American human rights groups, one co-founded by a 30-year-old State Department official turned Google executive and one by an 89-year-old veteran activist who once championed Soviet dissidents, are joining forces to support online activists in authoritarian countries. Google has no direct involvement in the venture, but intends to donate money, with the amount still being discussed, according to a company official who spoke on the condition of anonymity.
The merger involves Movements.org, co-founded in 2008 by Jared Cohen, now the director of Google Ideas, the company's research arm, and Advancing Human Rights, created two years ago by Robert L. Bernstein, a retired publishing executive who started Human Rights Watch in 1978. Their age difference gives the combination an intergenerational character that both men said added to its appeal.
"I'm learning a lot," Mr. Bernstein said in an interview. "My grandkids work these machines like crazy, and I'm catching on."
Mr. Bernstein said that in more than three decades as a rights advocate, "What I've discovered is that it's difficult to lecture people in other countries. So what you can do is free up speech." In the merged organization, which will retain the name Advancing Human Rights, he said, "We will be trying to say to people in closed societies that we will do everything we can to give you a voice."
Mr. Cohen, a State Department official when he helped start Movements.org, said his group decided to look for a partner and reviewed many rights organizations before approaching Advancing Human Rights. Besides Mr. Bernstein's decades of experience, Mr. Cohen said, the group was impressed by the activists abroad who had been connected by one of its programs, CyberDissidents.org, run by David Keyes, 28. An advocate and a pioneer in online activism, Mr. Keyes is also executive director of Advancing Human Rights.
"David is a creative young guy with a phenomenal network of cyberactivists in the Middle East and North Africa," Mr. Cohen said. "The combination of Bob and David was irresistible."
In addition to providing connections, technical advice and other support to dissidents abroad, Advancing Human Rights intends to publish their work in a series of e-books, as Mr. Bernstein, the retired chairman of Random House, once published the work of the physicist Andrei Sakharov and other Soviet dissidents.
Apart from its online orientation, Advancing Human Rights is distinguished by its embrace of a disputed philosophy in the human rights world: it will focus exclusively on authoritarian countries.
In 2009, Mr. Bernstein broke publicly with Human Rights Watch, where he was chairman for 20 years, over what he had come to believe was its excessive attention to the misdeeds of Israel. More broadly, he said, he thought the group devoted too much energy on "open societies" like Israel and the United States, rather than on dictatorships.
"Open societies are far from perfect, but they have a lot of institutions other than human rights groups working on making things better," he said. He argued in a 2009 Op-Ed article in The New York Times that Human Rights Watch should concentrate on the most repressive countries. The organization's leaders considered his argument and rejected it, saying it would be "a violation of our core principle that human rights are universal" to ignore problems in Israel or the United States.
In 2008, Mr. Cohen was serving as an aide to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice when American officials learned that a protest involving millions of Colombians against kidnappings by a rebel group, the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, or FARC, had been organized in part via Facebook.
On the State Department's policy staff, Mr. Cohen said, he became "the go-to person on tech stuff just because I was young." He found that few American embassies were tracking online activists around the world, and he helped to start an annual summit of the activists. The summits gave rise to Movements.org and have linked older, traditional dissidents with younger masters of the Web.
In a sense, that is what is happening with Advancing Human Rights, which has raised about $2 million with an initial budget goal of about $3 million a year, Mr. Bernstein said.
Advancing Human Rights is already getting a steady stream of requests for help. In recent days, Mr. Keyes said, he received a call via Skype from a Saudi woman who fears that she could become a victim of an honor killing by her family.
"I'll get an e-mail every other day from activists in Syria or Saudi Arabia or somewhere else," Mr. Keyes said. They are looking for help reaching the international news media, contacting American officials, learning about asylum laws or simply linking up with like-minded activists, he said.
"These guys have jobs and families and limited time and resources," he said. "I think we can help thousands of people."
C-SPAN Airs Gen Next Seattle Program with Mark Anderson, CEO of Strategic News Service
May 22nd, 2012 - 3:16pm
Filed under Education
C-SPAN recently aired the Gen Next Seattle Program with Mark Anderson, CEO of Strategic News Service. This was the first time Gen Next has allowed cameras access to our programs and with that, 100 million American homes were able to view the program through C-SPAN.
Anderson discussed U.S. and Western-nation competitiveness with Asia. He asserted that free-trade and "inventing" economies of the U.S., the United Kingdom, and continental Europe were losing a war with the mercantile systems of the Pacific Rim. He advised Western nations to become inventors again and give preferential treatment to countries that protect intellectual property.
We invite you to watch the video.
Prop 29
May 21st, 2012 - 4:39pm
Filed under Economy
Newspapers all over the state have raised the same concerns about Prop. 29. The Orange County Register, Modesto Bee, Riverside Press Enterprise, Ventura County Star, and most shockingly, the Los Angeles Times, have all come out against Prop. 29 in recent weeks.
The LA Times summarized the measure bysaying, "Proposition 29 is well intentioned, but it just doesn't make sense for the state to getinto the medical research business to the tune of half a billion dollars a year when it has so many other important unmet needs." We're laying off teachers, grappling with record unemployment and facing insurmountable debt - now $16 billion, yet none of this new revenue could be used to alleviate these problems.
The Orange County Register puts Prop. 29 into perspective by asking, "Who could favor exempting hundreds of millions a year from going to public schools?" But that's not all. Prop. 29 creates an unaccountable government bureaucracy that can use this new revenue however it wants, setting up a scenario for potential taxpayer waste and abuse. The Modesto Bee wrote, "There would be an annual audit of the agency, but no clear way for the state - the Legislature, the governor or anyone - to fix flaws or problems that became evident." And as revenue decreases over time because of the drop in cigarette sales, then what? It won't be long before there's a new initiative on the ballot asking for more money. Prop. 29 digs California deeper into a hole it already can't get out of.
Voters need to take heed and vote NO on Prop. 29.
GNF Partners with Google Ideas and Institute for Strategic Dialogue in Cutting Edge Venture
April 25th, 2012 - 9:26am
Filed under International Security
For the first time ever, former violent extremists ("formers"), survivors of violent extremism, NGOs, government, and private sector leaders will be united in a virtual global community to share ideas, foster new collaborations, and share solutions to prevent violent extremism among at-risk youth. Against Violent Extremism (AVE) is an innovative philanthropic approach to one of our greatest community and global security threats. With the help of the Gen Next Foundation (GNF), this venture will launch publicly today at Google's New York office.
The AVE network was envisioned by GN Member Jared Cohen and seeded in the summer of 2011 at the Summit Against Violent Extremism (SAVE) in Dublin, Ireland, which was hosted by Google Ideas, the Tribeca Film Festival, and the Council on Foreign Relations and attended by a delegation of Gen Next Members. The summit proved that former perpetrators and survivors of violent extremism are powerful influencers in turning potential and existing extremists away from a violent path. Here is a moving video from the summit.
The Gen Next Foundation and Members of Gen Next will work with Google Ideas, the Institute for Strategic Dialogue (ISD), and other partners to build a major global community of stakeholders--with formers at the forefront--empowered with a web platform that facilitates connections and delivers online resources to help match project needs with the means to execute.
The project is an example of what can be achieved when a dynamic collaboration applies private sector methodologies, human capital, and specific expertise to a problem normally handled by governments.
Many Gen Next Members have been inspired and are already providing resources for network users. In the first week of the launch Aaron Bare's company Buzz Mouth and Micha Mikailian's company eBoost Consulting are offering substantial in-kind support for projects and formers in the AVE network. We welcome Members to join the network at AgainstViolentExtremism.org and identify ways to be part of this innovation solution. A wide array of support services are needed, including, but not limited to: online advertising, digital strategy, SEO, business coaching, legal, and more. Other Members have already pledged major support, and we'll continue to announce Member involvement in and progress of this venture.
Gen Next Member, Pierre-Richard Prosper, Retained to Help American Sentenced to Death in Iran
January 11th, 2012 - 3:29pm
Filed under International Security
Pierre-Richard Prosper, a Gen Next Member and prominent international lawyer, has been called as the defense for Amir Hekmati, an Iranian-American U.S. citizen and decorated former marine. Hekmati has been sentenced to death by Iran's Revolutionary Court. He was charged with spying for the Central Intelligence Agency during a visit to Iran in September.
Iran has denied the Swiss access to Hekmati despite U.S. demands for his release. The situation comes in the midst of increasing tensions between Tehran and Washington.
Prosper, the Former U.S. Ambassador-At-Large for War Crimes and Genocide, also negotiated the release of Reza Taghavi, after being imprisoned Tehran. Taghavi was never formally charged for a crime.
To read more about the story visit Wall Street Journal.
Gen Next Taps Power of Private Sector Brain Trust to Tackle Public Sector Problems
July 28th, 2011 - 1:20pm
Filed under Think About It....
Posted by Bryan Myrick, NW Daily Marker:
Though some political and cultural commentators bemoan what they see as reluctance within Generations X and Y to pick up the leadership chain that is each age's responsibility, there is a group working diligently to accelerate the process of recruiting individuals to affect real change on crucial issues facing future generations.
Gen Next - with operations in Seattle, San Diego, Los Angeles, Orange County, and Arizona and roughly 150 members nationwide - is an invitation-only nonpartisan organization started in 2008. By focusing on the widescreen issues of education, economics, and global security, Gen Next serves a vital function for a select group of entrepreneurs who are compelled to understand, engage and get involved in the process of finding solutions to big picture problems.
In an interview last week in Seattle, Gen Next CEO Michael Davidson described to me his organization's role as that of both an educator and a facilitator for its members.
"The busiest people are the people that you need engaged in these types of issues," Davidson said. "They need to have an intellectual framework for their own success, whether it be how they're going to raise their kids, how they influence their networks, how they run their companies... the way they lead."
One way Gen Next helps provide that intellectual foundation is by creating exclusive programs with first-tier resources and information. (Former U.S. Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice, CBS news correspondent Bob Schieffer, and former defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld are among those who have presented to Gen Next members.)
"We did 100 programs last year and we expose the members to these ideas, people, and decision-makers in a way that expands their mind, their access and their view of how they can be influential," Davidson said.
Maximizing the impact Gen Next can have requires finding a select type of individual, according to Davidson, one who has achieved a high measure of personal success (the $10,000 annual membership ante is its own evidence of that qualification), has an intellectually curious and forward-thinking nature, has a passionate spirit, and has a capacity to have fun (in Gen Next, the hard work put in toward big picture goals requires an esprit de corps).
A Gen Next member is one who, in the opinion of Davidson, will use the tools knowledge and understanding to forge pathways with their influence and create new solutions.
"You can't just be an intellectual and sit on the sidelines," Davidson said.
Gen Next regional director Chris Reigelsperger echoed the sentiment. "When you identify and take a remarkable person, give them the tools, the information and the network... they're going to do some pretty incredible things," Reigelsperger said.
Based on output from recent work of members globally and in Washington State, the Gen Next model for high-impact activism is functioning as intended.
Gen Next members were instrumental in the effort to reeducate Washington State voters about last year's state income tax proposal and the negative effect such a tax would have on the state economy. The Defeat 1098 campaign drew heavily upon the talent pool represented within Gen Next's Seattle membership.
Last month, Gen Next was involved in the Summit Against Violent Extremism in Dublin, Ireland, an event organized by Gen Next member and Google Ideas director Jared Cohen to begin solving the puzzle of how to unring the bell that is calling so many youth around the world to a life of violence. From The Washington Post:
Technology giant Google, having conquered the Internet and the world around it, is taking on a new challenge: violent extremism.
The company, through its eight-month-old think tank, Google Ideas, is paying for 80 former Muslim extremists, neo-Nazis, U.S. gang members and other former radicals to gather in Dublin this weekend to explore how technology can play a role in de-radicalization efforts around the globe.
The "formers," as they have been dubbed by Google, will be surrounded by 120 thinkers, activists, philanthropists and business leaders. The goal is to dissect the question of what draws some people, especially young people, to extremist movements and why some of them leave.
At least in terms of binding ex-extremists to a common cause, the effort appears to have produced results. In the wake of the horrific attacks in Oslo, Norway that left 93 dead, "The Formers" issued a joint statement condemning the acts regardless of the ideological or political motivation of the assailant.
Gen Next is also following through to finance a project conceived at the Dublin summit, part of a broader effort with Home Box Office and Tribeca Films to produce a series of public services announcements weaving together the stories of former extremists. Gen Next members are also being enlisted in the digital strategy to complement the effort.
In Washington State's near future, Gen Next is eyeing education as an area in which ambitious leadership is needed. Taking action to improve the situation for future generations is a consistent motivation for Gen Nexters.
Smartsheet.com founder Brent Frei, a Seattle member for the past year and a half, sees involvement in Gen Next as a way to fight for his childrens' future in a way that maximizes leverage of his scarce spare time.
"I have four small children now," Frei said in a telephone interview. "I desperately want them to grow up in a better world. It's a pretty good world, but I want it to be better. To do that I need to be very proactive about making a positive difference."
With so many options available for becoming engaged in solutions, Frei chose to accept the invitation to join Gen Next. "It was clear to me that Gen Next has a structure, but more importantly it has the right kind of people to amplify my influence," Frei said.
Gen Next looks to add as many as 30 new individuals to it Seattle membership, and also has goals to grow in San Diego and Arizona before expanding into the rest of the United States.
Google Ideas de-radicalization departs from Dublin: GNF Gives Award at Summit
June 30th, 2011 - 5:37pm
Filed under International Security
By: Allen McDuffee
After more than a dozen panels and testimonials and many hours of working groups at the Google Ideas Summit Against Violent Extremism, several former extremists and survivors will attempt to recap the four days in a presentation Thursday to a couple hundred Google employees at their Dublin offices. The presentation is meant to summarize the events of the conference, what they've learned, what their ideas are and what action they are taking going forward
That's a tall order, after bringing together 80 former extremists and survivors and another 120 representatives from the academic, non-profit, business and government worlds.
"I'm still trying to digest what happened on the first day," said Google Ideas director Jared Cohen.
In what may have been the most tearful segment, former State Department Director of Policy Planning Anne-Marie Slaughter led a "mother-to-mother" talk with Aicha el-Wafa, whose son, Zacarias Moussaoui, is the "20th hijacker" of the 9/11 attacks.
El-Wafa, who was forced to marry at 14 and withstood her own share of hardships, saying, "Sadly I was born in a country where a woman is a woman, a second-class citizen." It was a condition that transferred even when the family moved to France.
Eventually, el-Wafa found housing, left her abusive husband and worked as a seamstress, doing the best she could to support herself and the four children, while not realizing her son was becoming radicalized.
"I never really looked further. I wish I had," el-Wafa told the audience. "I'm cross with myself. I didn't know."
Gill Hicks, who lost her legs below the knee in the London July 7, 2005 bombings, moderated a panel with a former neo-Nazi, a former gangster and a former Muslim extremist.
Former Irish extremists sat on a panel with IRA survivors. And former President of Colombia, Alvaro Uribe Valez, led a panel that included a former member of FARC.
At one point during the conference, Google Executive Chairman Eric Schmidt showed his frustration at questions about why the company and its think tank were taking on de-radicalization, a topic usually left to governments and non-profits.
Schmidt told a reporter he was becoming impatient with the questions, and said the company and Google Ideas were acting "simply as a convener."
Cohen had been assured that this kind of gathering was impossible, and that if he could bring such a group together, the outcome would not be fruitful.
But Cohen said that all of his expectations were met. "I honestly can't think of a single thing that I wanted out of this conference that didn't happen," said Cohen, adding, "In fact, there are things that happened here I didn't even know I was looking for."
More tangibly is a YouTube channel for former extremists and a website that will act as curation points for organizations and individuals in the de-radicalization field. Until now, there was very little coordination. Officials from some organizations located in the same city had never met until the Dublin summit.
One outcome is certain: Google Ideas is not getting in the grant-giving business. "From the beginning, we've consistently stood firm on not wanting to be in funding projects," said Cohen.
Cohen said that they were not willing to risk the relationships they worked hard to build by having them compete for funding under Google's auspices. But that doesn't mean Google Ideas won't be pitching other foundations and companies to fill that void.
In breakout sessions, teams of 10 or 12 formers, survivors and other stakeholders developed tangible ideas, including films, a WikiKoran and speaking tours. At the end of the conference, participants voted on the ideas and the top three were awarded financial awards from Edelman public relations, e Boost and Gen Next.
The Edelman 'Catalyst' Award provides for up to $25,000 of pro bono services; the Boost Positive Activism Award provides for up to $20,000 of digital consulting services and the Gen Next 'Innovation & Impact' Award provides $15,000 for the implementation of the winning idea.
Jane Rosenthal of the Tribeca Film Festival, a partner in the conference, said she's working with HBO to create a documentary on de-radicalization. "I'm walking away with more compelling and courageous stories than I ever could have imagined," said Rosenthal.
The conference was also a defining moment for Google Ideas. The conference, which was the think tank's first endeavor, is helping the organization refine its mission and structure.
"We didn't come into this with a perfectly defined organizational structure and defined roles for each position," said Cohen. And it's not something that is likely to change at Google Ideas.
"We just might be the ones to break the mold on the way think tanks think of themselves," he said. By Allen McDuffee
After more than a dozen panels and testimonials and many hours of working groups at the Google Ideas Summit Against Violent Extremism, several former extremists and survivors will attempt to recap the four days in a presentation Thursday to a couple hundred Google employees at their Dublin offices. The presentation is meant to summarize the events of the conference, what they've learned, what their ideas are and what action they are taking going forward.
That's a tall order, after bringing together 80 former extremists and survivors and another 120 representatives from the academic, non-profit, business and government worlds.
"I'm still trying to digest what happened on the first day," said Google Ideas director Jared Cohen.
In what may have been the most tearful segment, former State Department Director of Policy Planning Anne-Marie Slaughter led a "mother-to-mother" talk with Aicha el-Wafa, whose son, Zacarias Moussaoui, is the "20th hijacker" of the 9/11 attacks.
El-Wafa, who was forced to marry at 14 and withstood her own share of hardships, saying, "Sadly I was born in a country where a woman is a woman, a second-class citizen." It was a condition that transferred even when the family moved to France.
Eventually, el-Wafa found housing, left her abusive husband and worked as a seamstress, doing the best she could to support herself and the four children, while not realizing her son was becoming radicalized.
"I never really looked further. I wish I had," el-Wafa told the audience. "I'm cross with myself. I didn't know."
Gill Hicks, who lost her legs below the knee in the London July 7, 2005 bombings, moderated a panel with a former neo-Nazi, a former gangster and a former Muslim extremist.
Former Irish extremists sat on a panel with IRA survivors. And former President of Colombia, Alvaro Uribe Valez, led a panel that included a former member of FARC.
At one point during the conference, Google Executive Chairman Eric Schmidt showed his frustration at questions about why the company and its think tank were taking on de-radicalization, a topic usually left to governments and non-profits.
Schmidt told a reporter he was becoming impatient with the questions, and said the company and Google Ideas were acting "simply as a convener."
Cohen had been assured that this kind of gathering was impossible, and that if he could bring such a group together, the outcome would not be fruitful.
But Cohen said that all of his expectations were met. "I honestly can't think of a single thing that I wanted out of this conference that didn't happen," said Cohen, adding, "In fact, there are things that happened here I didn't even know I was looking for."
More tangibly is a YouTube channel for former extremists and a website that will act as curation points for organizations and individuals in the de-radicalization field. Until now, there was very little coordination. Officials from some organizations located in the same city had never met until the Dublin summit.
One outcome is certain: Google Ideas is not getting in the grant-giving business. "From the beginning, we've consistently stood firm on not wanting to be in funding projects," said Cohen.
Cohen said that they were not willing to risk the relationships they worked hard to build by having them compete for funding under Google's auspices. But that doesn't mean Google Ideas won't be pitching other foundations and companies to fill that void.
In breakout sessions, teams of 10 or 12 formers, survivors and other stakeholders developed tangible ideas, including films, a WikiKoran and speaking tours. At the end of the conference, participants voted on the ideas and the top three were awarded financial awards from Edelman public relations, e Boost and Gen Next.
The Edelman 'Catalyst' Award provides for up to $25,000 of pro bono services; the Boost Positive Activism Award provides for up to $20,000 of digital consulting services and the Gen Next 'Innovation & Impact' Award provides $15,000 for the implementation of the winning idea.
Jane Rosenthal of the Tribeca Film Festival, a partner in the conference, said she's working with HBO to create a documentary on de-radicalization. "I'm walking away with more compelling and courageous stories than I ever could have imagined," said Rosenthal.
The conference was also a defining moment for Google Ideas. The conference, which was the think tank's first endeavor, is helping the organization refine its mission and structure.
"We didn't come into this with a perfectly defined organizational structure and defined roles for each position," said Cohen. And it's not something that is likely to change at Google Ideas.
"We just might be the ones to break the mold on the way think tanks think of themselves," he said.
- Taken from the Washington Post. View article.
Gen Next Members Participate in Google's Summit Against Violent Extremism in Dublin, Ireland
June 28th, 2011 - 9:49am
Filed under International Security
The summit brings together networks of people like former neo-Nazis, gang members, Islamic radicals and representatives from private corporations, academia, civil society organizations and victims groups. It is the first time violent groups will be brought together in one place to explore the commonalities and differences in the causes of extremism across different cultural contexts.
Gen Next Members attending the summit include Jason Liebman, Co-Founder of Movements.org and CEO of Howcast Media; Juan Zarate, Former Deputy National Security Advisor for Combating Terrorism; Justin Choi, President of Cie Digital Labs; Aaron Bare, CEO of Buzzmouth Media; Micha Mikailian, CEO of eBoost Consulting, and Michael Davidson, CEO of Gen Next.
"Each Member attending is a private sector and policy leader," said Michael Davidson, CEO of Gen Next. "Their feedback and expertise exchanged with the former extremists will be invaluable in helping scale the outcomes of the summit."
The Gen Next Foundation will give an award of seed capital for "Innovation in Impact" at the end of the summit to the best entrepreneurial and actionable idea at the conference.
The summit is June 26-29 and has been organized by Google Ideas, the Tribeca Film Festival and the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR).
Key Takeaways:
- The objective of the summit is to establish a global network of former extremists who discern what draws some people to violent movements and how people can be deterred from joining these groups through the use of technology.
- It is the first time 90 former extremists, gang-members and other members of violent groups will be brought together in one place to explore the commonalities and differences in the causes of extremism across different cultural contexts.
- The group's 'formers' (a name coined by Google) will discuss their pasts on panels moderated by victims of terrorist attacks.
BASIS Tucson "Tops" Another National Ranking
June 21st, 2011 - 2:28pm
TUCSON, AZ, June 20, 2011 - BASIS School, Inc. is proud to announce that BASIS Tucson has been named among America's Best High Schools by yet another national ranking. Newsweek magazine, which published a new ranking this year, named the school 3rd out of over 1,000 public high schools across the country. Moreover, BASIS Tucson was the top ranked open-enrollment school according to the Newsweek ranking; the #1 and #2 ranked schools are both magnet schools with selective admissions.
BASIS Tucson has been a fixture on the Newsweek rankings, earning a top ten spot every year since 2006. But this year's Newsweek ranking is different. The old Newsweek ranking relied on the "Challenge Index," which measured the rigor of schools' academic programs by calculating the number of Advanced Placement (AP), International Baccalaureate or Cambridge tests taken at the school in relation to the number of graduating seniors. That ranking migrated to The Washington Post this year and named BASIS Tucson 4th among all public high schools.
The new Newsweek ranking relies on different methodology which was "designed to highlight public schools that excel at fostering a positive and effective learning environment, as well as preparing students for college," according to Newsweek. The methodology for calculating each school's 2011 Newsweek score "is comprised of six components: graduation rate (25%), college matriculation rate (25%), AP tests taken per graduate (25%), average SAT/ACT scores (10%), average AP/IB/AICE scores (10%), and AP courses offered (5%)" according to Newsweek.
"BASIS Tucson students and teachers should take great pride in this accomplishment," says Julia Toews, Head of School for BASIS Tucson. "Our students don't just take difficult tests and courses, they excel at them. In 2010, more than 80% of our students, grades 9-12 passed an AP exam, and they did so because they and their teachers worked really hard all year. This ranking is really a reflection of the hard work of both groups, and a clear sign of the great potential that exists in Arizona."
BASIS Schools operates six schools in Arizona, BASIS Tucson, BASIS Scottsdale, and BASIS Oro Valley, as well as BASIS Chandler, BASIS Flagstaff, and BASIS Peoria which will open this August. BASIS Tucson, BASIS Schools' flagship campus, was the only BASIS School eligible for inclusion in this year's Newsweek ranking. BASIS Scottsdale will first be eligible for inclusion in the ranking next year.
"BASIS Tucson's academic model has proven to be highly successful, having earned the school top rankings in Newsweek, US News & World Report and The Washington Post. Our goal is to make this same high quality education available to more students throughout the state and nation in the coming years," says Nick Fleege, New School Development Director for BASIS Schools.
To learn more about BASIS Schools, please visit www.basisschools.org.
Press release taken from BASIS Schools.
GN Featured in OCBJ: Big Picture
May 31st, 2011 - 9:21am
Jared Cohen, director of Google Ideas-a global issues think tank for Mountain View-based Google Inc.-got hooked on Gen Next after speaking to the Newport Beach-based issues group in 2008.
Now he's one member of a group of young, well-to-do executives-some part of prominent families in the county-who pay $10,000 a year to be members of Gen Next.
Gen Next is a hands-on group with a national and global bent. It works on and funds projects in education, security and economics.
Google's Cohen and two other Gen Next members even founded an offshoot, New York-based Movements.org. The nonprofit helps support young online activists across the globe.
"We are looking to be a catalyst for change," said Paul Makarechian, chief executive of Newport Beach-based Makar Properties LLC and founder of Gen Next.
The group looks to seed ideas or generate national attention for projects or causes Makarechian said.
Gen Next gives "members the opportunity to be consequential," said Dan McClory, managing director of Irvine-based Hunter Wise Financial Group LLC, an investment bank focused on midsize companies. "The common bond of the network is that, like me, these are extremely busy people who want to leverage the talent they have."
Gen Next has five chapters, including ones in Seattle and Los Angeles.
The founding Orange County chapter is the largest with more than 60 members.
Gen Next has about 150 members in all.
The nonprofit is made up of business owners and executives mostly in their 30s and 40s. There are older members, including Paul's father, Hadi Makarechian, a homebuilder and developer.
"We call it a psychographic-not a demographic," said Michael Davidson, chief executive of Gen Next. "We try to find high energy people who want to shape the world."
Some local members: Alex Bathal, co-president of Tustin's Raj Manufacturing LLC; Bill Lyon, chief operating officer of Newport Beach-based William Lyon Homes Inc.; Shawn Baldwin, partner in Newport Beach's Sunrise Co.; and Autumn Strier, president and cofounder of Irvine-based nonprofit Miracles for Kids.
Invitation Only
Membership is by invitation only.
Two members have to nominate a prospective member, according to Davidson. Then the majority must agree on the member.
Investment banker McClory is a newer member.
He had been eyeing the group but said he was reluctant to join, thinking it might be just another time zapper.
"As I look at it now, it helps me leverage my time," he said. "It can help act as a filter for all kinds of content, education material, charitable causes and extracurricular involvements."
Gen Next's Davidson said the group is designed to lure and accommodate busy people.
"We needed to create a model that was attractive, to give people the type of leverage they want, to get them off of the sideline," he said.
Gen Next seeks to educate members through speakers, global fieldtrips and other means.
"You take any remarkable person, you give them more information, more tools, and a network and they will do great things," Davidson said.
Last year, Gen Next put on more than 100 events, hosting a number of speakers.
Past speakers include: Bob Schieffer, chief Washington correspondent for CBS Corp.; John Connors, former chief financial officer for Microsoft Corp.; John Ashcroft, former U.S. attorney general; Craig Barrett, former chairman of Intel Corp.; Rep. John Boehner; and Condoleezza Rice, former Secretary of State.
Gen Next doesn't pay its speakers.
Many members are part of the Young Presidents' Organization, a global group that helps executives be better at business.
"YPO is wonderful for issues surrounding personal growth, family and business," said Kevin Maloney, president of Santa Ana-based QuantumSphere Inc., which makes catalysts that have applications such as lengthening the life of electric car batteries.
Gen Next goes beyond business, he said.
"It's motivated me to get more involved," Maloney said. "It's made guys like me feel like I can make a difference."
The group goes on annual educational trips.
This year, members are going to Russia.
In October, members traveled to Brazil, where they met with leaders in government and business.
They also toured the stock exchange in São Paulo.
Brazil has a parallel stock exchange for charitable projects, the Environmental and Social Investment Exchange.
It was at the Brazilian stock exchange where McClory connected a few dots.
"A light went off in my head," he said.
McClory said he figured Brazil's social stock exchange might be a great way for Gen Next to help fund schools that some members already had planned to build in poor neighborhoods in Rio de Janeiro.
"It's a project that really excites me," he said. "It's something that I would've never been exposed to had I never been a part of Gen Next."
If all goes well, McClory hopes to bend the ear of his friend, Robert Greifeld, chief executive of Nasdaq Stock Market Inc.
"I'll say 'Bob, why did we have to go to Brazil to list one of these things? Why aren't we doing it on Nasdaq?' I've already let him know it's coming," he said.
Political Roots
Gen Next is nonpartisan but has some roots in politics.
In the early 2000s, members started Generation Next, a political action committee.
They found that many of their peers weren't that interested in politics. Members wanted a broader appeal, so they evolved into an issues group, Gen Next.
For members who like politics, there is an offshoot, the Gen Equity political action committee. About 20% of Gen Next members participate in Gen Equity, which vets and endorses candidates.
"Politics is an important tool," Davidson said. "But it's one tool of many."
Another arm is the Gen Next Foundation for funding nonprofits.
Google's Cohen said he was surprised at the passion of the members.
"I've never thought of myself as much of a joiner," Cohen said. "I met these incredible young people from a diverse set of fields who had a passion about topics I care about. I went from someone who doesn't join things to someone who's incredibly passionate about this network."
He said he regularly taps Gen Next members.
In the aftermath of the 2010 earthquake in Haiti, Cohen called on Gen Next members to help track down satellite radios as part of his work for the State Department at the time.
Gen Next is set to be part of a Google Ideas Summit Against Violent Extremism to be held in Ireland in June.
Finding ways to counter extremism is the thrust of Gen Next's security focus.
"There's no single profile of a violent extremist other than the fact that they're young," Cohen said.
Gen Next also works with London's Quilliam Foundation, a think tank that tackles extremism.
New Gen Next chapters are planned for Nevada, New York, San Francisco, Dallas, Denver and Chicago.
"If it were up to me, we'd have a chapter in every major metro," Makarechian said.
Now living in Nevada, Makarechian is working on getting a chapter started there.
"My goal is try to get this organization to several thousand members," he said. "I'd love to break 1,000 under my leadership."
Makarechian said he started the group because he felt compelled, given his good fortune.
"My dad fled a revolution-his country imploded," Makarachian said of his father, who fled Iran with his family during the Iranian Revolution. "We take for granted the fact that we have a free democratic system." --- OCBJ
Gen Next National Board Member Yuri Vanetik Appointed to American Enterprise Institute's National Council
May 28th, 2011 - 9:26am
NEWPORT BEACH - Gen Next National Board Member, Yuri Vanetik, has been appointed to the American Enterprise Institute's (AEI) National Council. National Council members are leaders of the business and nonprofit community who are committed to the values and success of free enterprise and entrepreneurialism espoused by AEI. Based in Washington, DC, AEI is one of the most long standing and influential free market think tanks.
Other notable AEI National Council Members include Kohlberg, Kravis, Roberts & Co Managing Director and Gen Next Advisory Council Member Ken B. Mehlman and Former CFO of Microsoft John Connors.
"I am honored to join AEI's National Council," said Yuri Vanetik. "AEI's work continues tomake a lasting impact on the course of American history, and the core values that undergird a free enterprise world-wide."
An accomplished business leader, Yuri Vanetik does not take free enterprise for granted. "My family left the Soviet Union in the late 1970s to escape a totalitarian regime that criminalized personal choice and economic enterprise. Economic freedom is the guarantor of opportunities for personal development, and for me AEI is one of the most forward looking think tanks, supporting economic freedom in the 21st century," he explains.
Most recently, AEI was the location selected by House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan to unveil his plan to cut $6.2 trillion from the national debt over the next six years. AEI's research and work also led to welfare reform in the 1990's.
A number of former guests of Gen Next, former Ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, are Senior fellows at AEI.
Yuri Vanetik is a financier and philanthropist. He is the principal of Vanetik International, LLC. Presently, Yuri Vanetik advises several financial firms and invests in private equity transactions, both domestically and overseas. Yuri Vanetik supports and serves on the boards of charitable and civic organizations. These include the American Red Cross, University of California Center for Unconventional Security Affairs, Miracles for Kids, Kennedy Center, Yuri Vanetik Foundation, and the Gen Next Foundation. Mr. Vanetik is a Lincoln Fellow at the Claremont Institute in California and is on the Board of Advisors to the Pacific Research Institute. He is also a proud supporter of the Ayn Rand Institute.
OC Philanthropist Donates . . . Books?
May 16th, 2011 - 7:54pm
Filed under Economy
IRVINE, Calif--Orange County business leader and philanthropist Yuri Vanetik's contribution to the Ayn Rand Institute's (ARI) Free Books to Teachers Program is estimated to provide more than 2,000 Ayn Rand novels to high schools in Orange County, California. In the last nine years, ARI, a nonprofit educational organization, has distributed more than 1.9 million copies of "Atlas Shrugged," "The Fountainhead," "Anthem" and "We the Living" to schools across the country.
Ayn Rand's novels have been popular among English and literature teachers for decades. "They portray events of profound, timeless significance, and are inspiring and exciting stories with heroic characters fighting for their ideals," says Yaron Brook, president of the Ayn Rand Institute. "They challenge readers to decide not just what will happen to particular characters, but what their own lives and the world should be like."
"I know firsthand the importance of reading Ayn Rand," says Vanetik. "Learning about her ideas on collectivism and individualism will challenge students to think about the impact that government, business and they themselves have on our future, and I am proud to be a part of this program."
Funding for the Free Books to Teachers program comes from private donations. Yuri Vanetik is a private investor and philanthropist. He is the principal of Vanetik International, LLC, a consulting firm, and a National Board Member of Gen Next, an organization of business leaders dedicated to learning about, and becoming engaged with, the most pressing challenges facing future generations.
Analysis: Bin Laden Killed, Now What? Analysis by GN Member Juan Zarate
May 2nd, 2011 - 4:33pm
Filed under International Security
"CBS News' team, Justice Department correspondent Bob Orr, chief foreign affairs correspondent Lara Logan, Washington bureau chief Christopher Isham and senior national security analyst Juan Zarate, discussed the killing of Osama bin Laden, what it means for the war on terror and U.S. relations with Pahttp://www.gen-next.org/index.php/dashboard/blog/kistan and the Middle East region." See video.
Al Qaeda Stirs Again
April 19th, 2011 - 9:19am
Filed under International Security
By: GN Member Juan Zarate
MANY in the West had taken comfort in Al Qaeda's silence in the wake of the uprisings in the Muslim world this year, as secular, nonviolent protests, led by educated youth focused on redressing longstanding local grievances, showcased democracy's promise and seemed to leave Al Qaeda behind.
Indeed, the pristine spirit of the Arab Spring does represent an existential threat to Al Qaeda's extremist ideology. But Al Qaeda's leaders also know that this is a strategic moment. They are banking on the disillusionment that inevitably follows revolutions to reassert their prominence in the region. And now Al Qaeda is silent no more - and is taking the rhetorical offensive.
In recent statements, Ayman al-Zawahri, Osama bin Laden's second-in-command, and Qaeda surrogates have aligned themselves with the protesters in Libya, Egypt and elsewhere, while painting the West as an enemy of the Arab people.
In North Africa, Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb claimed that while protesters flooded the streets of Tunis and Cairo, it had been fighting in the mountains against the same enemies. Anwar al-Awlaki, a Yemeni-American cleric affiliated with Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, declared that in the wake of the revolutions, "our mujahedeen brothers ... will get a chance to breathe again after three decades of suffocation" and that "the great doors of opportunity would open up for the mujahedeen all over the world."
Mr. Zawahri has denounced democracy, arguing that toppling dictators is insufficient and that "justice, freedom, and independence" can be achieved only through "jihad and resistance until the Islamic regime rises."
The chaos and disappointment that follow revolutions will inevitably provide many opportunities for Al Qaeda to spread its influence. Demographic pressures, economic woes and corruption will continue to bedevil even the best-run governments in the region. Divisions will beset the protest movements, and vestiges of the old regimes may re-emerge.
Al Qaeda and its allies don't need to win the allegiance of every protester to exert their influence; they have a patient view of history.
Although Washington must avoid tainting organic movements or being perceived as a central protagonist, the United States and its Western allies should not be shy about working with reformers and democrats to shape the region's trajectory - and ensuring Al Qaeda's irrelevance in the Sunni Arab world, the heart of its supposed constituency.
In countries where autocrats have been toppled (as in Egypt and Tunisia), we must help shape the new political and social environment; in nondemocratic, allied states (like the region's monarchies), we need to accelerate internal reform; and in repressive states (like Iran, Libya and Syria), we should challenge the legitimacy of autocratic regimes and openly assist dissidents and democrats.
This is not about military intervention or the imposition of American-style democracy. It is about using American power and influence to support organic reform movements.
The United States Agency for International Development and advocacy organizations can help civil society groups grow; human rights groups can organize and assist networks of dissidents; and Western women's groups and trade unions could support their counterparts throughout the Middle East. Wealthy philanthropists and entrepreneurs who are part of the Middle Eastern diaspora could make investments and provide economic opportunities for the region's youth, while technology companies interested in new markets could partner with anticorruption groups to aid political mobilization and increase government accountability and transparency. Hollywood and Bollywood writers and producers should lionize the democratic heroes who took to the streets to challenge the orthodoxy of fear.
A focused campaign to shape the course of reform would align our values and interests with the aspirations of the protesters. More important, it would answer the challenge from Al Qaeda to define what happens next and reframe the tired narratives of the past.
In 2005, Mr. Zawahri anticipated this battle for reform and noted that "demonstrations and speaking out in the streets" would not be sufficient to achieve freedom in the Muslim world. If we help the protesters succeed, it will not only serve long-term national security interests but also mark the beginning of the end of Al Qaeda.
Juan C. Zarate, a senior adviser at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, was the deputy national security adviser for combating terrorism from 2005 to 2009. This article was taken from the New York Times.
Time Has Come to Take Responsibility
March 18th, 2011 - 4:07pm
Filed under P Jacob Yadegar, LABJ
A Los Angeles Businss Journal Op-Ed, Written by GN Member P. Jacob Yadegar
Every year for the past decade, we have been providing a snapshot of what we think the economy has in store for Angelenos. The good news is that the crisis is over and things appear to be stabilizing. We have a new governor who many believe is the cause of some of the most significant problems we face as a result of his policies implemented from his initial term as governor more than 25 years ago. Others think he may be the only one who can fix the very difficult issues we face in California, especially in Los Angeles.
Unemployment rates will continue to stay stubbornly high as our current business climate deteriorates and we become less and less friendly to businesses. Increased taxes, unnecessary rules and regulations, and a tax-and-spend agenda will continue to be business as usual.
Seeking change
As long as we continue to elect leaders who have these values, we can't expect any real change to take place. Tax revenue to the city and state continues to decline as businesses leave, property prices continue to drop and productivity remains weak. Far fewer new businesses and industries are opening in our great state, causing an extended period of slow economic growth and continued high unemployment.
At some point we will be forced to realize that our current method of continued deficits will run our city and state into the ground. Both Gov. Jerry Brown and Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa will have tremendous difficulty attracting the much needed funds unless they go against what's popular and make the difficult decisions to cut back on the social services and entitlements that are draining our state.
The current budget deficit is a direct result of our inability to control spending. Spending cuts are difficult and very unpopular, but they are effective in controlling our spiraling deficit, which may eventually bankrupt the city and the state.
Simply put, if we continue to spend more than we make, our credit will run dry. When that day comes, we will end up paying a far greater price than fixing the current problem.
For the last 20 years, we have seen incredible growth and prosperity. Most of the residents have seen a much better quality of living. We must start thinking about our future and the future of our children. It's time for all of us to tighten our belts and stop this irrational behavior of kicking our problems down the road. Responsible government will not happen without responsible citizens.
P. Jacob Yadegar is founder and chief executive of Empyrean Funding, an L.A.-based mortgage company specializing in commercial and residential mortgages. View article.
National Group, 'Gen Next,' Looks to Expand Membership Locally
March 17th, 2011 - 10:37am
Filed under Think About It....
March 3, 2011 - Section A13 - Published Weekly By Marlena Chavira-Medford What is the common thread connecting a celebrity chef, a luminary for Google Ideas, and a former US ambassador dealing with war crime and genocide? They are all members of Gen Next, an exclusive organization that educates and engages its members on some of the biggest challenges facing future generations in the areas of economic growth, education, and international security. Though it's varied a bunch, there is an overarching theme among members. "These are people bound by a big, big vision for the future," said Gen Next CEO Michael Davidson. "These are all people who are highly successful, intellectually curious, forward thinking and have an animating factor that sets them above most. They are extraordinary people." The group, which is five years old, has members across the country and is aiming to add about 20 in the San Diego area this year. By joining the group, which is done by invitation only and requires a $10,000 annual contribution, members gain access to a wealth of information. There's year-round programming that allows them to pick the brains of some major movers and shakers at the local, national and international level, including business innovators and government officials. For example, a quick search on the group's website, gen-next.org, revealed an upcoming talk by former U.S. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld. Members also get access to internal memos, member-only exchanges, and opportunities for national and international trips. Because Gen Next's mission includes economic growth, education, and international security, members tackle some pretty big issues, like how to achieve oil independence, and what to do about the public education crisis. Gen Next serves as a vehicle for change in these areas by helping to bring about legislative changes, elevate other organizations working toward the same goals, and by helping to launch new organizations. Case in point: Movements.org, a nonprofit that helps grassroots activists by pairing them with resources and mentors in the technology, media, private and public sectors, is the collaboration of Gen Next members and Gen Next sponsored their first conference in New York City. "This is a perfect illustration of what happens when Gen Next puts together the right people and right ideas with the platform and resources to make extraordinary things happen," he said. The ultimate hope is that by educating its members, Gen Next can help them to see issues in a bigger picture, and inspire long-term solutions. Taking that step outside one's comfort zone isn't always easy, Davidson said, but the payout is becoming part of something bigger, something relevant, something that brings about change. "I always like to use a line from Mad Men's Don Draper: 'If you don't like what's being said, change the conversation." For more information about Gen Next, visit gen-next.org or call 877-770-GNXT. If you are interested in learning more about becoming a member, send an email to email@example.com.
Justice in Georgia: First Jury Trials Come to Growing Nation
March 2nd, 2011 - 4:50pm
Filed under International Security
Sometime soon, somewhere in Tbilisi, Georgia, someone will be the victim of a historic murder. Although it will be no less tragic than any other death, the victim will be the first in Georgian history on whose behalf justice will be delivered by jury verdict. Either that, or the alleged killer will be the first wrongfully accused defendant to be acquitted by jury after being afforded a presumption of innocence and a higher government burden that resembles our "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard. Or, perhaps, Georgia will experience its first hung jury. Regardless, history is about to be made in Tbilisi - although, sadly, the loss of a life will have initiated the process.
As many may know, Georgia recently and radically changed its criminal justice system, and the changes are just now being implemented. This past summer, I traveled to Georgia to teach Georgian prosecutors how to conduct jury trials with a specific concentration on murder cases. As a former criminal prosecutor and current trial advocacy professor, the experience was fascinating on every level.
Georgia and Georgians
Most Americans think of Georgia as being a little country that was essentially Russian until very recently. Georgia, however, is so much more. Often described as being situated at the crossroads of Europe and Asia, Georgia is beautiful. It is bordered by the Caucasus Mountains to the north; Turkey, Armenia, and Iran to the south; Azerbaijan to the east; and the Black Sea along the west. The people speak Georgian and are proud of gaining their independence from Russia in 1991.
Georgia's government is progressive, proactive, and pro-Western. But it has been a struggle. Joseph Stalin was Georgian, and there are still old monuments to him littered throughout the country. After emancipating itself from Russia in 1991 and officially voting out the Communist government, the Georgian government, led by former Soviet Foreign Minister Eduard Shevardnadze (a Georgian), devolved into a Mafia-controlled corrupt bureaucracy. In 2003, however, 36-year-old Mikheil Saakashvili led a peaceful revolution (called the Rose Revolution) and forced President Shevardnadze to step down. The people immediately elected Saakashvili with 96 percent of the vote in 2004. Interestingly, Saakashvili attended Georgetown University and Columbia Law School and still enjoys the strong support not only of his people but of the United States and many European nations as well. Most recently, after a short but bloody war in August 2008, Russia took back two regions in Georgia (Abkhazia and South Ossetia), and Russian troops are now stationed approximately 20 miles from Georgia's capital city of Tbilisi.
Geographically, the country is the size of South Carolina, with a population of 4.4 million. The greatest concentration of people live in Tbilisi (population 1 million). A mostly Christian nation, Georgia's commitment to religious freedom and tolerance is unique in that part of the world. In Tbilisi, for example, one can find a synagogue, mosque, Georgian basilica, Armenian Church, and Zoroastrian temple all within walking distance of each other. Tbilisi is a quaint city, currently and actively improving its infrastructure. Despite its size and location on the cusp of Asia, it has a very European feel. There are many cobblestone streets lined with shops and cafés, bars and boutiques. The Mtkvari River wends through the city, cleaving the cliffs picturesquely (though one might wish to ignore the color of the water).
The Georgian people are warm, inviting, and appreciative of the foreign aid and partnership with the United States. Indeed, the United States has invested heavily in Georgia to transform it into a successful democracy and stable economy. In 2008, for example, the United States government pledged $1 billion in aid and support. The cultural differences between Americans and Georgians, generally speaking, are impossible to miss. Unlike most Americans, many Georgians tend to stay up very late, sleep in late, and smoke all day. And although they religiously enjoy their Georgian wine, Georgian moonshine (called chacha) is a popular method of ensuring the worst hangover imaginable. From what I hear, you understand.
Traffic and driving in Georgia are challenging. As a passenger or pedestrian, you are quite simply risking your life anywhere near a street in Georgia. Ordinary Georgians make New York City cab drivers look like proverbial little old ladies. As a visiting pedestrian, crossing the street is not recommended. Georgians, however, seem to have no problem walking right into traffic that is moving between 40 and 80 miles per hour. The big streets in Tbilisi have many under-street tunnels for pedestrian crossing, yet most elect the life-threatening, above-ground challenge. Why? Most likely they're running a little behind schedule.
Far from punctual, Georgians operate under what they jokingly refer to as "GMT" - Georgia Maybe Time. Things don't start early, but they definitely end late. There is an apropos myth about how the Georgians originally received their land from God. When God was distributing land to the peoples of the Earth, so the story goes, the Georgians arrived late because they were having a party and had been drinking too much. When God informed them that all the land had been distributed, they explained to God that they were late because they were raising their glasses in praise of him. God was so pleased that he gave them the land he had saved for himself - Georgia.
Georgia's New Justice System
As mentioned earlier, history is about to be made in Georgia because, for three months now, and only in Tbilisi, Georgian courts can begin the process of hearing their first jury trials in murder cases. Last year, with the assistance of the United States and other nations, Georgia enacted its new Criminal Procedure Code (CPC). The CPC went into effect last October and for the first time in the region's 1,500-year history. The new CPC institutes an adversarial system complete with the right to trial by jury.
The CPC is nowhere near comprehensive. In places, it will raise the eyebrows of American prosecutors and defense attorneys alike. But it replaces the often corrupt, Soviet-styled inquisitorial system (with one judge) where prosecutors worked with the court to secure convictions and, not surprisingly, enjoyed a 100 percent conviction rate. It is unquestionably a much fairer system than Georgian criminal defendants have had before. Indeed, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, while in Georgia last July, described the new CPC as a "landmark law for positive change in Georgia." U.S. Vice President Joseph Biden, also in Tbilisi in July, similarly praised the new law.
Although the CPC is just 116 single-spaced pages, divided into 333 articles, it is the entire body of law controlling Georgia's new adversarial system. It was the result of much debate and consideration. It is not annotated, and there is no case law to provide further definition or limitation. To American trial lawyers, it is shocking in its brevity and, in places, its breadth.
For example, regarding the prosecutor's burden of proof, the new law provides that "[a]ny doubt arising while evaluating evidence that cannot be resolved under the procedure established by law shall be settled in favor of the defendant." (CPC, Article 5). This essentially makes the burden of proof beyond "any" doubt as opposed to beyond a reasonable doubt. And unlike our burden of proof, it does not limit the doubt only to the elements of the crime charged. I can hear Georgian defense attorneys licking their chops in anticipation.
On the other hand, consider the CPC rule limiting the use of a defendant's prior convictions and, arguably in the last line, use of prior bad acts against defendants:
The Jury shall not be informed about previous criminal prosecution or administrative proceedings against the defendant or his/her prior conviction (unless such information is submitted by the prosecution as one of the qualifying elements of the crime, or/and [sic] is intended to verify reliability of the defendant's statements) before announcement of the verdict; neither shall they be informed about any evidence, which is not related to proving defendant's guilt. (CPC, Article 238)
Georgian judges, prosecutors, and defense attorneys read this rule as basically prohibiting the use of prior convictions. But because the CPC contains no rule like our own ER 404(b), there is no further limitation on what "evidence related to proving a defendant's guilt" means. A prosecutor could have a field day with the last sentence of Article 238.
Hearsay will be a problem for both sides in Georgia. In American courtrooms, the rules about hearsay testimony are perhaps the most complicated, least understood, and most often violated of all rules. The Georgian CPC has made it very simple:
The testimony of a witness based on information provided by another person shall be an indirect testimony. An indirect testimony shall be admissible only if the information source is identified. During the substantial consideration of a case by the court, hearsay shall be admissible evidence if supported by the body of other evidence. (CPC, Article 76)
Translation? If you can provide a name (or maybe even just a face), hearsay is admissible.
Perhaps the most significant difference between our system and theirs, however, is the way the CPC addresses closing arguments and unanimous verdicts. Closing arguments will be conducted more like the European model, where the defendant (or defense attorney) always gets the last word. This obviously favors the defendant and is unlike our system, where the prosecutor gives the last rebuttal argument because the prosecutor has the burden of proof and the requirement of unanimity to obtain a conviction.
Georgia's CPC, however, hedges the unanimity requirement in this way: in cases not carrying a life sentence, the verdict must be unanimous if it is reached within the first three hours of deliberation. Once three hours has expired, though, the jury can convict by a vote of eight out of twelve. (CPC, Article 261). In other words, the jury can sit around drinking coffee and chatting for three hours before needing only eight out of twelve to convict. Translation? A Georgian criminal prosecution just became easier to prove than an American civil trial.
My sources inform me that the U.S. Department of Justice urged the Georgians to keep the jury verdict unanimous under the new CPC. The Georgian response was that Georgians are not a "consensus" people and that Georgian citizens would not be able to arrive at a group consensus in unanimous terms. Thus, the previous compromise was settled upon. The new CPC may be amended in the future to include a completely unanimous requirement. The U.S. Department of Justice and the American Bar Association continue to jointly lobby for such an amendment.
Even with the new law's idiosyncrasies, the introduction of the jury trial into Georgian culture is a critical step toward advancing justice and due process. Once the citizenry adapts to this new criminal justice phenomenon, the government intends to phase in jury trials throughout the country and for all types of cases. The story of how Georgians adapt to jury trials remains to be written and will no doubt be fascinating to observe.
Department of Justice Trial Skills Program
Like Secretary Clinton and Vice President Biden, I was also in Georgia last July. And although we stayed in the same hotel, my trip was covered slightly less in the international papers. As a former King County deputy prosecutor and present UW adjunct law professor, I was excited to be asked to come teach and honored to participate in such a major change in Georgia's criminal justice system. I taught two three-day training sessions to groups of 25 prosecutors whose range of experience varied from one to 30 years. The training sessions were the result of a concentrated effort of manpower and resources by the U.S. Department of Justice.
In addition to me, several American federal prosecutors conducted the prosecutorial training sessions throughout the summer. In addition, American federal judges were there training Georgian judges, and defense attorneys trained defense attorneys with the help of the American Bar Association.
Teaching through an interpreter is exhausting. At the King County Prosecutor's Office, I had worked with interpreters frequently in hearings and at trial, but teaching through an interpreter was another experience entirely. My constant concern was that the translation was losing the instructive message, since the subject of jury trial advocacy is completely foreign to the prosecutors who attended the training sessions. Well, that is not entirely true - a few had seen "Twelve Angry Men" and some had watched "Law and Order."
I was able to gauge whether my lectures were sticking by monitoring the content of the prosecutors' questions. They picked up the technical concepts quickly, but the cultural differences became evident in the depth of their skepticism about whether Georgians would be fair or effective jurors.
Their system provides for voir dire to be conducted three days before the beginning of trial, and in that time the prosecutors wanted to know how much "investigating" into the jurors' backgrounds could be accomplished. When I explained that we do not do that in America, they were shocked to learn that U.S. prosecutors simply accept the jurors' answers on the juror questionnaire forms as true. They wanted to send "their people" out to "look into" the veracity of the prospective jurors' answers. Like the saying about the girl and Texas, you can take the Russians out of Georgia, but you can't take the Russian out of the Georgians.
My favorite question of the entire trip was asked during a discussion about jury selection. We were talking about peremptory challenges and the CPC's incredibly broad rule in this regard (Article 223 prohibits strikes based on "race, skin color, language, sex, belief, religion, political views, membership in any association, ethnic, cultural or social belonging, origin, family, financial and official status, place of residence, health condition, life style, place of birth, age, or any other ground"). One prosecutor from a small town asked: "Would you excuse a coffin-maker from the jury?" The confused look on my face probably prompted him to explain that because a coffin-maker would see death as necessary for his work and not as a tragedy, the coffin-maker may not make a good juror for the prosecution's side of the case. Given that there is probably a coffin-maker in every Georgian town, it wasn't such a crazy question. My answer, incidentally, was basically, "If you're in doubt, keep them out." I was hoping those words also rhymed in Georgian and betting the prosecutors would not notice the obvious theft of Johnny Cochran phraseology.
My second-favorite question was one that illustrated the depth of the change on the way. One prosecutor asked the question that the room's head-nodding told me was on everyone's mind: "Do prosecutors get fired in the United States when they lose a case?" Naturally, I explained that this does not happen and that prosecutors often lose cases under our system. My audience was baffled to learn that, to the contrary, if you lose a big enough case in America, you write a book and become famous.
The Beginning
Georgia's new system officially began in October and though there have been murders, as of press time there had been no aggravated murder in Tbilisi. Thus, someone is going about his business in Tbilisi, unaware that the sudden, violent end to his life will mark an historic change for his country, a sad and tragic beginning for a fairer criminal justice system.
Sam Chapin is a lawyer and an adjunct professor in the Trial Advocacy Department at UW School of Law.
Union Fails Pension Math: Part Time-Teacher Set to Earn More in Retirement than She Did While Employed
February 22nd, 2011 - 6:39pm
Filed under Education
By: GN Member Ben Everard
Shortly after the Green Bay Packers turned the nation's attention to the Midwestern state, Wisconsin once again has garnered the nation's attention. At stake this time is not a trophy, but a prized retirement package promised to public employees. Throngs of protesters have taken to Madison, Wisconsin to either show their support or disdain for Governor Scott Walker's plan to require public employees to pay 5.8 percent (the national average is roughly 12 percent) of their salary as a contribution to their pension.
The looming issue of funding public pensions is not unique to Wisconsin. Governor Walker's stand, however, has focused the nation's attention largely because he is the first Republican leader to propose legitimate legislation designed to address the problem head on. The debate in Wisconsin is a precursor to one that will be seen New York, California, Illinois, and dozens of other states. Unfunded liabilities stemming from decades of generous retirement packages for public employees has finally reached the breaking point. Without reform, state fiscal collapse is inevitable. Often lost in the debate is a simple explanation of what exactly the problem is with the system today. Fortunately, a pertinent example helps shed light on the financial precariousness of the situation in Wisconsin, and more importantly, the nation at large.
My mother worked as a public employee when she was a teacher's aide in Sheboygan, Wisconsin. She was employed by the state for five years, from 1981-1986. However, she worked only part-time, so was never credited for a full year of employment by the state for each year she worked. Instead, she received only partial credit each year. Fortunately for her, Wisconsin and two other states (Minnesota and South Dakota) allow for full vesting for public teachers after only three years of employment. Using a deduction for her part-time status, Wisconsin determined her creditable service amounted to 3.07 years. Had she worked three weeks less during her last year, she would be entitled to nothing. As luck would have it, she fully vested, and is entitled to receive a monthly check from the state of Wisconsin for the rest of her life.
Like millions of fellow baby boomers, she turns 55 this year. And in Wisconsin, one can elect to draw benefits at age 55. If she retires this year and elects to take her pension, she would receive a check, once a month, for $230. She receives this check for the rest of her life, and, if she predeceases my father, he is entitled to cash the check for the rest of his life.
A meager $230 a month may not sound like much-until you consider the salary she earned when she was employed, and how long she will likely draw her pension. The average life expectancy for women in the United States is roughly 78 years. Assuming my mother has an average life span, she will collect 276 separate checks from the state of Wisconsin for her five years of part-time service. These checks, without adjusting for inflation, amount to $63,480. Of course, in reality, the checks are adjusted upward annually for inflation, so her accumulated payout will be well north of $63,480.
To put things into perspective, consider the salary she drew when she was actually employed. In her final year, she made $7,650. Wisconsin's pension formula averages the highest three years' salary, which for her amounted to $7,072 and $6,191. Over the course of her career as a salaried part-time teacher's aide, she made approximately $35,000.
Thus, for five years of part time service in which she was paid a cumulative total of less than $35,000, she will collect nearly twice that if she has an average life span. She will be paid more money to be retired than she was ever paid by the state of Wisconsin when she was actually employed.
Let us not forget the other tiny detail-she has not lived in Wisconsin for over a quarter century, meaning she has not paid a dime to Wisconsin's tax system in over 25 years. Yet, she is entitled to tens of thousands of dollars in pension benefits for her five years of part-time employment as a teacher's aide.
Her scenario is just the beginning. It represents a tiny sliver of the enormity of the looming financial disaster. Substitute my mother's modest salary with a superintendent of a school district, for example, who was paid over $100,000 per year, and the gravity of the situation is put into proper perspective.
Ultimately, this means the taxpayers of Wisconsin will be paying, not for services, but for retirees. If the state has not woken up to this reality yet, it will. When a 911 call goes unanswered due to lack of emergency personnel on the streets, there will be calls for reform. When public schools cram 40 students into each classroom for a below-average education in an underfunded school district, there will be calls for reform. When checks are no longer issued, there will be calls for reform.
Fortunately, there already are calls for reform. They come from Governor Scott Walker in Madison, Wisconsin. He will not change existing benefits for present retirees. But he is attempting to tackle a ticking time bomb before it explodes. Let us, in the words of our free-spending President, hope, that the Democrats in the Wisconsin Senate, who have fled the state to avoid voting on the measure, eventually get the message. They are paid to cast votes. It is time they earn their paycheck. From what I hear, the pay can be quite generous in Wisconsin.
The Post-Islamist Future
February 21st, 2011 - 4:13pm
Filed under International Security
A recent op-ed written by friend of Gen Next Maajid Nawaz
Recent events in Egypt indicate the beginning of the end for the Middle East's fascination with Islamist opposition politics. Egypt's revolution is no deathblow to Islamism-it is not even a debilitating injury. But when thinking in terms of decades-long trends, it is the start of a new intellectual era for the region.
The 1950s and '60s witnessed the rise of pan-Arab socialism. Autocratic strongmen brought in by military coups were the order of the day in Egypt, Syria and beyond. By the 1980s and '90s, there was a fierce explosion in angry Islamism, as seen in the jihadist insurrection in Egypt and the rise of both Hamas and Hezbollah.
But with failed Islamist experiments in Iran, Sudan and Afghanistan, the new millennium saw a creeping transition. As I did, the region's young, tech-savvy youth developed new ambitions, away from Islamism and toward secular democratic politics. Democratic activism is the new political fashion.
Naturally, the potential for democracy in Egypt has raised fears that Islamists will take over, establishing a popular yet anti-Western and anti-Israel leadership. Being the most organized opposition group, the Muslim Brotherhood is the focus of these fears.
Mohammed BadieAlarmists would have us believe that we are on the brink of another Iran-style Islamist takeover, with the destruction of Israel as its obsession. The complacent, meanwhile, dangerously understate the threat. Interestingly, they are the very same voices who argued as recently as a month ago that the Brotherhood represents the only credible opposition in Egypt. Somewhere in the middle stand reasonable voices calling for critical engagement.
The Brotherhood is still formally committed to some of the more worrying Islamist principles of Hassan al-Banna, who founded the organization in 1928. Its popular rallying cry is "Allah is our objective; the Prophet is our leader; the Quran is our constitution; Jihad is our way; and death for the sake of Allah is the highest of our aspirations." And it insists that Islam must be the only source of legislation, and that non-Muslims and women cannot become heads of state.
The group's official line, therefore, inspires little confidence, especially as its current leader is the conservative Muhammad Badie (who was a cellmate of mine in 2002, when I was held as a political prisoner in Cairo's Mazra Tora prison). However, with a reformist middle-aged faction-led by another former cellmate of mine, Abdul Monim Aboul Fatouh-and a disillusioned youth, the Brotherhood is certainly no monolith.
United by the popular imperative to remove Hosni Mubarak, the group rarely allowed dissent. Despite this, in 1996 a group of prominent but frustrated younger members broke off, founding Hizb al-Wasat (the Center Party), which included among its founders Christians, unveiled women and non-Islamists. The Brotherhood's old guard reacted dismissively, but it seems that the founders of the Center Party were years ahead of the curve.
Last year, the Brotherhood had heated internal elections and middle-aged reformists were expected to do well. But under shady circumstances, and to the dismay of many frustrated younger members, they lost their seats at the leadership council. Things have never quite been the same.
Many younger Brotherhood activists, including friends of mine who had been jailed and tortured for their affiliation, froze their membership and joined the ranks of Egypt's increasingly bold secular youth activists. The groups included the Egyptian Movement for Change and the April 6th Youth. The effect was that the Brotherhood had to play catch-up when these secular democratic forces led the way in the January 25 uprising. The simple fact is that Egypt's most organized opposition group did not organize Egypt's only people's revolt. In addition, it is clear that the Brotherhood has no Khomeini-like figure capable of hijacking this revolution.
A recent poll by the Washington Institute for Near East Policy found that Muslim Brotherhood leaders received barely 1% of Egyptians' support for the presidency. Only 7% of respondents believed that "the [Mubarak] regime is not Islamic enough." This suggests that the Brotherhood is likely to win some seats in parliament but unlikely to produce the next president or prime minister of Egypt.
How, then, should policy makers think of the Brotherhood?
In a recent hearing of the U.S. House Intelligence Committee, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper asserted that the Brotherhood is a "largely secular" group. Such blunders are grossly counterproductive, as they hinder the clarity of understanding needed to plan for various contingencies, like Islamist ascendancy.
On the other hand, the alarmist approach-taken by many in Israel, for example-would seem to trade long-term regional security for short-term stability. As the former George W. Bush administration official Elliott Abrams remarked, "the Israelis apparently do not see the irony that they are mourning the departure of the man who created the very situation they now fear." (Returning to the recent Washington Institute poll, more Egyptians supported peace with Israel than rejected it, and only 18% approved of either Hamas or Iran.)
British Prime Minister David Cameron and former Prime Minister Tony Blair have taken a more cautious and reasonable approach. In his groundbreaking speech in Munich, Mr. Cameron declared, "I simply don't accept that there's a dead-end choice between a security state and Islamist resistance." And concerning the risk of a Brotherhood takeover, Mr. Blair said that "The truth is I don't know and neither does anybody else. And therefore what I am really saying is, don't be hysterical about it but don't be complacent about it either.
As long as we engage all peaceful opposition forces with our eyes open, Egypt can become a beacon for Arab democracy. Like Turkey's, Egypt's largely secular army is wary of an Islamist takeover. If we can help Egyptians build a democratic society for the first time in their history, we may see the dawn of a new post-Islamist age that transforms political dynamics world-wide. View article.
Mr. Nawaz, a former prisoner of conscience in Egypt, is executive director of Quilliam, a counterextremism think tank in England.
GN Partner Movements.org On Fox News
February 9th, 2011 - 5:15pm
Filed under International Security
Gen Next Member Jason Liebman, Co-Founder of Movements.org provides commentary on the impact of social media in Egypt.
The Loss of Self-Esteem is the Greatest Penalty of Unemployment
February 7th, 2011 - 4:13pm
Filed under Economy
By: Gen Next Member John Ridings Lee
One of the unspoken victims of the current unemployment situation is the effect that being unemployed has on the self-esteem of the worker without a job.
Regardless of the actions of the Federal and State government to extend unemployment benefits and to appear to be sympathetic to unemployed workers, there appears to be no concern over the psyche of the workers. One way this negatively impacts the worker is in the loss of their self-esteem.
Robert Roach, who recently lost his job as Principal of the Heartland Christian Academy in Bemidji, Minnesota, says that the lack of real attention to the issue of unemployment by government makes him - and 15 million other Americans like him - similarly unemployed, feel helpless.
His recent interview for a post as student services coordinator at a technical college found his competition to be 160 other applicants. Even though he holds a degree in chemistry and has no debts other than his home and car, he found out very quickly that he was "over-qualified." He maintains that it isn't just about the economy, it's about self-esteem. For those out of work, it is very easy to feel isolated and alone.
Consider the scope of the unemployment problem:
1. We are still running over 600,000 NEW jobless claims EVERY week.
2. The government continues to UNDER-REPORT the true problem.
3. Those who have given up looking for work aren't counted in any index. At the latest count, their numbers are at 920,000 - almost a million more that should be counted on the unemployment roles.
4. A vast majority of Americans are under-employed, having to take jobs that pay a fraction of what they formerly earned just to keep food on the table.
5. Most of the new jobs created are in the public sector, only adding to our debt burden.
6. The commercial banks are sitting on billions of bail out dollars rather than investing in new equipment or employees.
7. Uncertainty about future government taxes, health care impacts and other government programs are keeping several employers on the sidelines.
8. Major corporations are taking advantage of foreign labor costs and off-shoring many jobs formerly held by Americans. Alan Binder, a Princeton University economist, estimates that 22% to 29% of all current United States jobs will be shipped overseas in the next two decades.
9. Many companies are taking advantage of the vulnerable employees they have and increasing productivity by insisting on longer hours and working days by those who want to stay employed.
10.The annual summer layoffs are not here yet, and this year they will not have the governmental cover of the census to offset the loss of jobs.
11.Computers and automation are now performing many tasks formerly performed by humans and this trend will only grow over time.
12.Many workers have turned to temporary employment agencies with low pay and no benefits. Temporary jobs represent an astonishing 80% of private job growth.
According to the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) the United States accounted for over half of all job losses among the 31 richest countries from 2007 to the middle of 2010.
Karl Perera, an acknowledged expert in the field of self-esteem, listed several reasons why self-esteem is so important to a person. You can readily see how they affect the unemployed:
1. Self-esteem can be the difference between success and failure. This is especially important in the interviewing process.
2. Self-esteem affects your thinking, causing your outlook to be positive or negative about all aspects of your daily life, not just your employment situation.
Your potential to achieve what you most desire (and this usually is gainful employment for the unemployed) is directly related to your self-esteem. You must maintain positive self-esteem to overcome the attitudes of others who tell you that you cannot succeed.
Robert Reasoner, a former school administrator and the developer of a model that is used in schools throughout the United States, says that self-esteem is merely the confidence that one can meet life's challenges and be worthy of happiness.
If this is true, how little the unemployed ask and how easy it would be for our government to provide it.
Announcing: Gen Next Member Forums
February 3rd, 2011 - 12:10pm
Filed under Think About It....
We're excited to announce Gen Next Forums as an opportunity for Members to benefit from the perspectives, experiences, and wisdom of other Gen Next Members. Only in Gen Next do successful individuals have regular access to game changing individuals, consequential ideas, and unique life enriching experiences.
Participation in a forum can be one of the most valuable aspects of Membership, offering Members the opportunity to meet monthly with up to ten Members to exchange helpful ideas, get feedback, problem solve, and explore best practices in business.
Forum discussions operate under strict confidentiality. Topics are related to industry or Member specific professional challenges; educational reflections from a GN program or experience; or general business issues, such as strategic planning, preparing for acquisition, human capital, or risk mitigation, to name only a few.
The talent density within Gen Next is unmatched, which provides each Member an incredible resource at working through major professional challenges and ideas. Members come from many walks of life, but their day-to-day challenges are often similar, lending to an opportunity for Members to benefit from fresh and confidential input. We hope you'll take advantage of this great opportunity, as the strength of our organization is directly driven by the growth and commitment of our membership.
If you would like to get involved in a Gen Next Forum, or have any questions, please contact Bailey Cuzner. Forums are open to Members only.
Movements.org Launches Online Hub For Digital Activism
February 2nd, 2011 - 10:08am
Filed under International Security
Movements.org today launched an online hub for digital activism that will allow activists to connect on and offline, to access resources, and to share their stories with each other and supporters all over the world. The site provides how-to guides for new and experienced activists, blog posts covering the role of connection technologies in social change, and case studies for activists to share their stories and learn from their peers.
Examples of new digital tools and resources on the site include:
- How to Remain Connected if Your Internet Gets Shut Off
- 5 Things You Can Do to Support Egyptians from Anywhere
- How to Boost your Security on Facebook by Enabling HTTPS
- How to Access Blocked Websites
- How Online Media Drove a Campaign to Release Egyptian Blogger Kareem Nabeel Suleiman
The organization was founded by three Gen Next Members - Roman Tsunder, Jason Liebman and Jared Cohen. Cofounder Jason Liebman said "Movements.org is the source for anyone who wants to keep up to date on the use of technology for achieving real social change. We have existed for two years as a support network for grassroots activists using digital tools, and today we come out of alpha launch to make our platform and resources available to everyone."
The Movements.org network of grassroots activists is diverse, representing approximately 27 countries from Latin America, Europe, Asia, Africa, and the Middle East. Leaders of the Egyptian Shabab April 6 Movement were represented at our 2008 Summit and are playing an important role in the current protests in Egypt. Other examples of movements include:
Recent events in the Middle East have illustrated the potential of connection technologies to foster civic empowerment and mobilize citizens towards affecting positive change. This potential underlines the importance of Movements.org's mission to identify, connect, and support activists not just during and after protests like those we are witnessing in Egypt, but also beforehand in order to prepare them as much as possible.
The Entire World is Facing a Currency Crisis
January 17th, 2011 - 3:21pm
Filed under Economy
By: Gen Next Member John Ridings Lee
European Union financial leaders say they are ready to do whatever they have to do to save the euro but they are not willing to add to the already existing bailout fund. Germany has defeated every attempt to expand the rescue mechanism in place for fiscally troubled countries. Other country leaders wonder if the rescue fund would weather a collapse of Portugal and Spain, currently on the closely watched list. In the meantime, Moody's has downgraded Hungary's credit rating putting the Hungarians at odds with the European Union and the International Monetary Fund. Some circles report that Germany is considering abandoning the euro altogether.
Ireland is attempting to enforce a personal income tax on 2.2 million workers who historically have paid no taxes. This is causing severe political unrest in Ireland. Observers have said that the euro as a currency is a mess and will continue to be throughout 2011.
All of these financial worries come in the midst of an economic slowdown throughout Europe. Unemployment is rising, tax revenues are diminished, all of which is linked to the slowdown. Pressure to cut public spending is building as the government debt grows. Central governments in many European countries are being cut drastically.
The financial woes of the United States are well known and the quantitative easing or bond buying program announced by Ben Bernanke to purchase up to $600 billion of bonds through next summer only makes foreign investors wary of a weaker dollar if that is accomplished.
President Barack Obama says that there is "broad agreement" on global economic policy between the G20 nations but there are other leaders that fear that the conflict between China and the United States may threaten global growth.
While Washington officials maintain that the Chinese currency is held artificially low (which allows Chinese exporters an unfair trade advantage and allows China to accumulate huge amounts of foreign reserves) China argues that it has a commitment to reform its currency values but is waiting for global economic stability before making any significant adjustments.
Thomas Erdbrink reported in The Washington Post that new sanctions against Iran implemented by the United Arab Emirates have led to a sharp drop in the value of Iran's currency, the rial. This is causing confusion in Iran's markets and has resulted in a loss in trading value against both the dollar and the euro. The situation has become so tense that no foreign currency is being sold by currency exchanges. Even the gold merchants have closed their doors.
The dollar has fallen to a 15 year low against the Chinese Yuan and a record low against the Swiss franc. Officials in Asia were warning against an expected flood of foreign currencies as America moves ahead with its $600 billion asset purchase plan. Already Asian currencies are enjoying new trading positions. The Thai baht is up 11%, the Korean won is up 6% and the Philippine peso is up 8%. A major oil refiner in the Philippines just issued a bond yielding 7%, and this rate of return compared to the puny near zero rates of United States Treasuries are very attractive to foreign bond buyers.
Inflation fears abound in many countries, especially those who have a negative trade balance and are forced to import most consumer goods, food, and other staples. Experts believe that the extension of the Bush tax cuts by the Obama administration and recently approved by Congress may be positive in the short term but will do nothing to help the poor fiscal situation with budget deficits of about 10% expected in each of the next two years. Even Moody's is warning that it may have to downgrade the United States' AAA credit rating. This scares many of our trading partners.
Meanwhile, gold is enjoying a rapid rise in value as countries keep interest rates low in order to stimulate their economies and central banks are buying gold as a hedge against the unknown.
It is still a world-wide concern. The eight hundred pound gorilla is still the United States. In this currency scenario, the gorilla is walking a very fine tight rope and the fall could be fatal.
Gen Next Supports the S.E.A.L.s
December 1st, 2010 - 2:32pm
Six months ago Gen Next spent a day with the Navy SEALs in San Diego, and it's remembered by those who went as a rigorous, humbling, patriotic, and poignant experience. Some Members called it "life-changing". It wouldn't have happened without Lucas, Trevor, and Mike-the three heroic men who led us that day.
Right now they're in our hearts and thoughts as they fight overseas. This holiday season, to give them a little taste of home, Gen Next Members rallied to send them care packages filled with food, drinks, games, luxury cigars, and more. We can only hope that the packages will provide a bit of joy as they spend the Holidays away from their friends and family.
Cheers to our SEALs. There are not enough words to thank them for their service. We look forward to their safe return.
Bryan Mistele Featured on '60 Minutes'
November 8th, 2010 - 1:11pm
Filed under Economy
Gen Next Member and Inrix CEO Bryan Mistele was recently featured on "60 Minutes". Lesley Stahl interviewed him on the potential impact an income tax in the state of Washington would have on small business, if the bill were passed. The debate has national implications as law makers continue to argue over various policies aimed at increasing much needed revenue.
The FED's $600 Billion Dollar Gamble
November 8th, 2010 - 1:02pm
Filed under Economy
The FED's $600 Billion Dollar Gamble
John Lee | November 4, 2010 at 2:11 pm | Categories: Uncategorized | URL: http://wp.me/pJ5Yj-3o
Indeed, markets are beginning to recognized that the Fed will has decided to monetize Treasury debt in an effort to rearrange the proverbial deck chairs on the Titanic.
Almost immediately, a backlash exploded from foreign central banks. China, Brazil and Germany on Thursday criticized the Fed's yesterday, and a string of East Asian central banks said they were preparing measures to defend their economies against large capital inflows. But what does they mean by "defend against large capital inflows?" Quite simply, market participants will begin dumping dollars in anticipation of the dollar's imminent depreciation and potential for inflation leading to an appreciation of their currencies.
The Chinese central bank called unbridled printing of dollars the biggest risk to the global economy and said China should use currency policy and capital controls to cushion itself from external shocks. "As long as the world exercises no restraint in issuing global currencies such as the dollar - and this is not easy - then the occurrence of another crisis is inevitable, as quite a few wise Westerners lament," Xia Bin wrote in a newspaper under the Chinese central bank.
The Brazilian finance minister also weighed in warning of a "currency war", stating: "Everybody wants the US economy to recover, but it does no good at all to just throw dollars from a helicopter."
International tension of our central bank policy will likely to complicate US efforts to get leaders of the world's leading economies countries meeting in Seoul next week to press China to sign up to a new accord promising to limit current account balances.
Dan Price, partner at the law firm Sidley Austin and formerly George W. Bush's White House representative at the G20, said: "The US may find it increasingly difficult to galvanize countries to push China on [renminbi] appreciation when many think the Fed's quantitative easing policy is itself a major contributor to currency misalignment and imbalances."
Neither the Federal Reserve nor the US Treasury commented on Thursday. The tension over exchange rates has created fears of a wave of protectionist trade and investment actions in response, a reaction that so far has been markedly absent from the global economy during the recession and recovery.
Gen Next Member Pierre Prosper Negotiates and Wins Release of Fellow Member's Father Who was Unfairly Imprisoned in Iran
November 1st, 2010 - 10:17am
Filed under International Security
GN Member Ambassador Pierre-Richard Prosper negotiated the release of Reza Tagahvi--father of a Gen Next Member--from Evin prison in Tehran, Iran after being held for two years. Mr. Tagahvi was not officially charged with a crime during his captivity. Negotiations transpired over 14 months across several different countries.
Prosper and Taghavi were connected through Gen Next.
"We could not be prouder of Pierre for re-uniting the family. Our hearts go out to the Tagahvi family as they reunite after such a challenging experience," said Paul Makarechian, Chairman of Gen Next.
Prosper spoke with GN Members in Seattle on Oct 26, marking the first public remarks on the negotiations and release. Prosper served as a war crimes prosecutor for the United Nations International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, and he is responsible for setting the precedent that rape committed in time of conflict is now considered a form of genocide in international law. Pierre prosecuted the first ever case of genocide in the history of the world and went on to become the United States Ambassador-at-Large for War Crimes and Genocide.
For more on this story, please visit: Wall Street Journal
Official Launch of Counter-extremism Social Movement in Pakistan
October 13th, 2010 - 1:03pm
Filed under International Security
Saturday October 9th will see the launch of Khudi, a grassroots social movement in Pakistan, established to promote the culture of democracy and counter-extremism through civil society activism.
Founded by Quilliam Co-Director Maajid Nawaz, Khudi is Pakistan's first nationwide counter-extremism social movement, which aims to create a platform for young Pakistanis to debate and articulate their visions of Pakistan, and to make these visions a reality through political and civil engagement.
Khudi's leadership consists of seasoned youth activists, who bring to the movement their tremendous zeal for social change, their experience and an extensive network of activists. Even before launching, Khudi's Facebook page has over 10,000 fans. Through organising events that range from critical thinking workshops, to conferences on the role of religion in the Pakistani public sphere, Khudi's work will focus in particular on questions of counter-radicalisation, counter-extremism, national identity, religious tolerance and democratic governance.
Maajid Nawaz, founder of Khudi, says:
"Khudi is working towards combating extremist ideologies and is committed to bringing Pakistan back to the model of a progressive, pluralistic and democratic country as envisioned by leaders such as its founder, Muhammad Ali Jinnah. This would not be possible without the energy and enthusiasm of the youth of Pakistan, who's dedication will ensure that extremists will not be allowed to dominate in Pakistan."
Speakers at Khudi's launch include:
Noman Benotman, a former leader of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group and one-time associate of Osama bin Laden, he has since renounced the violent ideology of radical Islamism and has publically challenged al-Qaeda's ideology through an open letter to Osama bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri. Benotman is now a senior analyst at Quilliam.
Oscar Morales, a Columbian anti-terrorism activist who has fought against FARC's activities in his native country by organising mass public movements against violence.
Maajid Nawaz, Khudi's founder and himself a former leader in the radical Islamist Hizb-ut-Tahrir (HT) group, Nawaz renounced HT's ideology while imprisoned in Egypt. He now fights for his vision of a progressive and pluralistic Islam, Co-Directing Quilliam, the world's first counter-extremism think tank based in London.
The event will be attended by Pakistani political leaders, officials, youth activists, civil society leaders, academics and media representatives. It will also feature the launch of Khudi's Pakistan-wide student-led Laaltain magazine, aimed at challenging extremism on campus and promoting democratic culture and the integrity of Pakistan's borders. Representatives of partner youth groups will sign a 'Statement of Vision', uniting them under the Khudi banner to work towards promoting democracy, fighting extremist ideologies and building a better Pakistan.
State Department Innovator and GN Member Goes to Google
September 14th, 2010 - 3:37pm
Filed under International Security
On Thursday Sept. 2, Jared Cohen walked out of the Truman Building with his luggage for a final time, after four years on the State Department's Policy Planning staff, serving under both the Bush and Obama administrations. During his time in government, Cohen, who will be 29 in November, attracted much attention -- both praise and controversy -- for his unconventional thinking about statecraft: for calling on his friend Jack Dorsey to keep Twitter from going through with a scheduled maintenance shutdown during the heady days of the Iranian election last summer; for leading delegations of technology executives, including Google's Eric Schmidt, to troubleshoot problems in Iraq; and for tweeting his observations, with a touch some critics found too lighthearted, to his 300,000-plus digital followers.
Anne-Marie Slaughter, director of Policy Planning for the last year and a half, says his exuberance will be missed: "Jared's time with the Policy Planning staff was a period in which we moved from not only writing memos proposing new ideas, but also finding ways to put those ideas into practice as an initial proof of concept. We are known as the Secretary of State's think tank, but we have become a think/do tank."
In mid-October, Cohen will begin his new job as director of Google Ideas, a new division of the search giant that he is helping to launch. He will also be, as of Tuesday Sept. 7, an adjunct fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, focusing on counter-radicalization, innovation, technology, and statecraft. Cohen is the author of two books, Children of Jihad and One Hundred Days of Silence, and despite his interest in all things new media, is also the owner of an extensive collection of rare books, presidential autographs, and 19th-century campaign memorabilia.
Cohen chatted with FP about his new gig at Google, what he's learned at State, where his interest in the intersection of technology and foreign policy began, and what he thinks his critics get wrong. Excerpts:
Foreign Policy: While you were a Rhodes Scholar at Oxford, you made your first trip to Iran for a research project. I understand that project didn't work out as planned, but the time you spent in Iran, which you later wrote about in the book Children of Jihad, spurred your inquiry into unexpected uses of technology. Tell us about that.
Jared Cohen: What I had wanted to focus on was interviewing opposition leaders, government officials, and reformers. I did interview the Iranian vice president and some opposition leaders. But the Revolutionary Guards came into my room in the middle of the night and found a list of people I wanted to interview. That made my original plan impossible, but ended up being one of the most important things to happen because in the absence of my original research being viable, I ended up just wandering the country looking for friends to hang out with.
It became very clear to me that I had gone to Iran wanting to study the wrong opposition. I became obsessed with this idea that the real opposition in Iran is the 67 percent that's under the age of 30, and all I wanted to do was meet as many of them as possible. Even the ones that are part of that counternarrative like the basijis and the pro-regime ones.
Where it became about technology was I had this experience: I was in Shiraz, in the south, at one of these very busy intersections and all these kids --- there was five or six different alleyways all meeting, it was a very, very busy part -- and it was filled with kids perched against the sides of shops all looking at their cell phones. And I asked one: "What are you doing?"
And he said "Oh, this is where we use Bluetooth." He was trying to explain, "This is how I'm figuring out what I'm doing tonight." Another person was trying to recruit a bassist for their band; only one or two doing something that could be loosely interpreted as doing something politically relevant. It was mostly social and recreational. I asked one [youth]: "Aren't you worried? You're doing this right in the open; aren't you worried you're going to get caught?" He looked at me and said, "Oh, nobody over 30 knows what Bluetooth is."
The conclusion I came to there is there's two gaps: There's a generation gap between young people who are socialized and brought up with these technologies and an older generation that's coming a bit late to them (and that questions them before they embrace them); there are downsides to both. And there's an innovation gap between companies that innovate for luxury environments -- i.e., free and open societies -- and repressed populations which use things innovatively.
FP: Let's talk about your time at the State Department. Could you pick one of the technology delegations you led and just narrate it? We hear a lot about "technology delegations," but don't really know what that phrase means.
JC: I might as well start with the first one. The first technology delegation [the State Department] did was in April of 2009 to Iraq: It was me and nine techies from the private sector, including representatives from Google and YouTube.
We met with senior government officials in and around Baghdad. Then we met with American troops, NGOs, private-sector companies, like cell-phone carriers. We met with professors and academics and academic administrators. We met with tons of students. I led the delegation, and it was staffed by people at the embassy; I was the only person from Washington.
I had a very good relationship with the public affairs counselor there, Adam Ereli, who is a really, really smart "push the envelope" kind of guy, who had pitched an idea to me to get some professors out [to Iraq]. Now, we [at the State Department] often lead delegations of academics and NGOs to countries around the world, but we hadn't led delegations of people with expertise on tools. So, I thought: Why don't we take a delegation of technology executives to Iraq?
The hypothesis was very simple: If you connect people that have expertise on tools with people that have expertise on Iraq, something innovative may happen. I just had an intuition this could lead to something interesting. It just sounded right, and the embassy thought it sounded right. The idea was: "Let's see if this can result in concrete deliverables that can provide new solutions to old challenges."
FP: Can you talk about some concrete outcomes? Do you think the trip succeeded?
JC: A lot of deliverables that came out of that trip: We created a program called the U.S.-Iraq internship program, for example. We figured that instead of just bringing Iraqi students on exchanges to the United States to study at high schools and universities, let's create internships for them at technology and other start-ups to immerse them in the entrepreneurial "garage culture." So now we're bringing young Iraqi engineers to the U.S. to work for Twitter, Howcast, AT&T, etc. After they go back to Iraq, based on the connections they built in the U.S. and based on what they've learned in the U.S., they're now building their own networks -- what they believe will be their version of Silicon Valley for Iraq. They're the pioneers of entrepreneurship in a post-Saddam Iraq.
Also, the Museum Project was really cool. Iraq has this amazing national museum, and it's an incredible source of pride. Sixty to 70 percent of the museum artifacts that were stolen in recent years have been returned, but the museum exists in a part of Iraq that is sufficiently turbulent that it is not open to the public. We figured that if people can't go there, let's create a virtual presence for it. So we partnered with about 10 different companies. Google, for instance, sent engineers out and digitized the entire museum with street-view technology, literally rolling trolleys around the museum, taking images of things, and built this whole virtual platform. We had a company called Blue State Digital, which did the Obama campaign's tech stuff, build it out, and Howcast, an online video company, created accompanying "how-to" videos -- like how to tell if your Iraqi antiquity is stolen and what to do about it.
These things aren't going to change the face of Iraq, but what I was trying to do was show how these technology delegations can lead to deliverables that are funded and driven in part by the private sector. While small in this early piloted stage, maybe this can actually be a methodology that can be scaled up at a later date.
FP: Talk about the evolution of thinking behind State Department initiatives now identified as "21st-century statecraft."
JC: The core of it, to me, is bringing together nontraditional partners to do multistakeholder initiatives. The State Department's Policy Planning staff, which is where I've worked for four years, is typically thought of as the secretary of state's personal think tank. Our job is to generate ideas, think out of the box, think long term, and we have the most valuable resource of all, which is the resource of time. We are the only entity, really, in the State Department, maybe the U.S. government, that has the mandate to sit around and think big thoughts and think ahead and put pieces together.
In the four years that I've been in policy planning, I've worked for three excellent directors: Steve Krasner, David Gordon, and Anne-Marie Slaughter, who have all transformed it more into a think/do-tank. I look at the Policy Planning staff now as the secretary of state's personal think tank, but also the secretary of state's personal start-up. I often say Policy Planning is very analogous to a venture capital firm. A venture capital firm sees an interesting idea and puts money behind it; in Policy Planning, we look for promising ideas and then put contacts and relationships behind it.
The U.S. government is uniquely positioned to be the world's greatest matchmaker, and I don't mean that as a jargony statement. With all of our embassies and consulates around the world, the fact that people will take our phone calls and the fact that we have a really good bird's-eye view into how different stakeholders can help address different challenges [means] we can play matchmaker well. That's why when you hear people within State now saying something like "statecraft is as much about building connections as it is doing negotiations," it's actually something that has meaning.
Of course, we still do negotiations; we still do representation; we still do government-to-government exchanges. But it's about using new tools and working with new kinds of stakeholders. The technology delegations are a great example.
FP: So it's more about bringing together different problem-solvers than about technology per se?
JC: So here's what frustrates me. There are two common misperceptions about the technology aspect of 21st-century statecraft. The first is that the technology side of 21st-century statecraft is just about State Department officials using Twitter and blogging more -- in other words, that embracing technology is just about more effectively and innovatively communicating and advocating our policy. I think technology is a valuable tool for that, but to me that's public diplomacy 2.0.
When I think about 21st century statecraft, I think about technology being used as a tool to empower citizens, to promote greater accountability and transparency, to do capacity building. At its core, what technology does is it connects people to information, which is new media; it connects people to each other, which is social media; and then there's a far more exciting path that we're going down now, which is that technology is a tool to connect people to actual resources -- like mobile banking or mobile money transfers or telemedicine.
My second frustration is that I embrace technology, but not without an understanding of what the challenges are. My own thinking has evolved over the years. I think when I wrote Children of Jihad, I wrote it with a very optimistic view of what technology can do; today I maintain that optimistic view, but I'm also aware of the challenges we have. So I would say I'm not a techno-utopian, but I'm a techno-pragmatist. I get the downsides of technology; in fact, I'm very concerned about the downsides of technology.
FP: Do you worry that efforts encouraging, or enabling, people to use social media in a place like Iran may be inviting them -- especially dissenters and human rights activists -- to put themselves at greater risk, with more personal information online? In a worst-case scenario, do you worry about enabling the surveillance operations of a police state?
JC: Technology is a tool, and it's a platform. Nobody gets arrested for being a blogger; people get arrested for dissent. Nobody gets arrested for putting information about themselves online; they get arrested for being an activist. I'm a strong believer in the fact that you should not blame the tools; you should blame the circumstances.
FP: Going forward, tell us about your future work at Google.
JC: I am going to be director of a new division at Google called Google Ideas. And it's basically a think/do tank. Much of the model for it is built off of my experiences on the Policy Planning staff. It's not designed to be, "Let's pool all of Google's resources and tackle global challenges."
In the same way Policy Planning works by bringing together a lot of stakeholders in government, out of government, and across different sectors, so, too, will Google Ideas do something very similar. And the range of challenges that it may focus on include everything from the sort of hard challenges like counterterrorism, counterradicalization, and nonproliferation, to some of the ones people might expect it to focus on, like development and citizen empowerment.
What I'm interested in is the SWAT-team model of building teams of stakeholders with different resources and perspectives to troubleshoot challenges. So the reason I say it's a think/do tank is you need a comprehensive approach to think about and tackle challenges in different kinds of ways. In government, we used to refer to a "whole of government" approach, meaning work with multiple agencies to leverage ideas and resources; Google Ideas will take a "whole of society" approach.
FP: What can you do at Google that wasn't possible at the State Department?
JC: There are things the private sector can do that the U.S. government can't do. The big thing is the resources and the capabilities. There are not a couple hundred [computer] engineers in the State Department that can build things; that's just not what government does. You don't necessarily have some of the financial resources to put behind these things. It's really hard to bring talented young people in; there are not a lot mechanisms to do it. On some topics, it's very sensitive for government to be the one doing this.-- Foreign Policy
Real Banking Reform and Capitalism
August 9th, 2010 - 10:09am
Filed under Economy
By: GN Member John Ridings Lee
The time has come to bite the bullet. Throughout the world there is growing support for massive change in the ways that financial systems operate as most countries view the current systems as the cause for the worldwide financial crisis.
The International Monetary Fund has often been discriminatory in the implementation of their obligations, mostly due to the pressure exerted by the G20 nations who dominate the membership of their board of governors. Most central banks have all operated to impose regulations, currency manipulations, trade barriers, and political influence to the advantage of their own needs without regard to how it impacts the globalized economy.
We are not talking about minor adjustments here, but rather a wholesale restructuring of the world's financial communities. We can no longer allow financial entities to develop new products that stay one step ahead of the government regulators and permit the obscene practice of the "greater fool" philosophy which has characterized the banks activities over the past several years and has been the root cause of the world wide recession.
In the United States you cannot even count the number of regulatory agencies responsible for overseeing the activities of the banks and financial entities. It is no wonder that the left hand never knows what the right hand is doing! Rose Marie Kushmeider writing for the FDIC Banking Review stated that the research department of the World Bank reported that at the end of 2002 at least 46 countries had already revamped their supervisory responsibilities for their financial institutions by adopting a single agency or set the machinery in motion to do so. Beginning with Norway in 1986, 22 countries have already consolidated into a single supervisory agency.
In the United States the Federal Reserve directly supervises only 12% of the banks and then only 25% of their assets. This small percentage does not effectively prohibit the banks from taking undue risks with the rest of their assets. Barney Frank and Christopher Dodd have demonstrated they are not capable of supervising Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, so even quasi-private entities need better supervision. The Securities and Exchange Commission has done a woeful job of supervising Wall Street investment bankers.
Of course there will be tremendous opposition to restructuring the financial system of the United States. The banking lobby virtually regulates itself. The politicians move seamlessly between Wall Street and Washington, and any new restructuring will require Congressional Action.
Paul K. Kelly, the president of Knox & Co. maintains that this should start with reinstating a law with the spirit of the Glass-Steagall Act. The repeal of this act in 1999 allowed the commercial banks to become investment banks, and investment banks to become protected as though they were commercial banks. All the financial institutions set about to get involved in the marketing of insurance products, derivatives, credit default swaps, and many other sophisticated products that no one had any idea of the risk ramifications they presented.
Once each entity has determined in which part of the financial marketplace it wishes to be placed, it should clean up the books. Write off, or sell all the toxic assets so that their books reflect properly their capital position.
Then new capital requirements should be established that meet prudent investment risks. Non-banking corporations such as General Electric, Sears, and insurance companies should be forced to liquidate their banking activities.
We need to do this sooner than later. The benefits to the United States and its citizenry are numerous and our leadership will once again prove to the world that we have our financial house in order. Confidence in the dollar will return internationally. Confidence in the new system will spur activities in the business community and result in businesses once again gearing up for planned growth and the hiring of employees to meet that growth that will do more than any other activity to improve our unemployment situation. We need to establish products that each segment of the financial system can offer to their customers. One stop shopping in the financial institutions simply is impossible to manage, supervise, or regulate. It is extremely difficult to determine who is responsibility for fraud and deceptive practices, and then to prosecute them. This leaves depositors, investors, shareholders, and taxpayers holding the bag for the losses.
The only losers are the ones that caused the problem in the first place with their exotic risk taking, like Dick Fuhr of Lehman Brothers, who lost hundreds of millions of dollars yet he is extraordinarily wealthy personally, rewarded for those unwise risks he authorized even while he drove Lehman Brothers into bankruptcy.
Dominique Strauss-Kahn the Managing Director of the International Monetary Fund recently said: "if there is not a restructuring of the banking system, then all the money that you can put into monetary and fiscal stimulus will just go into a black hole." He states that the IMF has been through 122 banking crises and one thing is constant: until all of the losses have been recognized, not only from real estate, but also from other factors resulting from the downturn in the economy and only then can we expect much improvement in our globalized economy. Not until the banks have been cleaned up can we find any way for recovery.
Banks are important to Capitalism. Credit is important to Capitalism. But, the stacked deck we use today does not allow Capitalism to work properly. We need to be the world leader in being the first to allow the free market to work and lead the global economy out of the recession
Why Debt Should Be Washington's Main Concern
July 30th, 2010 - 9:28am
By: GN Member John Ridings Lee
"The budget should be balanced; the treasury should be refilled; public debt should be reduced; and the arrogance of public officials should be controlled." -Cicero. 106-43 B.C.
Hardly a day goes by when we are not bombarded with information, both valid and misleading, about the sheer size of the national debt of the United States. The average American has a tendency to dismiss the reports as too big for him/her to worry about. In truth, they should be very worried as the national debt influences our personal financial lives in many ways: rising interest rates, higher taxes and inflation among them. As federal debt increases investors lose faith in the ability of the government to pay, and the borrowing for the productive private sector dries up. Yet in 2010 the federal government is projected to issue almost as much new debt as the rest of the world combined! The real indebtedness is close to $53 trillion dollars when future Social Security and Medicare liabilities are included according to David Walker, former Comptroller General.
In addition, some economists argue that the government is manipulating the inflation rate by understating the Consumer Price Index which ignores food and energy costs. If they took these factors into consideration, the CPI, our inflation rate would be considerable higher, but that would cause increases in pensions, benefits, and federal deficits. This would require higher interest rates and the government bailouts would overwhelm the federal and state budgets and the financial sector would face an even greater crisis.
The Office of Management and Budget lays the blame for our massive debt in three areas: an imbalance between federal revenues and spending that predates the recession and the recent turmoil in financial markets, sharply lower revenues and elevated government spending, and the various federal policies implemented in response to the conditions. They forecast the debt in 2019 to be 76.5% of GDP, but other sources place it there right now in 2010.
Further increases in federal debt relative to GDP almost certainly lie ahead if current policies remain in place.
Murray Rothbard, a libertarian economist, warns that a long-term reliance on borrowing by government to pay for public goods and services is a recipe for disaster. He says that this incurring this massive debt places a growing and intolerable burden on the society and economy, both because they raise the tax burden and drain resources from the productive to the non-productive.
Another economist, Milton Feldstein says that common sense tells us that the ratio of debt to GDP should not be allowed to rise year after year. A country should recognize that it is in trouble if it sees the ratio of debt to GDP rising year after year. Deficits are popular with politicians because deficits are not visible to voters as the burden is shifted to future generations.
This entire spending mind-set started with John Maynard Keynes in the early 1940s, and was supported by ever-growing numbers of university educated economists. However, these policies have left one important question: How soon and how deep will the crash be in this credit-fueled and speculative-dominated economic cycle?
The heads of President Obama's national debt commission, Alan Simpson and Erskine Bowles, told a meeting of the nation's governors that they cannot count on the federal government to bail them out any further. "This debt is like a cancer," Bowles said. "It is truly going to destroy the country from within." According to EconomicPolicyJournal.com, 32 states have already run out of funds to pay for any unemployment benefits.
In testimony before President Obama's new bipartisan commission, Ben Bernanke stated that the government deficits threaten the American economy. This commission is smacking of hypocrisy. The President tells everyone that he is working to control the problem and fix the economy, yet his actions are just the opposite of the appropriate requirements. He calls for a "spending freeze" at a historically high level both in real terms and as a percentage of GDP.
Of special danger to the American economy is the amount of debt held by foreign countries. Recently, Russia and China had a meeting to discuss how they could team up to weaken the dollar. Although nothing official came from that meeting, the danger persists. Over the last ten years foreign ownership of our debt as increased from 29% to 48% of the outstanding total.
The rest of the world recognizes that the Congressional Budget Office has, for some time, been cooking the books to make President Obama's economic decisions look good, and they consider our fiscal policies very dangerous.
Excellence is the Standard
June 21st, 2010 - 11:03am
Filed under International Security
By: GN Member Sam Chapin
"THE ONLY EASY DAY WAS YESTERDAY" reads a sign in the "Grinder" -- the courtyard where each morning, U.S. Navy SEAL trainees perform calisthenics before being physically and mentally challenged beyond belief. For the twenty-five civilians and Gen Next Members, of which I am one, that sign was at once ominous and prophetic. Thanks to GN Member Jared Cohen, we were recently able to spend the day at the SEAL training compound at Coronado, just across the bridge from San Diego. It is rare for civilian groups to take a tour of the SEAL compound and our tour was the first to allow a group to attempt the famous obstacle course.
The experience was a profound dose of perspective. It left us grateful that there are still some aspects of American life where merit is the standard , mediocrity is not accepted, and trophies are not awarded simply for showing up.
For those either unaware or smart enough not to watch the movie G.I. Jane, "SEAL" is the acronym for the elite group of warriors expertly trained in Sea, Air, and Land and these guys are truly impressive. Our host SEAL, Trevor (28), was no exception. Trevor, a Washington State native from Kent, is a Naval Academy grad, Rhodes Scholar Alum from Oxford University, Navy Lieutenant, and Assistant Officer in Charge of a SEAL platoon. Just your basic stellar human being who is physically capable of unimaginable feats and willing to sacrifice his life for our freedom and our country. In other words, and to borrow an infamous line, we want him on that wall -- we need him on that wall.
Our tour began with a presentation and Q&A session where we learned that each year up to 1000 young men attempt the six-month SEAL BUD/S course (Basic Underwater Demolition/SEALs). And each year no more than 250 receive their Trident which signifies their induction onto an elite SEAL team. We learned that SEALs are deployed in forty countries and are away from home about 50% of the time. Their training is unimaginably rigorous, dangerous, and complex.
They are often called the "Silent Warriors" because of their unique ability to perform their missions with stealth. During their training, however, the silence is often broken by the call of the motivational exclamation "Hooyah!" Hooyah is the SEAL word for pretty much anything and everything and somehow manages to keep up morale.
It became quickly obvious to us that the men who become SEALs are a breed apart. Marcus Luttrell, ex-SEAL and author of the book Lone Survivor, described the men who make it through the grueling training as "the ones with no quit in them." For the ones who do ultimately quit, the quitting process, as we witnessed, is solemn. Out on the Grinder courtyard there was a line of about 50 helmets which started underneath a large bell on a post. Those helmets had been placed there by some in the present class of trainees who decided that being a SEAL was not for them. Each trainee rung the bell three times, placed his helmet on the ground, and walked out. Some made the choice to quit and others were forced out after failing any of the "Evolutions" (the SEAL word for training challenge whether running, swimming, shooting, testing, or demolition).
The training evolutions occur on land with long beach runs in long pants and boots, at sea with 5 mile ocean swims and inflatable boat evolutions, in the pool with dive gear and underwater demolition drills, on the firing range, and in the classroom. The classroom, incidentally, is not like your normal classroom in that it has buckets of water suspended from the ceiling to douse sleeping trainees during Hell Week (the culmination of BUD/S training) when they're allowed only four hours of sleep for the entire week. Not per night. Four hours for the entire week. And if motivation wanes, there's also this inspirational reminder on the classroom wall: "The beatings will continue until morale improves." Hooyah.
Next, we saw the headquarters for SEAL Team 3 and were honored to examine the memorial walls to the fallen SEALs of team 3 like Michael Monsoor and Marcus Lee who both died in 2006 in Iraq. Lee was awarded the Silver Star and Monsoor was awarded both the Silver Star and posthumously awarded the Medal of Honor for diving on a grenade to save his three SEAL teammates. Monsoor was nearest the door in the room when the grenade hit him in the chest and landed in front of him. He could have jumped out of the room and out of the blast. Had he done that, his teammates would surely have died. Without hesitation he jumped on the grenade, absorbed the entire explosion, and paid the ultimate price. "Hero" doesn't begin to describe a man with that kind of courage.
Our tour continued with the aid of Lucas (21) and Mike (25) who volunteered to help Trevor lead the tour on their day off. Like Trevor, Lucas and Mike are trained experts and carry themselves with the confidence, courage, and humility that is so evident in the Navy SEAL. They taught us about the various rifles, rocket launchers, pistols, and breaching tools that SEALs routinely use in battle. Fortunately for all involved, the firing range was closed and we were unable to discharge anything.
Even in the most serious of occupations and environments, however, there can be humor. For our SEAL hosts, the funny part was about to begin. After outfitting us in camouflage pants and t-shirts, they allowed us onto the obstacle course, or the "O Course" if you're speaking SEAL. Reminiscent of the movie Stripes, we were twenty-five people, ages 25-50, men and a few women all willing to try the obstacles to the extent we could. We were all pretty fit but the O Course is like nothing you have ever seen. There are 15 big obstacles (interspersed by little ones) and they are daunting to say the least. There are ropes, logs, walls, and barbed wire everywhere. One of their doctors gave us a pre-briefing, explaining where they would take us if we were in serious trouble or if "something minor" occurred like a broken leg. Yikes.
SEALs must complete the entire O Course quickly and without failing a single obstacle. They get three chances and if they fail any one obstacle, they're out. Nothing short of excellence is tolerated. Not being SEALs, we were free to fail and humiliate ourselves over and over. And that we did. There were some moments of glory here and there; and ultimately we were able to do enough of the course to make us incredibly sore, a little proud, and truly grateful for the opportunity.
We left the compound for our last Evolution - dinner and drinks with our hosts at a Coronado pub. I'm not sure which was more humbling, training like a SEAL or drinking like one. Either way, for us the hard part was over. The real test was coming for the SEAL trainees who were about to begin Hell Week two days later. Many more will quit and the line of helmets under the bell will grow. The most dedicated -- the ones with no quit in them--will succeed. For those new SEALs, yesterday was truly the only easy day. For us it was a challenging, inspiring, honor.
Sam Chapin
Sam Chapin is an attorney, University of Washington School of Law adjunct law professor, and member of Gen Next
The United States' World Cup of Mediocrity
June 8th, 2010 - 10:42am
Filed under Education
Gen Next Senior Director Wade Lairsen, is short on Team USA's chances at the FIFA World Cup this summer, but long on our children's future. Read below to see why he feels our attitudes toward each are connected.
In a few days, 32 nations will step on to the world stage and engage in the fiercest battle in four years. National pride, billions in revenue and many fans would say, global domination is at stake.
Despite the fact that Team USA has the best equipment and resources at its fingertips, we will not win the World Cup in South Africa this summer. The team will certainly mount a formidable effort, but will not go all the way. Teams from the Netherlands, Argentina, and Brazil have a far better chance at winning than Team USA. Why is that?
Undoubtedly, our athletes are as capable of being trained to win as their global counterparts. What then, holds our team back? Is it the system in which they play? Is it the comparative lack of national focus on soccer?
One thing is certain. Instead of insisting that Team USA brings home a win, we have lowered our expectations. Our team's best hope comes in the first round, where a victory over England would be an upset the likes of which hasn't been seen since 1950. Winners win championship titles; they don't get excited by merely winning round one.
One might argue that expectation to win the World Cup in a game like soccer is unrealistic. But acceptance of our own mediocrity is a reality with far greater implications.
A similar battle is taking place where stakes are much higher. This battle is fought not on the soccer fields, but rather in elementary, middle and high school classrooms around the world.
Here, too, the United States has lowered its expectations and accepted its own mediocrity. Currently, students in the United States rank 25th in Math and 21st in Science among 30 developed countries. They continue to fall behind their counterparts in countries, such as Finland, Canada, and the Czech Republic. Meanwhile, the Czech Republic spends only one-third as much per student as the United States does.
In recent years, we have been somewhat successful at narrowing the achievement gap between minority and non-minority students, domestically; yet we have not begun to address our own global achievement gap.
Team USA has undoubtedly been working since the 1950s--albeit without success--to repeat that historic victory and Americans have been talking for a longer period of time about fixing the problems in education. In 1955, Rudolf Flesch authored the groundbreaking bestseller "Why Johnny Can't Read," which cited system-wide failures resulting in the fact that students in the United States were dramatically less literate than their counterparts in Germany and the United Kingdom. Despite the book's popularity and that it has been long-hailed as a breakthrough in identifying challenges in the American education system, the problem persisted. In 1981, Flesch followed up with "Why Johnny Still Can't Read," where he noted that the education system's response to the issues he raised more than 25 years prior had been more about protecting its own image and monopoly, than actually addressing the core issue.
Today, for the first time in history, this generation of Americans will be less literate than the generation before it. That means Johnny could not read and Johnny, Jr. will be even less literate.
When today's elementary school students graduate high school, will they be prepared to step on to that field of competition and mount a formidable economic defense (or, preferably, offense) against the brute force of China with its seemingly endless amount of cash available for investment, or the agility of India which is able to replicate the latest US business models almost overnight?
Much like Team USA competing in South Africa this summer, the United States certainly has the best equipment and resources available, which could be used to educate our children. We must ask ourselves then, are our students inherently less capable of learning than students in Finland?
Certainly, that's not the case. Our students continue to fail because we lack national focus on their individual education and have accepted our own mediocrity and the broken system in which they struggle every day. It seems we have forgotten that our education system exists for one reason: to educate our children.
Sadly, it also seems that those running the system treat it more as a job bank focused on pensions and retirement plans, than the cultivation of opportunities for our kids and our country's future economic capabilities. While it would be hyperbole to say that global domination is at stake in South Africa this summer, global position is most certainly what's at stake in classrooms across the United States every day.
The US is still the world's largest economy, and also competes quite well on the world stage of the Olympics. If soccer teaches us anything, however, it should teach us that acceptance of our own mediocrity is a self-fulfilling prophecy.
The stakes are too high, the future of a nation demands it, and the United States must accept nothing less than a win.
Governor Christie: Not About Teachers
June 7th, 2010 - 4:27pm
Filed under Economy
Governor Chris Christie gives remarks regarding Teachers and the New Jersey Education Association during a Town Hall Meeting in Robbinsville, N.J.
Star Treatment
May 17th, 2010 - 10:26am
Filed under International Security
Orange County's hottest race in the June 8 primary election quite possibly is the competition for Sheriff-Coroner. Given the previous elected sheriff was the disgraced Mike Carona, emotions are high as voters consider which candidate will do the most to restore integrity to the county's top law enforcement post.
The candidates: the appointed sheriff, Sandra Hutchens, Anaheim Deputy Police Chief Craig Hunter, and former sheriff's Lt. Bill Hunt.
Voters have a choice between what seems to be the seemingly sensible political establishment pick, the mostly unknown local deputy chief or the populist union candidate de jour.
All three differ on issues such as crime fighting, the role of SWAT teams and administration of the county jails. But voters should take this opportunity to repudiate public employee union influence on county elections and maintaining bloated pension benefits, reaffirm local commitment to the Constitution's Second Amendment and, most importantly, restore integrity to the office of sheriff.
Orange County's political landscape was rattled in October 2007 when Sheriff Carona was indicted on federal corruption charges. He resigned in January 2008 and was temporarily replaced by an assistant sheriff, Jack Anderson. That June, Hutchens was appointed sheriff by the county Board of Supervisors, to serve the remainder of Carona's term.
This election will mark the first time voters will elect a new sheriff since Carona first won the job in 1998. Let's hope this time around they choose more wisely.
The department has been virtually scandal-free since Hutchens' appointment and she has been effective in general, demonstrating a firm grasp on budgetary issues. Her biggest drawback was her political blunder regarding concealed-weapons permits, and how she responded to criticism from the Board of Supervisors.
Hutchens came under hard fire (not literally) within the first few months of her appointment related to some "reforms." The OCSD sent letters to many people who hold permits to carry concealed weapons (CCWs), informing them that the "Department has determined that your identified risk does not meet the good-cause threshold as required under the new CCW policy based upon the information you provided. As a result of this determination, the Department's present intention is to revoke your CCW license." This sparked a backlash from many of the permit-holders, other residents and gun-rights activists.
Last Tuesday, The Orange County Register, the Orange County Forum and Gen-Next gave the three candidates an opportunity to square off in a 75-minute debate showcasing the differences in their approaches to law enforcement. I moderated the debate, which helped me conclude who is the most promising candidate and, perhaps more importantly, who is the most objectionable candidate, from a freedom perspective.
The unionist
Hunt, who ran against Carona in 2006 and then retired as a lieutenant when Carona moved to demote him after the election, has an uncomfortably aggressive style of communication, which made some members of the debate audience, the moderator included, a little uncomfortable. It seemed like he was hopped up on one too many Red Bulls.
Hunt's message, as Hutchens noted, was long on platitudes and short on substance. But his impassioned populist appeals seem to be resonating with at least the Tea Party crowd and perhaps a broader segment of county voters. He portrays himself as a Sheriff Joe Arpaio-type of law enforcer but his priorities are misguided. And he rose in the Sheriff's Department under Mike Carona.
My biggest concern with Hunt is that he is the union candidate. He was endorsed by the ultra-powerful Association of Orange County Deputy Sheriffs, the deputy's union. When criticized at the debate for having union backing, Hunt gave a fist pump to the audience, acknowledging, apparently, that he was quite proud of that fact.
What likely comes with union support is hundreds of thousands of dollars in campaign spending and the understanding that he will defend union priorities, such as protecting unsustainable pension benefits for county deputies, which Hunt says the sheriff has no control over.
He places responsibility for pensions on the Board of Supervisors, and he is partially correct. The Board has ultimate authority to end pension abuses in the county. But the sheriff sits on a number of boards and commissions and can use the position as a bully pulpit for pension reforms.
The establishmentarian
While Hunt has the union, Hutchens has become the choice of the political establishment, or at least, that is how her candidacy appears. She has amassed an impressive list of local elected-official endorsements: Supervisor Bill Campbell - the only supervisor to make an endorsement - Rep. John Campbell, R-Irvine, South County state Sen. Mimi Walters and the OC Taxpayers Association. She has taken little union money (she says from only the firefighters union, which is promising), but she sought the deputy union's endorsement, as did Craig Hunter.
Hutchens' biggest drawback is her perceived softness on the Second Amendment, evidenced by her policy decision to revoke many CCWs. She aggravated the situation by arranging for a large show of force by deputies at a Board of Supervisors meeting where gun permits were discussed.
Hutchens has shown she is generally adept, and the department is much better off under her leadership, certainly than under Carona. And on the pension issue she is pretty good though not ideal, arguing their needs to be a two tiered system - meaning new employees should not be hired in with the same overly generous pensions deputies have now under current provisions.
The other guy
Hunter, the deputy chief in Anaheim, is less well-known in county politics than his opponents, though his experience in law enforcement is impressive. His career spans more than 30 years, starting on the streets of Garden Grove. He has worked in jail operations, undercover, narcotics and SWAT. He has a far less aggressive style than Hunt, coming off as tempered and grounded in data and offering reasonable approaches to problems facing the Sheriff's Department. He has a strong stance on the Second Amendment and has a broader interpretation of gun permit laws than Hutchens.
Hunter says he would approve more CCW permits than has Hutchens. He is the only candidate who signed the Orange County Republican Party pledge not to accept public-employee union money for his campaign, and he has kept to that promise. Hunter has the best position on pension reform, stating that a two-tiered system - where new hires receive less-generous benefits - is not enough; the department needs to move to a 401(k)-style plan.
Hunter doesn't have political endorsements to match those of Hutchens and Hunt, though he has some, and he does have the support of nearly a dozen former police chiefs.
One shortcoming is that Hunter does not have the same familiarity with the Sheriff Department's budget as Hutchens and Hunt. But that learning curve is not insurmountable, especially for someone who has helped to run one of Orange County's largest police departments. The Anaheim department's purview includes Angel Stadium, the Honda Center, the Anaehim Convention Center and Disneyland.
The priorities
My colleagues and I on the Register's Editorial Board spent considerable time debating qualifications for a sheriff. Honesty and integrity are top of the list, followed by:
- A philosophy that incorporates community policing and keeping citizens involved;
- A workable approach to dealing with illegal immigrants;
- Strong philosophical grounding in support of the Second Amendment and an open policy towards concealed weapon permits;
- A desire to reform the unsustainable pension program for public safety employees;
- A fiscally conservative approach to budgetary issues;
- A clear strategy for management of the county jails.
Applying these criteria to the candidates, it became clear to me who would make a better sheriff. Craig Hunter has a clean track record in law enforcement, adheres to the Second Amendment and has the best approach to pension reform.
Sandra Hutchens has done a good job turning the Sheriff's Department around since the days of Mike Carona. But it is difficult to overlook her narrow approach to Second Amendment issues, even though it is understandable as to why she would want to revoke gun permits arguably handed out as political favors by her predecessor. That issue aside, Hutchens would get my support.
The next elected sheriff will have a lot to deal with, but if the most important issues in this election are pensions, unions and the Second Amendment, the choice is clear. - Register
Taliban Warn of Major Offensive in Afghanistan
May 11th, 2010 - 1:41pm
Filed under International Security
KABUL-The Taliban warned they would launch a major countrywide offensive in Afghanistan in the coming days, momentarily shifting the focus from President Hamid Karzai's visit to Washington.
Afghan officials dismissed the Taliban's warning as nothing more than blustery rhetoric, and coalition officers said they, too, didn't think the militants could sow chaos on the scale suggested in a statement posted on their website Saturday.
But "we'll obviously be looking to see what happens Monday," the day the Taliban warned the offensive would begin, said a North Atlantic Treaty Organization officer. "Our guard is pretty high every day. This doesn't change anything."
Just days before meeting with President Obama, Afghan President Karzai paid a visit to the Bagram Airbase medical facility where he spent some time with wounded Afghan soldiers. Video courtesy of Reuters.
The Taliban said their forces would begin laying siege Monday to Afghanistan's major cities and blockading Afghan and NATO bases. The militants called their coming offensive "al-Fatah" ('to conquer' in Arabic) and warned there would be "ambushes, detonations of explosive devices, assassinations of government officials, suicide bombings and detainment of foreign invaders."
The warning appeared timed to a series of coming events. The first, Mr. Karzai's visit to Washington, starts Monday and is aimed at smoothing over the rough relations between Kabul and the Obama administration. A series of major attacks could distract from the trip and underscore just how far Mr. Karzai's government and its Western backers have to go before the Taliban is neutralized.
Later in May, Mr. Karzai is planning to convene a so-called Peace Jirga - a gathering of politicians, elders and other prominent Afghans - to chart out a path for talks with the insurgents. Alongside peace talks, the Karzai government and its Western backers are also planning to lure away low-level fighters with cash and jobs.
The Taliban, in a statement Saturday, offered their own version of that plan, saying it would provide "material incentives" to any Afghan soldiers or police who defected.
The Taliban also said they would take care to ensure the safety of ordinary Afghans. Civilian casualties, especially those caused by NATO forces, are a longstanding concern among Afghans, including Mr. Karzai, who is expected to raise the matter in Washington.
Many Afghans fear there will be more civilian casualties in the coming months as thousands of NATO and Afghan soldiers pour into the southern city of Kandahar and push out to the districts that surround it. The area is the Taliban's birthplace and strategic heartland, and coalition special operations forces are already quietly hunting down midlevel commanders in the area.
The Taliban are also stepping up activity in and around the city, and the offensive announced Saturday seemed to be a bid by the insurgents to counter allied efforts to win over the Kandahar's populace with promises of increased safety and better governance in the coming months.
The Taliban have already stepped up its suicide bombings in Kandahar, and the militants are targeting prominent officials and tribal elders in the city and surrounding districts. The latest assassination came Saturday, when the insurgents took credit for gunning down an official and two of his bodyguards in Arghandab, a volatile district north of the city.
Despite the increasing volatility in Kandahar, Afghanistan's Defense Ministry was quick to downplay Saturday's statement, calling it a "desperate move."
"This statement is just more propaganda by the Taliban," said Defense Ministry spokesman Gen. Zahir Azimi. "The enemy is in a defensive position, not in an offensive position."- WSJ
Bomb Suspect: How was he Caught? - Commentary from GN Member Juan Zarate
May 4th, 2010 - 11:58am
Filed under International Security
Insight and analysis of the Times Square bomb arrest. Harry Smith talks to Bob Orr, CBS News Homeland Security Correspondent and Juan Zarate, CBS News National Security Analyst. Video.
Isn't it Time to Take Another Look at Free Trade?
April 28th, 2010 - 8:58am
Filed under Economy
The economy is struggling through one of the worst periods in modern history. Several experts have put forth their suggestions of what we must do to end the suffering and emerge at the beginning of a recovery. Most of the proposals involve continued spending, raising taxes, or a combination of the two. Missing from the dialogue is to look at the methods that made America's economy the envy of the world. That was the implementation of Capitalism and its primary tool: free trade.
United States Trade Representative Ron Kirk recently warned the Congress that it is time to pass free trade legislation. Although President Obama has identified job creation as priority one in his recent speeches, it doesn't appear the Congress is getting the message as little is being done to facilitate free trade and to create jobs in the United States. Even the stimulus money, although paid to American firms, ends up creating jobs in China and other cheap labor markets.
Although free trade will stimulate export-driven jobs and would help to meet Obama's goal to double the United States exports over the next five years, we still see Europe claiming many of our markets overseas. The only supporters of free trade policies seem to be conservatives and business groups in Washington. Labor, through their lobbyists such as the AFL-CIO and other labor groups say they NEVER will support any program that promotes free trade. Alan Blinder writing in the Library of Economic Liberty periodical said that the divergence between economists' beliefs and those of well-educated men and women on the street seems to arise in making the leap from individuals to nations. In running our personal affairs, virtually all of us exploit the advantages of free trade...without thinking twice. The fact that another country becomes wealthier does not mean that America becomes poorer. One reason that the United States did so much better than Europe for two centuries is that Americans had free movement of goods and services across our state lines while European countries "protected" themselves from their neighbors.
Many estimates have been made regarding the "saving of jobs" through trade restrictions. Invariably, these trade restrictions end up costing Americans more. Consider the $1,285,000 we lose annually for every job in the luggage business, $199,000 lost annually for each job in the textile industry, $1,044,000 lost annually for each job in the softwood lumber industry, and $1,376,000 a year for each job in the benzenoid chemical industry! On the other side of the issue, free trade provided 1.2 trillion dollars in revenue and supported one in five manufacturing jobs here in the United States. With more than 95% of the world's consumers living outside the borders of the United States the global marketplace is important to domestic companies.
Daniel Griswold of the Cato Institute reports that a recent study by the Institute found that 90% of Senators and Congresspersons favor trade restrictions over free trade. This study shows a drifting towards isolationism. Americans pay dearly for the government intervention in free trade matters. The trade barriers erected by Congress cost Americans an estimated 70 billion dollars a year by raising prices and reducing competition. Daniella Markheim, of the Heritage Foundation, said that hiding from or ignoring the debate on globalization will not promote a free trade agenda. Rather, this approach leaves the voice of protectionism as the only voice being heard on trade issues.
The Institute for International Economics has calculated that moving from today's trade environment to one characterized by perfectly free trade would generate an additional 500 billion dollars in annual income. Also, the University of Michigan concludes that if we would reduce the trade barriers on agriculture, manufacturing, and service activities by just one third we would increase our annual income by another 500 billion dollars. So, the message is clear. Congress needs to support trade agreements, ratify the agreements already in place with a number of countries, stop protectionism legislation, and eliminate all international trade barriers. - By: GN Member John Ridings Lee
CBS '60 Minutes' Explores Quilliam's Work
April 26th, 2010 - 1:29pm
Filed under Quilliam
Quilliam's counter-extremism work has been the subject of the latest edition of CBS '60 Minutes', one of the US's most prominent and influential current affairs TV programmes. the Qulliam Foundation is a partner of Gen Next.
The programme's lead 14 minute segment, entitled 'Jihadists and The Narrative', focuses on Quilliam director Maajid Nawaz's involvement in a hard-line Islamist group and on his subsequent decision to reject Islamism - while remaining Muslim - and to co-found Quilliam to directly challenge extremism in all its forms.
First aired on Sunday evening in America, the programme also covers Quilliam's ground-breaking work in Pakistan, its regular events in British universities and its wider efforts to puncture Islamist narratives.
Maajid Nawaz says:
'Today, as this programme shows, I believe that Muslim-led organisations need to do more to actively undermine the ideas and aims of the terrorism-sympathising groups that fester in our midst - condemning terrorist violence is not enough. And in this battle of ideas, governments cannot shy away from taking sides. Such past blunders has resulted in our present malaise.
'For how much longer we try to tackle terrorism, while not uprooting the narrative and ideology behind Islamist violence? This programme helps explain the challenges that we all face.'
The programme can be watched online here.
Quilliam's annual progress report can be downloaded here.
1. Quilliam is Britain's first counter-extremism think tank. It is an independent organization and believes in political representation as citizens through Parliament, not separatist community groupings.
Flex Fuel Vehicles Hold the Key
April 15th, 2010 - 12:03pm
Filed under Economy
Oil drilling, conservation measure not enough to address America's energy security challenge
Two policy announcements last week revealed the Obama administration's core strategy in addressing the nation's growing dependence on oil. On Wednesday, President Barack Obama announced that his administration would allow new oil exploration along the Atlantic Coast and in the eastern Gulf of Mexico. The following day, the administration announced new mandatory fuel efficiency standards of 35.5 mpg average within six years, up nearly 10 mpg from now.
By simultaneously promoting supply-side solutions (drill baby, drill) and demand-side solutions like increased efficiency, Mr. Obama is throwing bones to the two camps that for decades have dominated the nation's energy debate. This may be smart politics, but when it comes to effectiveness - though there is nothing wrong fundamentally with either efficiency or drilling - both policies will do very little to address America's energy security challenge, as they fail to address the root of the problem: oil's virtual monopoly over transportation fuel (only 2 percent of U.S. oil demand is due to electricity generation).
Last year, the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) estimated that opening the Outer Continental Shelf to exploration would affect oil prices by 11 cents per barrel by 2020, which would translate to less than a penny per gallon. On the flip side, going on an efficiency diet would not even offset the growth in demand due to natural growth.
Furthermore, consider OPEC's response. The history of the past 30 years shows that when non-OPEC producers increase their production, OPEC responds with production cuts, essentially keeping the same amount of oil in the market. Conversely, when we use less due to higher gasoline taxes, stricter fuel efficiency standards or simply in response to a hike in gasoline prices, as was the case in 2008, OPEC, again, cuts its production. In other words: when we drill more, OPEC drills less; when we use less, OPEC drills less.
While both drilling and efficiency promise little relief, with growing instability in the Middle East and millions of Chinese and Indians moving from bicycles to cars, it is almost a given that we will face further painful oil crises as the decade progresses. Contrary to popular belief, our oil dependence problem is not a function of the amount of oil we consume or import (we don't care how many bananas we consume or how many computers we import) but about the fact that oil is a strategic commodity second to none. More than 95 percent of transportation energy is petroleum based. Therefore, solutions that perpetuate the petroleum standard rather than producing new vehicles in a way that enables fuel competition are vastly insufficient.
A transformational approach is needed. Until the 19th Century, salt had a position similar to that of oil today because it was the only means of preserving food. Salt-rich countries had inordinate power on the world stage. Wars were fought over salt. Today, salt is still a useful commodity for a range of purposes. We import much of our salt, but canning, electricity and refrigeration decisively ended its monopoly over food preservation, diminishing its strategic importance.
To truly address our oil dependence problem, we must do to oil what humanity did to salt: turn it into just another commodity. The cheapest and easiest technology to strip oil of its strategic status is the flex fuel vehicle. This technology, which costs less than an extra $100 per new vehicle, enables cars to run on any blend of gasoline and alcohol fuels like ethanol or methanol. Such fuels can be made cheaply from a variety of non-petroleum energy sources ranging from coal to natural gas to biomass.
In the future, technologies to produce alcohol fuels from carbon dioxide may offer an elegant way to achieve energy independence while reducing greenhouse gas emissions. If every car sold around the world was flex fueled, gasoline would have to compete at the pump against a variety of alternative fuels, and the oil barons in the Middle East would be challenged by fuels made elsewhere, including in poor countries in Africa, Latin America and South Asia.
President Obama has expressed several times his support for flex fuel vehicles. So did Secretary of Energy Steven Chu. A bipartisan bill, the Open Fuel Standard Act, which requires that 50 percent of new cars be flex fuel by 2012, was introduced before both the House and the Senate. Now that Mr. Obama has satisfied the wishes of both drillers and dieters, its time for him to focus on the third leg of the stool and ask Congress to enable Americans what they need and deserve most - fuel choice at the pump.
Gal Luft is executive director of the Institute for the Analysis of Global Security. He is co-author of "Turning Oil into Salt: Energy Independence through Fuel Choice." His e-mail is email@example.com. - Baltimore Sun
GN Member Roman Tsunder Featured in "3 Steps to Sustainable Cause Marketing" Article
March 23rd, 2010 - 1:13pm
Filed under Economy
Two weeks ago I interviewed Doug Akin of Mr. Youth, but after my recent interview with Roman Tsunder (1010 Youth Nominee) I believe that the title of Mr. Youth is truly his. Roman is the Founder and President of Access 360 Media, a next generation of Out-of-Home Media platform, delivering digital content and advertising programming to engaged audiences through both digital and non-traditional media. However, in addition to his work with Access 360 Media, Roman spearheads the Alliance for Youth Movements (AYM) and the PTTOW! Summit. AYM is a non-profit organization dedicated to identifying, connecting, and supporting digital activists from around the world and PTTOW! is an invite only, intimate, Allen & Co type gathering focused on the young adult market (p14-34) bringing together select CEO's, CMO's, Heads of Product and Industry Icons. Emigrating from Russia to the United States when he was 5 years old, Roman understands and believes in the power of role models and mentors in youth activism and his ongoing mission is a clear depiction of that.
In this episode of mobileYouth TV, I talk with Roman on how brands can successfully incorporate social causes into their marketing initiatives.View video.
Source - Mobileyouth.org
AYM Summit: A Meetup for the World's Youth Activists
March 10th, 2010 - 4:04pm
Filed under International Security
I'm at the Alliance for Youth Movements (AYM) summit in London, at the Intercontinental Hotel. The two-day summit, which ends tomorrow, is an impressive gathering of youth activists from more than 18 countries, NGOs and tech giants, here to learn more about using online tools to promote their extraordinary range of social movements and promote non-violent change. You can read more about the AYM here.
At the opening reception last night, hosted at Google's headquarters, I met a smart bunch of people from organizations such as Blue State Digital (which ran Obama's online campaign), Howcast, Middle East peace activists One Voice, and the East London-based Young Foundation.
But the highlight is an A-list bunch of conference speakers at the conference today and tomorrow -- including Jack Dorsey of Twitter, Sir Martin Sorrell of WPP, Scott Heiferman of MeetUp, as well as top people from Google, YouTube and the World Bank. Other keynote speakers include Jeremy Gilley, the former actor who founded Peace One Day, and Joe Rospars, who was the new-media director for Obama for America.
There's strong representation here from Washington DC. This morning, Jared Cohen, of the US State Department, moderated a session titled Seizing the Moment: Responding to Crises and Mobilizing Around Key Events. That had speakers from Mobile Accord, Ushahidi, Mazahery Law, AccessNow and the Censorship Research Center. I'm now sitting in a session called Turning Video into Tangible Action, featuring experts such as Ramya Raghaven of YouTube, Levi Felix of Causecast, and Chris Sarette, Invisible Children.
There's much discussion of how to produce a viral video to spread the word about an urgent crisis -- a panelist who's involved in the Robin Hood Tax campaign (to promote a redistributive 0.05% tax on final transactions) is currently explaining how getting the help of director Richard Curtis helped the campaign soar.
Now a human-rights activist from Israeli NGO B'Tselem is explaining how they gave 250 cameras to Palestinians in the West Bank to document the reality of local life. Not to activists, but to ordinary families, such as a 16-year-old in Hebron whose one-minute video about her frustrations became national news and influenced official policy on law-enforcement in Hebron. It wasn't about using new media -- it was about using traditional tools to provoke established media to notice a story that had been under the radar.
It's an inspiring event, geared towards helping activists share top-level information and making connections that lead to significant change. You can sense the scale of their practical ambition from the title of some of the sessions: one is called Tech Solutions to Repressive Regimes; another is titled Effective Strategies for Mobile Content to Increase Empowerment. - Wired Magazine
Education Finalists Picked
March 9th, 2010 - 4:46pm
Filed under Economy
By NEIL KING JR. and BARBARA MARTINEZ
The Obama administration picked 15 states and the District of Columbia as finalists in a heated competition for extra federal education funds to shake up underperforming schools.
The states that made the cut in the $4.35 billion Race to the Top competition were Colorado, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Kentucky, Louisiana, Massachusetts, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina and Tennessee.
President Barack Obama visits Martin Luther King Charter School in New Orleans in October. The Race to the Top program encourages such schools.
Under the program, states stand to garner hundreds of millions of dollars each, depending on their size, at a time when many local education budgets face deep funding shortfalls.
The sheer number of finalists surprised outside observers, who had predicted the administration would impose more stringent standards. The list included a number of states whose applications were considered weak.
A total of 40 states and the District of Columbia submitted applications in January for the first round of funding, with a second round set for summer.
The administration defended the selection of the 16 finalists, saying that all states whose applications cleared a pre-set score automatically advanced to the next round.
The Education Department promises to be tougher in winnowing the list down to the winners, which will be announced next month, and are expected to include fewer than a half-dozen states.
"Most of them will go home losers," said Education Secretary Arne Duncan. "We anticipate very few winners in round one."
The size of the finalist list drew fire from some quarters. "I was hoping the administration would send a clear message that you had to be absolutely great to even be in the competition," said Andrew Smarick, a former George W. Bush administration official who has supported the program. "This is a huge disappointment."
President Barack Obama has used the lure of federal grants as a way to get states and school districts to improve local education standards, even if they receive no money in the end. The idea behind the program is to reward states that show a willingness to overhaul failing schools through measures such as tough testing standards, data collection and teacher training. The administration intends to apply this competitive approach to an increasingly large share of its education budget.
The Education Department turned to a panel of outside judges to pick the finalists according to 19 criteria, including a state's track record, openness to charter schools and use of testing systems to judge teacher performance. The finalists' scores weren't made public.
Independent evaluators have given especially high marks to three states on the list-Florida, Tennessee and Louisiana-for their accountability standards and for implementing systems to track student performance. All three have also pushed to expand the growth of charter schools, which are publicly funded but independently run.
Observers who have dug through the applications were taken aback by other picks. Few gave New York much chance after state lawmakers failed in January to lift a cap on charter schools and allow for the use of student test scores in teacher evaluations.
New York caps charter schools in the state at 200, a limit it is expected to hit this year. The failed legislation would have doubled the maximum allowable, while killing a current law that bars tying teacher evaluations to student test scores.
Not allowing student test scores to be tied to teacher evaluations "seemed like a clear no-no under the rules" of the competition, said Joe Williams, executive director of Democrats for Education Reform, a group that favors charter schools and stronger teacher evaluation systems. He said the state legislature now had a short window to enact legislation that would correct New York's shortcomings.
Joel Klein, chancellor of the New York City school system, the largest in the country, failed to win the legislative changes he sought in January, but cheered the announcement nonetheless. "We're within striking distance,'' he said. He wants the legislature to immediately move to lift the charter cap and change state laws regarding teacher evaluations, firings and seniority. "That's the way to win this,'' he said. "We know that these things are hurting us.''
California, which faces a $20 billion state budget crisis, failed to make the finalist list. The state had hoped to qualify for as much as $700 million at a time when many local school districts are slashing their budgets. California had also tried hard to qualify by doing things such as ramming a bill through the legislature over union objections that allowed teachers' pay to be linked to students' test scores.
Los Angeles Unified School District Superintendent Ramon C. Cortines said Thursday he was "disappointed to learn that California is not among the Race to the Top finalists for the first round of funding." He added that "I look forward to working with the state and federal education authorities on future rounds of funding. I also hope that the Obama administration recognizes that [the Los Angeles school district] is paving its own path to success in the midst of our challenges."
Mr. Duncan and his team say they have aimed to keep the selection process as free of politics as possible. Congress, the states and the White House weren't told who made the cut until Thursday morning. Mr. Duncan said the finalists were picked solely based on the judges' scoring of their applications, and that he had no hand in the decision.
Mr. Duncan has won bipartisan support for Race to the Top, but that could change as lawmakers and governors realize only a small minority of states may emerge as winners.
The list of winners so far could stir unease for other reasons. Only five of the 16 finalists were states that went for Republican Sen. John McCain in the last presidential election. And only one of them, Colorado, was west of the Mississippi-a fact that Mr. Duncan said was "purely a coincidence." - WSJ
U.S. Chamber of Commerce Grows Into a Political Force
March 9th, 2010 - 9:28am
Filed under Economy
By Tom Hamburger
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce is building a large-scale grass-roots political operation that has begun to rival those of the major political parties, funded by record-setting amounts of money raised from corporations and wealthy individuals.
The chamber has signed up some 6 million individuals who are not chamber members and has begun asking them to help with lobbying and, soon, with get-out-the-vote efforts in upcoming congressional campaigns.
The chamber's expansion into grass-roots organizing -- coupled with a large and growing fundraising apparatus that got a lift from Supreme Court rulings -- is part of a trend in which the traditional parties are losing ground to well-financed and increasingly assertive outside groups. The chamber is certainly better positioned than ever to be a major force on the issues and elections it focuses on each year, analysts think.
The new grass-roots program, the brainchild of chamber political director Bill Miller ( Member of Gen Next), is concentrating on 22 states. Among them are Colorado, where incumbent Democratic Sen. Michael Bennet is vulnerable; Arkansas, where Democratic Sen. Blanche Lincoln faces an uphill reelection battle; and Ohio, where the chamber sees opportunities in numerous House races and an open Senate seat.
The network, called Friends of the U.S. Chamber, has been used to generate more than a million letters and e-mails to members of Congress, 700,000 of them in opposition to the Democratic healthcare plan. That is an increase from 40,000 congressional contacts generated in 2008.
What makes the initiative possible is a swelling tide of money. The chamber spent more than $144 million on lobbying and grass-roots organizing last year, a 60% increase over 2008, and well beyond the spending of individual labor unions or the Democratic or Republican national committees.
The chamber is expected to substantially exceed that spending level in 2010.
The chamber's expanding influence is worrisome to top officials in the White House -- including Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, who has expressed concern about the chamber in the past, and senior advisor Valerie Jarrett, who tried to build direct contacts with company executives last fall when the chamber was fighting the administration's legislation to regulate carbon emissions.
Several companies, including Pacific Gas & Electric and Apple, left the chamber over its stance on climate policies, but since then many more firms have joined and made substantial contributions, chamber President Tom Donohue said.
Amassing cash
Two major factors are driving the chamber's growing success in fundraising.
First, President Obama and Democratic majorities in both houses of Congress have alarmed a widening circle of business leaders with their calls for greater government involvement in healthcare, tighter federal regulation of the financial industry and legislation to help unions organize workers, among other issues.
Second, the recent Supreme Court ruling that corporations have a free-speech right to spend money to help elect or defeat candidates not only struck down a century of laws limiting such spending, but it also made many business executives feel more comfortable about using corporate money for political purposes.
Industries that are the most directly affected by Washington policies and regulations -- pharmaceuticals, for example -- have always spent lavishly on lobbying and politics. But many others have held back, deterred by concern over violating the complex laws on campaign spending and by a general sense that putting money into politics might open companies to criticism.
The Supreme Court decision appears to have allayed those concerns, according to corporate lawyers and others involved in the process.
"In the past a lot of companies and wealthy individuals stood on the sidelines," said Robert Kelner, who heads the Election and Political Law Practice Group at Covington & Burling, one of Washington's most influential corporate law firms.
"In just the last election, we had the spectacle of John McCain threatening to prosecute his own supporters if they spent their money on outside groups that ran advertising in the presidential race.
"That cloud has been lifted," he said.
Using trade associations such as the chamber as the vehicle for spending corporate money on politics has an extra appeal: These groups can take large contributions from companies and wealthy individuals in ways that will probably avoid public disclosure requirements.
The chamber has developed that into something of a specialty: Under a system pioneered by Donohue, corporations have contributed money to the chamber, which then produced issue ads targeting individual candidates without revealing the names of the businesses underwriting the ads.
At the chamber, officials contend that rising donations are less the result of the recent Supreme Court ruling than they are of a 5-4 decision in 2007 in which the court ruled it was unconstitutional to ban issue-related advertising close to an election.
As a result of that ruling, the chamber was able to spend $1 million on so-called issue ads in the final days of the Massachusetts Senate race in January to help elect Scott Brown, the state's first Republican senator in decades.
As ominous music played in the background of one of the ads, a moderator intoned: "Washington politicians continue to fail us. More spending and fewer jobs. Scott Brown . . . supports measures that hold spending and cut taxes. . . . Call Scott Brown. Thank him."
Powerful as the effect of such advertising could be, the chamber and its allies expect the next big expansion of influence will come in street-level organizing and voter turnout operations.
Miller, a former chief of staff to a GOP lawmaker and co-owner of a restaurant in Washington's tony Georgetown section, built up the chamber's grass-roots organization in 2008 and expanded it in 2009 with the help of consulting firms.
Studying magazine subscriptions, voter registration and consumer buying habits, the consultants built a list of potential allies in 122 key congressional districts.
Individuals were invited to join the Friends of the U.S. Chamber initiative and were promised updates and special insights on Washington. They were then "activated," asked to write letters or call Congress on a particular issue or get involved in events in the districts.
Miller said the so-called activation rate was "roughly equivalent" to the rate claimed by Organizing for America, the network known as Obama for America during the presidential campaign, which has twice as many members.
The chamber has also given its staff, especially senior leaders, incentives to push fundraising. They are now working, in effect, on a commission system: the more money they bring in, the more they are compensated.
Leaning right
Officially, the chamber is a bipartisan nonprofit organization, but over the last decade it has tilted decidedly toward the Republicans. During 2008, 86% of the spending by the chamber's political action committee went to Republicans. Far more was spent on issue ads, most supporting GOP candidates.
The chamber says it represents 3 million companies that pay dues to the national chamber or a local affiliate, though internal documents suggest the organization's treasury is filled in substantial part by contributions from a couple dozen major corporations most affected by Washington policymakers.
Tax records from 2008 show that 19 companies or individuals paid between $1 million and $15.3 million, providing a third of the chamber's total revenue that year. Because the chamber is a nonprofit, it must disclose donations, but not necessarily the identity of the donors.
The chamber insists that those donors remain anonymous.
Some labor-backed organizations, such as Working America, which has 3 million nonunion members nationwide, have also declined to release details of its donors, which suggests a rocky road for legislation to require more transparency.
tom.hamburger@ latimes.com
Kim Geiger of the Washington bureau contributed to this report.
Copyright © 2010, The Los Angeles Times
Tech Delegation Goes To Russia To Carry Out 21st Century Statecraft
February 23rd, 2010 - 5:14pm
Filed under International Security
Silicon Valley and the State Department are getting along quite well under the Obama Administration. Last year, a tech delegation traveled with the State Department to Iraq and Mexico City to see how technology can help aid the countries. As a result of those trips, the Iraqi government set up a YouTube channel and digitized the contents of its looted national museum, while Mexico set up an SMS hotline for reporting crimes anonymously. In January, Sec. Hillary Clinton held a dinner in Washington D.C. for tech innovators and luminaries to discuss how to harness the power of technology tools to promote diplomacy around the globe, what Secretary Clinton calls "21st Century Statecraft."
Today, a group of leaders in the tech sector is joining the State Department on a trip to Russia to discuss how communications technologies and social media can be used to strengthen and broaden the ties between the United States and Russia. The State Department has recruited some big names to join the trip, including actor and social media lover Ashton Kutcher, eBay CEO John Donahoe, Twitter co-founder and Square founder Jack Dorsey, and Cisco CTO Padmasree Warrior. We hear one of Kutcher's responsibilities will be to Tweet about the trip. Topics which will be explored include how to foster entrepreneurship and how to use the Web to combat child trafficking and corruption, and use it to improve training, distance learning for remote populations, e-government initiatives, and cultural exchanges.
The delegation is led by Jared Cohen, a State Department policy staffer, Howard Solomon of the National Security Council and White House Chief Technology Officer Aneesh Chopra. The full list of tech leaders on the trip include John Donahoe, Jack Dorsey, Padmasree Warrior, Shervin Pishevar, executive chairman and founder of Social Gaming Network; Jason Liebman, CEO and cofounder of Howcast; Esther Dyson, prolific investor and leader; Mitchell Baker, Chair of the Mozilla Foundation; and Ellis Rubinstein, president and CEO of New York Academy of Sciences.
Kutcher, along with his actress wife, Demi Moore, are the founders of the Demi and Ashton Foundation, which works on anti-trafficking issues. Kutcher also founded production company Katalyst and has been active in promoting and furthering social media initiatives.
"They are taking off their commercial hat, putting on their expert hats and becoming part-time diplomats," Cohen tells TechCrunch. "The State Department is a connector here. Statecraft is as much about building connections as doing negotiations."
The delegation is tentatively scheduled to meet with the Russian Ministers of Communications, Health and Education; with advisors to President Medvedev; with leaders of Russian technology and telecommunications companies; with cultural and educational leaders; and with civil society organizations concerned with health, child welfare anti-trafficking, and anti-corruption efforts. - Tech Crunch
Silicon Valley Luminaries Become Technology Ambassadors to Russia
February 23rd, 2010 - 5:10pm
Filed under Economy
Silicon Valley is playing a much larger role in international diplomacy in the Obama administration than in the Bush administration. That's in large part thanks to Jared Cohen, who has played a role in both.
Cohen joined Condoleezza Rice's State Department policy planning staff as its youngest member in 2006. A Stanford University graduate who won a Rhodes Scholarship and earned a master's degree in international relations at Oxford, Cohen advised the State Department on youth and education, particularly in the Muslim world. He gained notice for his book: "Children of Jihad: A Young American's Travels Among the Youth of the Middle East," which was based on his travels there. He advised Rice on how to reach young people in the Middle East who were increasingly using social media tools.
Now Cohen is on Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's team and helped with her speech on Internet freedom. I spoke with him while he was waiting at the airport to board a flight for Moscow. He's part of an effort that Secretary Clinton calls "21st Century Statecraft." In January, Clinton held a dinner in Washington to explore how to use technology to promote diplomacy.
"Statecraft as much about building connections as it is about negotiating," Cohen said.
That's what Cohen will be doing for the next five days. He has teamed with Howard Solomon of the National Security Council and White House Chief Technology Officer Aneesh Chopra to lead an all-star U.S. delegation to Russia to see how technology can mutually benefit both countries.
The State Department has always sent business delegations to other countries. But sending technology delegations is something new. Last year, a tech delegation traveled to Iraq and Mexico. After the Iraq trip, the government there set up a YouTube channel and tech companies helped set up a website to catalog arts and artifacts in the national museum that was looted after the U.S. invasion. After the Mexico trip, the country set up an SMS hotline to report crimes anonymously.
Cohen's contention: The U.S. can open doors to other countries and cultures through its technology sector that produces many of the tools that young people around the world use to connect with one another.
Among the luminaries headed to Russia with Cohen are actor Ashton Kutcher; EBay CEO John Donahoe; Shervin Pishevar, executive chairman and founder of Social Gaming Network; Twitter co-founder and Square founder Jack Dorsey; Mozilla Foundation chair Mitchell Baker; and Cisco System CTO Padmasree Warrior. They will meet with Russian ministers of health and education, advisors to President Dimitry Medvedev, leaders of technology companies and more. They will tackle issues such as encouraging entrepreneurship and e-government initiatives and combating child trafficking and corruption.
The participants were chosen because they represent a microcosm of the technology industry and they make efforts to do social good. Kutcher, and his actress wife Demi Moore, for example, have a foundation that works on trafficking issues. Kutcher is also active in social media.
"They are taking off their CEO and commercial hats and putting on their expert hats," Cohen said. - L.A. Times, Jessica Guynn
Why Aren't we Learning From Japan's "Lost Decade"?
February 18th, 2010 - 11:57am
Filed under Economy
President Obama has requested another round of stimulus spending with expanded unemployment benefits and additional money for infrastructure projects to jump-start economic growth and reduce unemployment. Although this stimulus package is meeting with more opposition than the first, our elected officials do not seem to have learned anything from other countries who have unsuccessfully tried similar stimulus policies in the past. Take Japan for example.
Following strong economic growth and low interest rates in the 1980's, an asset bubble developed in the Japanese economy consisting of inflated real estate and securities prices. Recognizing that this bubble was unsustainable, the Japanese central bank raised interest rates in 1989, leading to a massive sell-off in securities and a dramatic decline in real estate values. In short, the bubble burst.
The government responded with several rounds of stimulus which consisted of massive infrastructure spending. All over Japan, roads were paved, dams were built and bridges were erected to connect numerous land masses all in an effort to stimulate the economy. In the process, Japan accumulated trillions in national debt which now totals 180% of it's nearly $6 trillion dollar economy. So large is Japan's debt that it now ranks number one of the developed countries in terms of leverage.
So how well did this entire stimulus program work? Well, economists generally refer to this period in Japan's history as the "lost decade" because the policies failed. Miserably.
Between 1989 and 2003, the Nikkei Index fell by 80% and real estate declined by 50%. Homeless camps sprung up on the banks of many rivers as people abandoned their homes due to foreclosure activity of the banks. The suicide rate skyrocketed when unemployment doubled. Even today, exports still continue their downward spiral, prompting fears of a second wave of recession for the Japanese economy.
The Heritage Foundation says that no nation is sorrier than Japan for endorsing John Maynard Keynes brand of economics and for squandering vast sums of national wealth in a vain attempt to stimulate their economy.
It now appears that these policy mistakes cost Japan the chance to lead the world in economic growth. Indeed, The Japan That Can Say "No" learned the hard way that fiscal stimulus programs financed by debt won't stop bankruptcies, declining real estate values, foreclosures, job losses or a falling stock market.
Richard Koo, the chief economist at Nomura Research Institute calls our current recession "a balance sheet recession." In the United States, the housing and credit bubble created several trillion in assets. It also created several trillion in debt. When the bubble burst, the value of the assets declined as housing prices plummeted and mortgage backed securities became worthless. Unfortunately, the debt remains.
The only solution now is for banks to remove these assets from their balance sheet by taking the write-offs. Likewise, individuals and business have no choice but to pay down their debt. This reduction in debt takes huge sums of money out of the economy. Koo maintains that Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke and popular left-of-center economist Paul Krugman, who often writes for The New York Times, do not understand this yet as demonstrated by their vain attempts to prop this bubble up even more through massive government stimulus plans financed by equally massive increases to the national debt.
When one compares one financial indicator: The Nikkei 225 Index to the Standard and Poor's 500 Index, there is a frightening similarity. If the United States stays on its current course, we are likely to suffer the same fate as Japan, and perhaps even more so, because while the savings rate cushion in Japan was 17%, the United States savings rate is considerably lower.
Furthermore, Japan had very little population growth during this period while the United States continues to grow from substantial immigration, both legal and illegal. Where most of the bad debts in Japan have been written off and removed from balance sheets, most banks in the U.S. have not written off their bad debts and we continue to prop up vast sums now owned or backed by Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae.
American businesses are truly beginning to see the same level of declines that the Japanese experience. Brian Dunn, the President of Best Buy, recently commented: "In 42 years, we have never seen such difficult times for the American consumer." If the United States does not curtail its current government spending frenzy and stabilize our sovereign debt level, we are destined to suffer a period of low economic growth, historically high unemployment, stagnating living standards, all while the world around us resumes prosperous growth.
In short, we, too, will experience our own "lost decade." - John Ridings Lee
U.S. Girds for a Fight for Internet Freedom
February 11th, 2010 - 1:44pm
Filed under International Security
By Ken Stier
During the Cold War, Soviet bloc dissidents had to rely on primitive printing technologies to reproduce samizdat literature in tiny quantities. Today's dissidents living under authoritarian regimes around the world can disseminate their message world wide with the click of a mouse, through blog postings and viral videos. And, as Secretary of State Hillary Clinton announced in a recent speech, the United States plans to champion their cause by enabling unprecedented freedom of speech on the Internet, in defiance of all political censorship.
"While it is clear that the spread of [new communication] technologies is transforming our world, it is still unclear how that transformation will affect the human rights and human welfare of the world's population," noted Clinton. That's because "on their own, new technologies do not take sides in the struggle for freedom and progress, but the United States does; we stand for a single Internet where all of humanity has equal access to knowledge and ideas." (Read about internet searches in China.)
In the U.S., the notion of unfettered access to communications is so uncontroversial as to seem almost trite, but it is a revolutionary demand in countries such as Iran and China where it threatens the regimes' hold on power. That's the reason that one third of the world that has any access to internet sees a version censored by their governments. Declaring a kind of soft war on this new information curtain being drawn across the "new iconic infrastructure of our age", the U.S. is now committing itself to actively undermining censorship. In China, that means going up against some 50,000 government employees and the '50 Cent Party' - the many thousands of youths alleged to be paid 50 cents for each pro-government comment they post on-line.
The State Department is already working to enhance digital communications capabilities in some 40 countries, but not all of those efforts are aimed at subverting dictatorships. Some further development ends, such as mobile banking systems the U.S. has helped deploy in Afghanistan, and for demobilized militia members in the Congo. Others address urgent social problems. In Mexico, local mobile phone carriers are working with a U.S.-sponsored technical team to enable citizens to text information about crimes to police - the anonymity of the source would help protect informants from retribution. And in Pakistan, the U.S. helped establish the nation's first ever text-messaging system, allowing real-time information exchanges all across the country, according to Mobile Accord's James Eberhard, who has also been instrumental raising donations for Haiti through text messages. (See the top 10 banned books.)
The State Department's more sensitive efforts are those that seek to empower grassroots organizations, such as the $5 million Civil Society Initiative 2.0, officially launched in Morocco last November to work with local NGOs in North Africa and the Middle East. An even broader effort, the Alliance of Youth Movements, mentors activists from around the globe using annual summits and a bulging library of how-to videos such as How to Create a Grassroots Movement for Change. "Mostly these are one or two people doing amazing things on their own, who often did not appreciate the full significance of what they were doing, so we brought them all together," says Jason Liebman, co-founder of the AYM and Howcast, which produces the videos. "For most of them this was a first time on an airplane." (Read "A Coming Chill Over Internet Freedom?")
Having seen the potential of new communications platforms and social media to spread information and organize action, the State Department has assembled a team of tech-savvy twenty- and thirty-somethings to train activists, nurture networks and even innovate new technologies. To do this, it plans to sponsor competitions and partner with universities and companies, which Clinton called upon to "be part of our national brand" campaigning against Internet censorship.
Clinton recently hosted a dinner where her senior staff met with CEOs of leading technology companies, as part of an effort to shake up her own organization. That means ditching its 20th century habits for a culture of innovation, explains Andrew Rasiej, of the Personal Democracy Forum, who has periodically offered Clinton advice on IT issues. "Whereas the Internet may have been looked at as ancillary to her campaign when she was running for president, it is no longer, it is now integral to her vision for a successful tenure as Secretary of State," he added.
Internationally, the new emphasis on enabling the skirting of Internet censorship amounts to a shift from traditional public diplomacy to a kind of Internet democracy activism. Where the former relied on tools such as Voice of America radio broadcasts to all corners of the globe, the latter emphasizes the U.S. promoting indigenous voice in countries that curb free speech, says NYU telecommunications professor Clay Shirky, adding that enabling citizens to express themselves "is way more threatening than Voice of America-style broadcasts, and autocratic governments will react to that."
Thus far, authoritarian governments have largely managed to control the Internet in their countries, argues Hal Roberts, a researcher with Harvard's Berkman Center for Internet and Society. "Actually I think the story of the first 15 years of the widespread use of the Internet is that it is deeply embedded with local mechanisms of control and that governments can control the Internet pretty well," he says. That's only likely to change if the U.S. is willing to match the new inspirational rhetoric about Internet freedom with actions that could be deemed hostile by the regimes concerned. Time Magazine.
Aging Baby Boomers Need A Bucket Brigade
January 29th, 2010 - 10:38am
Filed under Economy
For decades, financial planners helped baby boomers build their nest eggs. Now, as those same folks age, advisers are increasingly preoccupied with plotting how to distribute that wealth in retirement.
That's a whole new ball game. "Managing distribution is much harder than managing accumulation," says Todd Rustman, GN Member and founder of Newport Beach Calif.-based GR Capital Management. For one thing, he says, there are more variables, primarily the addition of mortality to infamous unknowables such as market conditions.
"Longevity risk is the new buzzword," says Rustman, referring to the problem of clients outliving their money.
As more Americans head into their sunset years, Rustman believes the job skills for managing wealth need to adjust significantly. "What I've seen in 16 years in this business is that a lot of advisers take all the [retiree's] money, assume a 3% or 4% return rate, and invest it all that way."
But 2008 showed how badly that calculation can fail. To mitigate that potential, Rustman divides a retiree's money into five-year buckets, and invests each bucket as a separate nest egg based on analytics that factor in longevity, gains and average inflation. "We end up with very little risk for the next five or 10 years, and more exposure to equities over the long term," he says.
To demonstrate, he cites the example of a 63-year-old client with a wife and two grown children. "He was an executive who is now worth about $7 million," says Rustman. "He's not living high on the hog, but he also has a pension of about $6,000 a month. He's super-healthy and a non-smoker." Actuarial tables say that, on average, he'll live another 17.5 years, and his wife two years longer. Of course, no one is average. They could both live to be 100.
So first, Rustman set aside about $1.5 million of the estate plus a paid-for home, which are earmarked as an inheritance for the children. Then he took the remaining money and divided it into five five-year buckets. Bucket One would contain 27% of the remaining nest egg and assumes just a 2% rate of return because 95% of the money is in fixed-income investments like laddered CDs. "We're planning to deplete that bucket entirely," says Rustman.
The next bucket holds another 26% of the total nest egg and is marked for a 4% return, with a bit more risk exposure. It now becomes the new Bucket One after five years, converting to the safer fixed-income funds. But over the first five years when it was Bucket Two it has presumably increased in value, so distributions will be notched up to counter inflation.
The third, fourth and fifth buckets have consecutively less in total funds and larger allocations of equities; each is expected to grow at faster rates as the time horizon expands. The total equity exposure comes to about half the portfolio, but it's mostly loaded onto the back end, years away from now.
"The $1.5 million inheritance for his kids gives him a huge cushion," says Rustman. "So even if I'm wrong on a lot of things, he has a lot of cash to chew through." - WSJ
Haiti Earthquake: GN Members Respond
January 25th, 2010 - 2:02pm
Filed under Miscellaneous
We Have We Need is a place where relief organizations can quickly post their most urgent needs and have them matched by generous donors during a time of crisis. This site was built by a group of geeky do-gooders, also Members of Gen Next, who saw this as an opportunity to use technology to help bring people and donations together in the aftermath of a devastating earthquake in Haiti. More.
Alliance of Youth Movements To Participate In Secretary Clinton's Internet Freedom Address
January 20th, 2010 - 11:34am
Filed under International Security
Secretary Hillary Rodham Clinton will deliver a major policy address on Internet freedom on Thursday, January 21 at 9:30 a.m. at the Newseum in Washington, D.C. Secretary Clinton's policy address will lay out the Administration's strategy for protecting freedom in the networked age of the 21st century. The speech will underscore the importance of technology as a tool to connect populations around the world to information, to each other and entities, and to actual resources be they financial, judicial, health, or educational. Four fellows representing Alliance of Youth Movements will be featured prominently in Thursday's program. The Alliance of Youth Movements (AYM) is a nonprofit organization that empowers leaders to affect nonviolent change in the world by creating and promoting the use of 21st century tools to safeguard human rights, promote good governance and foster unprecedented civic empowerment.
AYM Fellows on Thursday's panel include::
- Oscar Morales, A Million Voices Against the Farc (Colombia)
- Shubham Kanodie, In Memory of Those Who Died in the November 26th-27th Mumbai Massacre (India)
- Natalia Morari, ThinkMoldova
- Ceren Kenar, Young Civilians (Turkey)
David Nassar, Executive Director of AYM will also be participating in a panel discussion following the Secretary's remarks moderated by Anne Marie Slaughter, the Director of Policy Planning at the State Department.
AYM is the world's leading network of online and mobile social movements for change. The organization has hosted two successful which brought together some of the worlds most innovate social entrepreneurs with some of the world's most exciting technology companies. AYM supporters include Causecast.org, Facebook, Gen Next, Google, Hi5, Howcast Media, MTV, MySpace, Pepsi, Univision Interactive Media, Inc., WordPress.com and YouTube.
"Online technology has unprecedented potential to help us work together to address some of the world's most urgent problems," said Megan J. Smith, vice president of new business development and general manager of Google.org. "We are proud to support the Alliance of Youth Movements and share its vision to empower citizens and communities to influence positive change through the use of today's technology."
"Today we have the power to communicate and connect in real-time through online tools like Twitter," said Jack Dorsey, chairman and co-founder of Twitter. "Traditional social movements can now take advantage of these revolutionary technologies to spread their messages more rapidly and effectively," continued Dorsey.
U.S. Sees An Opportunity To Press Iran On Nuclear Fuel
January 11th, 2010 - 4:13pm
Filed under International Security
Domestic unrest and unexpected problems in Tehran's nuclear programs have made Iranian leadership susceptible to new U.S. imposed sanctions. These sanctions would suspend financial transactions with front companies for the Islamic Revolutionary Guard, the military force believed to run the nuclear weapons effort. "For now, the Iranians don't have a credible breakdown option, and we don't think they will have one for at least 18 months, maybe two or three years." Although sanctions have failed to detour Iranian nuclear efforts in the past, the Obama administration hopes that this extended time frame will allow the sanctions to have an effect and convince Iranians that their nuclear programs are not worth the price tag. - NY Times
The War Against the Wanna Be Rich
January 11th, 2010 - 4:12pm
Filed under Economy
A war was declared on the wannabe rich when the Obama administration announced that people earning over $200,000 a year will pay higher income taxes. Professionals and small-business owners are among the hardest hit. The new law has only furthered the recession causing small business owners to retrench rather than expand by hiring new employees. Business owners fear that the proposed new income, payroll and health-care tax rates along with increased state and local taxes will put up to 70 percent of their income in the government's hands. "[If we] continue to punish and demonize [the productive class], the country will grind to a halt - as we are seeing now." - Real Clear Politics
Public Sector Unions Are Killing California
January 11th, 2010 - 4:11pm
Filed under Economy
More Americans are fleeing California as the public sector unions diminish willingness to fulfill promises to taxpayers. As unions take control of the Democratic majorities in the state legislature, the "net internal migration" fluctuates.The union's ability to produce effective campaigns that have a track record of making or breaking political careers has caused politicians to submit to the will of the public sectors in order to receive a higher compensation. "For the first time in history most union members work for the government... [and] depend on the government for their livelihood." This change has devastated American taxpayers as the increase in union member voters results in more dollars for campaigns to elect politicians who will support higher taxes to compensate for the upward arc of government spending on workers. According to a City Journal writer, the reciprocity existing between compliant politicians and influential public sector unions has left California with higher taxes, poor services and a disappearing middle class. - The Foundry
Who's Got Michelle Rhee's Back?
December 21st, 2009 - 10:25am
Filed under Education
D.C. Chancellor, Michelle Rhee, has proposed changes to the teacher tenure system that would offer higher salaries to teachers willing to link their paychecks to student performance. Those opting to be paid solely on seniority would receive smaller pay increases. Rhee has been in negotiations with the Teachers Union for more than two years. While Arne Duncan Secretary of Education has hinted that he'll look favorably on states that enact such reforms when distributing "Race to the Top" grant, he has refused to interfere with Rhee's negotiations with the unions. In the last couple years D.C.'s fourth-graders have made the largest gains in math among big city school systems, while eighth-graders have increased their math proficiency at a faster rate than all other big cities (U.S. Department of Education). - WSJ
Helping Iranians Stay Free Online
December 21st, 2009 - 10:19am
Filed under International Security
Traditional media in Iran has long been censored the government, leaving nontraditional new-media such as blogs, Facebook and Twitter as the only platform for dissenting opinions. President Ahmadinejad is working to censor all Internet access for the Iranian people, which can be attributed to movements like the one following the controversial presidential election last summer. Haystacknetwork.com is a new program designed to provide unfiltered Internet access to the people of Iran. The site conceals the identity of users, making them undetectable by Iranian authorities and "enabling them to learn, communicate and fight for their rights to personal liberty, freedom of expression and information." - OC Register, Written by GN Member Brian Calle.
An Empire at Risk
December 8th, 2009 - 1:27pm
Filed under Economy
The decline of an empire begins with debt explosion and ends with a reduction of national defense resources (Newsweek)."If the U.S. can't restore the federal budget in 5 to 10 years, a debt crisis may result in a major weakening of American power and a shift in the global economy. "Call it the fatal arithmetic of imperial decline. Without radical fiscal reform, it could apply to America next".
Rep. Jeff Flake Spent A Week On A Deserted Island
November 5th, 2009 - 11:35am
Filed under Miscellaneous
Rep. Jeff Flake, who spoke with Gen Next Members in September, spent a week surviving alone and with minimal supplies on an island in the Pacific Ocean. His reasons for doing it? He said, "As a kid, I used to snicker when I shook an uncallused hand. Now I've got two of my own... But, perhaps the greatest appeal was not knowing what was behind the next wave." Flake, 46, is a fifth term Congressman from Arizona and serves on the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, the Committee on Resources, and the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.
Rift Emerges in Fed Over Timing of Rate Rise
October 17th, 2009 - 11:40am
Filed under Economy
With unemployment rates expected at 9.8% in 2010, federal fund rates are expected to stay low for an extended period. Recent debate is centered around strategy, which includes raising rates and putting $2 trillion into programs that will hold up banks and credit markets, and how to execute them (New York Times). Any quick calls will cause friction between the fed and the White House because Obama has said that he doesn't want a quick end to stimulus policies.
Deployments and Diplomacy
October 17th, 2009 - 11:38am
Filed under International Security
More troops is just the start. Henry Kissinger says Obama should be focusing on a diplomatic solution with Afghanistan's influential neighbors (Newsweek). With Pakistan, India, China, Russia, and Iran directly impacted by Al Qaeda, Jihadists and Muslim fundamentalists, negotiations would be in their best interest. The diplomatic effort would also bring to the forefront the importance of a global alliance against terrorism.
Mark Twain
October 17th, 2009 - 11:37am
Filed under Think About It....
"[Education] consists mainly in what we have unlearned." -- Mark Twain
Capitalism: This Time, Moore is Less
October 17th, 2009 - 11:36am
Filed under Miscellaneous
Our very own Brian Calle recently wrote his debut opinion article in the OC Register entitled "Capitalism: This Time, Moore Is Less." According to Calle, "Moore completely misdiagnoses the villain (capitalism/capitalists) and heroine (socialism/government). He mistakes corporate fraud and government corruption - which are statist, not capitalist, tendencies - for capitalism. And he essentially begs for more government intervention as the solution, even though his own examples point to how government enabled every injustice the film describes."
Decline Is A Choice
October 17th, 2009 - 11:34am
Filed under International Security
"The question of whether America is in decline cannot be answered yes or no. Both answers are wrong... nothing is inevitable. Decline is a choice (The Weekly Standard)." To resist decline, we should accept our role as a hegemonic power and decrease dependency on foreign oil by lifting the 30 year nuclear power plant building restriction. Our focus should be on elevating ourselves, not worrying about other countries. Ultimately, we should learn from Demosthenes who said when asked about the decline of Athens, "I will give what I believe is the fairest and truest answer: Don't do what you are doing now."
Reviving America's Schools
October 17th, 2009 - 11:33am
Filed under Education
Almost three-quarters of Americans think that the problems facing education are at least as grave as those facing health care (Economist). Traditionally, the education secretary can do little to push reform. Armed with $10 billion in stimulus, Arne Duncan wants to "fundamentally change the business the department of education is in." Some even call him a "venture philanthropist." His plan includes "Investing in Innovation" a fund that awards grants to school districts and private groups running schools and a "Race to the Top" fund which rewards states who reform in the following areas: support of internationally benchmarked standards and tests; reversing the tendency of states to weaken NCLB standards; streamlining the collection of pupil data to improve teaching; use performance to determine training and, controversially, pay and promotion.
Dollar Loses Reserve Status to Yen and Euro
October 17th, 2009 - 11:32am
Filed under Economy
The Euro and Yen now are favored by central banks as the reserve currency. The U.S. Fed Chief, Bernanke could go down in history as "the man who killed the greenback on the operating table (New York Post)". He's credited with printing trillions of new dollars and bonds to stimulate the economy, but is now facing inflation and recession instead. Economists suggest that Bernanke start raising interest rates and "pull back the flood of currency spewed from U.S. printing press."
Save The Greenback, Mr. President
October 17th, 2009 - 11:31am
Filed under Economy
To stabilize the U.S.'s economy, we should stabilize the dollar, lower tax rates to reduce unemployment, and use the Mundell - Laffer model. The model "exercises monetary restraint to save the dollar-and low marginal tax rates for economic growth incentives that benefit investors, risk takers, small businesses and workers". The treasury should also buy up unwanted dollars in the marketplace and stop printing excess money to cover congress' debt. These solutions have worked for JFK, Clinton, and Reagan in the past. Obama should follow suit (CNBC).
There Is No Such Thing As Too Big In Free Market
October 17th, 2009 - 11:27am
Filed under Economy
"We must not allow giant, state-supported banks to believe that they are indestructible (Telegraph)". The economic repression was not a result of market failure, rather it was because of "excessive concentration, excessive leverage, spurious theories of risk management and moral hazard in the form of implicit state guarantees, combined to create huge ticking time-bombs on both sides of the Atlantic". Government interference has made the issue even worse. The government should instead offer incentives for the banks to shrink and divide by taking its protection out of the equation -- leaving the losses on the backs of the creditors and other stakeholders.