Republicans and Latinos

Thanks to a student for pointing this out to me via Twitter. The Republican National Committee's director in charge of Florida's Latino outreach just announced he's switching to the Democratic Party. Holy cow. Here is an excerpt from an open letter he published.

It doesn’t take much to see the culture of intolerance surrounding the Republican Party today. I have wondered before about the seemingly harsh undertones about immigrants and others. Look no further; a well-known organization recently confirms the intolerance of that which seems different or strange to them.

That pretty much sums up the serious long-term problem the Republican Party has. Being openly hostile to a very large and growing group of people--especially after already having alienated African Americans--is self-destructive. Nonetheless, a vocal part of the party is doubling down on racism.

Demography is unforgiving. The slope to minority status is not steep but it is relentless.

Read more...

Venezuela and Honduras in Media

At NACLA, there is a petition to have the New York Times rethink its language toward Venezuela and Honduras. For the former, it employs language of authoritarianism, while the latter is free of it.

We urge you to examine this disparity in coverage and language use, particularly as it may appear to your readers to track all too closely the U.S. government’s positions regarding the Honduran government (which it supports) and the Venezuelan government (which it opposes)—precisely the syndrome you describe and warn against in your column.

I am sympathetic, but slightly confused. I am not sure if they mean it--and I tend to doubt they do--but the impression I end up getting from the petition is that they want the Times to characterize the leadership of both countries in the same manner. If that is the case, then since they characterize Honduras as murderous, then they want both countries to be characterized as authoritarian or at least authoritarianish. They want to end the disparity, and clearly don't want Honduras to be labeled as democratic.

It seems instead they should be asking the Times to flip the disparity in the opposite direction, but for some reason they don't ask that.

Read more...

Immigration, Crime & Ignorance

It seems a lot of sheriffs in North Carolina do not know the law and do not understand logic.

WASHINGTON More than a dozen North Carolina sheriffs have banded together with other sheriffs from Arizona to Pennsylvania in opposition to a bipartisan U.S. Senate proposal to overhaul the nation’s immigration laws.

Sheriffs Eddie Cathy of Union County, David Carpenter of Lincoln and Terry Johnson of Alamance, among others, criticize what they consider a lack of border security.

They say the proposal “tolerates both past and future criminal activities,” according to a letter sent Thursday to Sens. Richard Burr, a Winston-Salem Republican, and Kay Hagan, a Greensboro Democrat.

As everyone learns the first week of my immigration class, being in the United States illegally is not a "criminal activity." It is a civil offense. I don't know why we have to keep repeating that.

Since we also know that recent immigrants commit fewer crimes than almost anyone else, then logic would tell us that immigration reform would most certainly not involve tolerating future criminal activities. There is no empirical evidence of any kind, of any sort, of any type, that would support anything these sheriffs are claiming.

How come we can't have a debate based on facts rather than ignorance?

Read more...

Cuban Doctors in Brazil

Vincent Bevins of the L.A. Times published a story about the Cuban doctors going to Brazil. There are all kinds of stories embedded within it.

First, it is yet another reminder that there are serious economic disparities in Brazil. Glowing reports of development mask a large urban/rural divide, for example. That is definitely true with regard to doctors.

Second, there is incredible indifference to those disparities. This quote really got me.

When asked if any doctor was better than no doctor, CFM President Carlos Vital responded in the negative.

“Pseudo treatment is worse than no treatment,” he said. “If you don’t have a doctor in your city, you can go to the next city and have a quality doctor.”

Sure, just go 100 miles to the next city if you don't have a doctor. Nothing to see here!

Third, more attention needs to be paid to the plight of Cuban doctors, who are paid almost nothing and deployed like soldiers. Thousands of them end up in the United States.

Fourth, even less attention is paid to the impact of aid on local markets. When a country is flooded with food aid, for example, prices plummet. That hurts local producers (though there is plenty of debate about the overall impact). If there are any local doctors, they cannot compete with free ones. If there are no local doctors, then obviously that's not a problem, but then there will never be an incentive for any doctor to start there.

Fifth, why is Brazil importing doctors rather than producing them on its own? That would eliminate problem #4. With financial and idealistic incentives, get Brazilian doctors to work in more remote areas (unfortunately as I write this I cannot get Northern Exposure out of my head).

In the end, though, with this program people are getting healthcare when otherwise they would receive little or none. We need to keep our eyes on that goal while also acknowledging the problems inherent in the way they are receiving it.

Read more...

Distorted Views of Latin America

Yesterday I was writing about Shannon O'Neil's argument that U.S. policy makers have a distorted view of Mexico that negatively affects policy decisions. What I didn't know was that almost as I was publishing the post, Sen. Lindsay Graham was proving the point by spouting off nonsense that he believes is true.

“We have a Canadian border.... Why are we OK up there and not OK to the south?… Why is one a problem and the other is not? Because Canada is a place where people like to stay. They like Canada. We like Canada. We love to have them visit. They want to go home because it’s a nice place,” said Graham. “The people coming across the southern border live in hell holes. They don’t like that. They want to come here. Our problem is we can’t have everybody in the world who lives in a hell hole coming to America.”

Via ImmigrationProf Blog, here is the video clip in all its ignorant glory. It really sums up the challenge with immigration reform. Mexico has a number of problems, obviously, but blanket stereotypes are hard to shake. They've been around since Latin American countries became independent (the key work on this is Lars Schoultz's Beneath the United States). Graham wasn't referring just to Mexico, but to everywhere south of the United States.

We can expect more, likely much more, of this as the immigration debate in Congress moves forward. Do not expect anything more accurate the penetrate the bubble. For many policy makers, Latin America is a savage land of bandits and siestas, where dark-skinned people live in hovels and jungles. Hellholes, in fact.

Read more...

Shannon O'Neil's Two Nations Indivisible

It is very hard to say something new or original about U.S.-Mexican relations (as is the case with U.S.-Cuban relations). Books and articles are churned out at a rapid pace, all with variations on a "we're partners and need each other whether we like it or not" theme, with a laundry list of things to do. What Shannon O'Neil does in Two Nations Indivisible: Mexico, the United States, and the Road Ahead (2013) is to carve a niche she had been showing on her blog and elsewhere. Her take looks primarily at the way in which Mexico is perceived in the United States.

Basically, she argues that Mexico is ascending, but that too few in the United States recognize this. Instead, they are stuck on the idea of a backwards country on the road to nowhere. Instead, there is a strong economy and growing middle class, a persistent expansion of democracy, and a highly cosmopolitan population. She makes this argument through a narrative that takes care not to exaggerate claims (and places drug-related violence in perspective). It takes the reader through economic reforms, the fall of the PRI, and the cracking of soft authoritarianism, all of which make Mexico a very different place than it was just a short time ago.

The policy prescriptions that flow from the narrative aren't really new, but those aren't really the point of the book. Instead, the idea is that the relationship can't move forward productively until false images are dispelled. Ultimately, the vast majority of Americans don't know Mexico much at all. And I would wager that many think they understand Mexico when in fact they don't.

Toward the end she mentions a trip she took with House and Senate staffers to Mexico City, and how they expressed surprise at how nice the city was, even more impressive than the places they came from. Getting over that hurdle, she argues, will help policy a lot. This makes sense, as the pervasive popular image is a Mexico of dirt streets and ragged children. They do exist, but more and more Mexicans are equally educated and prosperous as their northern counterparts.

I've cautioned before about overly optimistic views of the middle class in Latin America. Aside from measurement questions, aggregate figures can obscure the number of people who are on the brink of falling back. But O'Neil provides plenty of evidence for her glass-half-full perspective perspective. In the end, the book plus a trip to Mexico would be a good thing for most members of Congress and their staffers.

Read more...

Shadow of the Condor Photographs

Thanks to my friend Mary Rose Kubal for pointing out this really moving collection of photographs related to Operation Condor, an archive called "Shadow of the Condor," assembled by João Pina.

I also recommend John Dinges' The Condor Years and J. Patrice McSherry's Predatory States, both of which analyze Operation Condor, the former by a journalist and the latter by a political science professor.

Read more...

Arguing Against MOOCs

There are plenty of good reasons to be skeptical of Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs). Recently, the Philosophy Department at San Jose State University wrote an open letter that captured many of the problems. For example, they are just as static as any lecture, they are outdated quickly, and they can make courses overly homogeneous. These are the types of nuts-and-bolts arguments academics should use to engage those who want to push MOOCs into more universities.

What we don't want is this: the Chronicle of Higher Education has an article about a conference that focused on the dark side of the digital that seemed to attack online learning in general, framing as an attack on, well, everything (even GPS sucks, apparently).

Fair enough. There are plenty of people skeptical of any type of online learning. But arguing effectively against MOOCs requires accepting--as the San Jose State professors explicitly did--that blended classes done well can provide a rich experience for students. What we have here instead is what the Chronicle notes is a "dense fog of theoretical jargon."  Since MOOCs are by definition very public and more people are hearing about them, good arguments against them should also be made in ways that people can easily understand. The echo chamber does us no good.

Read more...

Shaky Growth in Latin America

I am a broken record, as I've written this kind of post many times before. The IMF says that Latin America will go from 3% growth in 2012 to 3.5% growth in 2013. That seems good, and no one can complain about growth. But how much of it is pure dependence on remittances and demand for commodities? A lot.

In other words, Latin American growth is highly dependent on two things: emigrants finding jobs in the United States, and China sucking up all the raw materials it can find.

The report suggests prudently that countries with a lot of energy exports start saving commodity revenues. That's good advice but ignores the broader structural issue, which is the inability to break out of the traditional development model.

Read more...

Presidents in Colombia

Nicolás Maduro has announced a new plot against him almost daily. One of those was aimed at former Colombian President Alvaro Uribe, who Maduro claimed was trying to kill him. Not surprisingly, Uribe got mad. Meanwhile, Juan Manuel Santos has said nothing, which has prompted another former president, Andrés Pastrana, to write an open letter telling him to respond.

“Personal feuds and political differences must be thrown out and the silence, which is already bordering on complacency, must be broken to confront  to this serious accusation against someone who has held the highest national rank,” stated Pastrana in the letter.

I cannot recall any situation in Latin America where current and former presidents have engaged with each other in such a highly public fashion. Uribe rants and raves about Santos on Twitter all the time.

I do wonder, though, why Santos hasn't said anything. I would guess that in part it's an unspoken policy many governments have taken, which is to ignore the crazier things being said by Venezuelan presidents. On the other hand, claims about assassination plots take things one step further, especially when they are accompanied by exactly zero evidence. On Twitter--now his chosen means of communication--Uribe thanked Pastrana for the letter.

Read more...

Venezuelan Response to Obama

Here is the Venezuelan Ministry of Foreign Relations response to President Obama's comments on the election, which were the following:

In the interview that aired Friday, Obama wouldn't say if the United States recognizes Nicolas Maduro as Venezuela's new president following elections that have been disputed by the opposition.

When asked, he replied that it's up to the people of Venezuela to choose their leaders in legitimate elections.

He also said that reports indicate that basic principles of human rights, democracy, press freedom and freedom of assembly were not observed in Venezuela following the election.

Naturally, the Venezuelan government wasn't happy. You would think this would be an opportunity for Nicolás Maduro to assert himself. But that's not what happened.

In fact, what's interesting about the response is that it is all about Hugo Chávez, who is mentioned four times, once even as "Comandante Eterno." He is mentioned before Maduro, who gets only two inclusions, and both of them specifically mention that he is the heir of Chávez and just following his policies. Maduro is very clearly framed as a follower.

This isn't a winning political strategy. At some point the government will have to be Maduro's, and not the Chávez leftover. Already the country's political landscape has changed dramatically, and unless there are more birds flying around then it will have to be Maduro, not Chávez, who determines how the government evolves with it.

Read more...

Bolívar and Fascism

From Simón Bolívar's 1819 speech at the inauguration of the Second National Congress of Venezuela:

"The formation of a stable government requires as a foundation a national spirit, having as its objective a uniform concentration on two cardinal factors, namely, moderation of the popular will and limitation of public authority."

Harold Bierck (ed.). Selected Writings of Bolivar, Vol. 1, 1810-1822. (New York: The Colonial Press, 1951): 191.

Ah, good. Obviously democracy needs limits. But here's the president of the Bolivarian Republic:

Nicolás Maduro last night: we'll force a cadena so we can make people watch what we want and cut off Henrique Capriles when we can. And he calls Henrique a fascist for the millionth time, telling him to stop contesting the election, calling him a fascist for the millionth time. Not exactly limitation of public authority.

But wait! Bolívar continues in the same speech:

"All our moral powers will not suffice to save our infant republic from chaos unless we fuse the mass of the people, the government, the legislation, and the national spirit into a single united body. Unity, unity, unity must be our motto in all things."

Hmm. Maduro says Capriles is a fascist, but what Bolívar describes is a very nice definition of fascism.

Read more...

Translating Political Science

Matthew Flinders, "The Tyranny of Relevance and the Art of Translation." Political Studies Review 11, 2 (May 2013): 149-167.

Abstract:

The ‘tyranny of relevance’ captures a widespread sense of concern among social and political scientists that their academic freedom and professional autonomy is under threat from a changing social context in which scholars are increasingly expected to demonstrate some form of social ‘relevance’, ‘impact’ or ‘engagement’ beyond academe. This article attempts to reframe the current debate by reflecting upon the history of the discipline and different forms of scholarship in order to craft an argument concerning the need for political scientists to rediscover ‘the art of translation’. This, in turn, facilitates a more sophisticated grasp of key concepts, emphasises the need for the discipline to engage with multiple publics in multiple ways, and suggests that engaging with non-academic audiences is likely to improve not simply the discipline's leverage in terms of funding, or scholarship in terms of quality, but also teaching in terms of energy and relevance. The simple argument of this article is not therefore that political science has become irrelevant, but that it has generally failed to promote and communicate the social value and benefit of the discipline in an accessible manner. Resolving this situation is likely to demand a little political imagination.

Yes, yes, yes. All political science research starts with a problem or puzzle even if it is not immediately obvious. We should take it upon ourselves to explain what it is to the world outside academia. We should do this not because we're being forced, but rather because it's good for everyone. Thinking about translation will make your argument clearer and expand your audience.

The article above was part of a special issue on relevance and impact in political science.

Read more...

What Censorship Isn't

If you haven't checked it out, Nicolás Maduro's Twitter feed is worth following because it's the Venezuelan Alice in Wonderland. Today's example: censorship. His latest multi-tweet rant argues that the people and the government must fight against the censorship of the opposition. His answer? More cadenas, the state-imposed news messages that trump everything else.

This is, to put it mildly, ridiculous. Those not in power cannot censor the government, which controls media all over the place. Censorship comes from the state. Equating the opposition with state power is nonsensical. Instead, it can be seen as an effort to justify the cadenas, which in some cases have even cut off a speech Henrique Capriles was making.

Read more...

Anonymous Sources

Below is a fabulous quote:

"In the United States, "revelations" about Noriega have at times been based on putative intelligence reports related by anonymous sources. In at least one case, according to an influential Panamanian opposition journalist, a U.S. congressional staff member with access to classified material on Noriega seemed to encourage him to embellish, telling him: 'Put down whatever you want and it will be true.'"

--John Dinges, Our Man in Panama (New York: Random House, 1990): x.

That was written 23 years ago, but fits many conservative accounts of Latin America today. Neither Mary O'Grady nor Roger Noriega could ever write much of a column without using anonymous sources to give them the juicy anecdotes they use to vilify what they don't like. I would guess that the sources themselves, along with their disseminators, figure it is worth it because the politician in question is so vile. If I think it could be true, then it is true.

Very often, of course, these sources need no encouragement because they are trying to get something they want, perhaps a prominent position after some sort of intervention. Those sources are especially insistent when it appears that intervention is imminent, reassuring policy makers that everything will work out fine.

I expect in the coming months we'll be hearing a lot from such sources about Venezuela. They will say lots of unverifiable things that will get picked up in the MSM and will confirm people's worst fears. There will be calls to do "something."

Read more...

Audit Dispute in Venezuela

Henrique Capriles is mad about the audit, saying it is insufficient because it won't include examination of voter signatures and fingerprints. The government's response has several dimensions.

First, you are asking for something without evidence it is needed.

Second, even if we did what you wanted, the election outcome would not change.

Third, since we have the best system for going back over votes, there is no need to do so.

I previously argued that simply doing the audit would constitute enough of a concession that it would take the air out of the opposition. That could still be the case. But the government does itself no favors by saying the vote could never change, accusing Capriles of murder, and calling him a fascist (which is frequent to the point of being funny).

What matters now are perceptions. If the opposition successfully mobilizes, it will occur in no small part because of the government's aggressive reactions. Looking conciliatory would make it more difficult for Capriles and other opposition leaders to sustain the level of outrage necessary to mobilize.

UPDATE: here is the CNE's official response.

Read more...

Brazil in the World

I'm quoted in this L.A. Times story on the differences between Dilma Rousseff and Lula in foreign affairs. Coincidentally, not long ago I had been revising my lecture on Brazil for my Latin American politics class--since I hadn't taught it recently, the slides on foreign policy had to be modified, especially with regard to the Middle East.

Rousseff still works to make Brazil a global power, but is much less flamboyant about it. Let's see if that yields anything from the Obama administration during a state visit, or if it matters at all.

Read more...

Immigration Bill

Here is a really good summary of the Senate immigration bill from the Migration Policy Institute, comparing it to the 2006 and 2007 proposals.

Restrictionists bemoan the amnesty portion of the bill, but in fact it has enforcement mechanisms so stringent that they could conceivably never be met. It's basically what Charles Krauthammer wanted, and he is well out of the mainstream.

Along with massive and seemingly unrealistic enforcement, one of the biggest changes from past proposals is the reduction of family member visas (see page 12 of the summary in particular). If you want tons of enforcement, more workers, and fewer family, then this bill is for you. What we're seeing now, though, are arguments that it provides too much executive flexibility since it includes waivers. Tough call. Rigidity prevents you from responding adequately to unforeseen effects, whereas too much flexibility means watering the bill down.

Read more...

Inflation in Brazil

Here is a good summary of how focused Dilma Rousseff is on curbing inflation. It is at 6.59%, which is higher than the government's stated upper limit of 6.5%.

The policy reaction is to help out domestic ethanol. Rousseff wants to ramp up ethanol production to get fuel prices down, so is providing tax breaks and expanded credit. Ethanol producers are annoyed that gas prices are artificially low, but raising them would also spur inflation.

After months of pressure and mounting losses at state oil giant Petrobras, the government agreed to allow a 6.6 percent increase in wholesale gasoline prices in January. However, analysts estimate local gasoline prices are still about 15 percent below international levels, allowing the petroleum-based fuel still to undercut ethanol's competitiveness.

The Brazilian government remembers the years of hyperinflation, as do many other Latin American governments. At the same time, though, research has shown that people are forgiving of moderate increases in inflation as long as they believe the government is encouraging growth.

It's funny, too, how fickle the media is. Just over a year ago there were all kinds of stories about how incredible the Brazilian economy was. Now the news is almost universally gloomy. Yes, the economy has slowed down, but there seems to be no middle reporting ground.

Read more...

Tweeting Academia

Jay Ufelder and Dan Drezner give tips for academics thinking of getting on Twitter. It's good to get some guidance, especially if you're unfamiliar with the medium.

However, I would add something else that I discussed some time ago in response to pointers about blogging, namely that you should not focus much on rules. This is supposed to be fun, and trying to keep a lot of rules in mind makes it less fun. I like the professional benefits that come from blogging and tweeting, but the real reason I spend time on them is because I really enjoy it (though Jay correctly points out that this is addicting, so maybe I enjoy them the ways addicts enjoy drugs).

As of this moment, I have 8,437 tweets. Many of these are not well thought out, may include dumb pictures, or reflect pure whimsy, while others were about ongoing events in Latin America and got lots of responses and retweets. All of them, though, were fun. So keep your eye on that prize.

Read more...

Terrorists and Subversives

Rafael Correa said that the FARC should not be considered a terrorist group. It is just "subversive."

Más temprano, durante una entrevista concedida a periodistas locales sostuvo que las Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia (FARC), no son un grupo terrorista: “Yo no creo que (que sean terroristas), son un grupo subversivo, aunque no estoy en absoluto de acuerdo con ellos. Creo que son gente que lucha por ideales, totalmente equivocados, pero no son terroristas”.

"Subversive" refers to a group trying to overthrow the government, whereas a "terrorist" typically refers to an individual or group who targets civilians or "non-combatants." Correa's argument is that the FARC is fighting for the wrong ideas but their tactics are not terrorist.

It seems reasonable to argue that subversion need not automatically entail terrorism, though you're always going to be very, very close to it. However, I don't think it is reasonable to argue anything but that the FARC is both subversive and terrorist. Clearly it wants to overthrow the existing order and use tactics like murder and kidnapping. It's hard to call Ingrid Betancourt a "combatant."

Read more...

Election in Paraguay

I'm quoted in this Associated Press story on the Paraguayan presidential election, really just giving the big picture view. The essential point is that this election will allow the region to say they've moved on from the Fernando Lugo controversy. Paraguay can then participate in Mercosur and Unasur. It's like Mitt Romney's Etch-A-Sketch statement.

This is just like Honduras. The elites who overthrew Mel Zelaya were correctly confident that just having an election would calm everything down. Even Venezuela and Brazil moved on.

There was a brief experiment with tentative liftism in Paraguay, and elites closed ranks to end it. Now the party of Alfredo Stroessner will likely come back, and the new president may well be a drug trafficking homophobe. Back to "normal."

Read more...

Chávez and the Latin American Left

Kevin Lees makes an interesting, though I think overstated, point at The National Interest that Hugo Chávez provided space for moderate leftists in Latin America who otherwise would've experienced greater antagonism from the United States.

In Venezuela, bitter partisans will never agree about what, if anything, Hugo Chávez created. But there's no doubt that by occupying a petrodollar-fueled perch on the radical left, Chávez created space for progressive leftism to become much more palatable throughout Latin America.

He uses the Brazilian example most effectively. At the time of his election, Lula was viewed very warily by the Bush administration, but he simply needed to show he wasn't as radical as Chávez. It's all a matter of perspective.

He brings in Chile but it doesn't really work. Michelle Bachelet never enacted anything even remotely radical. The right is pleased with that and the left is not, but the United States would not have paid it much attention even without Chávez as a counterexample.

Read more...

Auditing Venezuela

Backing off previous statements, the CNE is going to do an audit of the votes it had not audited before. According to the government it will take thirty days.

Para este proceso de revisión se seleccionará una muestra que será auditada durante 10 días y al final de ese lapso se presentará un informe a todo el país sobre los resultados obtenidos. Este procedimiento se repetirá en ciclos de 10 días hasta completar 30 días.

And Capriles immediately accepted the decision, since of course he had asked for it.

Opposition candidate Henrique Capriles immediately went on television and said his campaign accepted the decision of the election council, thereby defusing for now a standoff with Maduro, who is to be inaugurated as president Friday.

My initial take is that this will take the air out of the opposition. After all the hot air and inflammatory rhetoric, the government is actually doing what the opposition wants. Well, not exactly after the rhetoric, because Nicolás Maduro is still trying to fulfill his personal pledge to get into the Guinness Book of World Records by saying the word "fascist" more in one day than anyone else in history.

In the meantime, of course, Maduro will be sworn in, so by the time the count is completed he will have been president for a month and people will be getting more used to that fact. At least as it stands now, this is a very uphill road for Capriles.

Read more...

Recount vs. audit in Venezuela

Here is the list of problems that Henrique Capriles has presented to the CNE. What's interesting is that almost none of them require a ballot by ballot recount, which he has been told is impossible. A recount suggests that the counting was done incorrectly, which he's not exactly saying.

In some cases his concerns would entail an audit, such as checking to see whether dead people voted. In others it is an investigation into whether the constitution was violated, such as the charges of intimidation and harrassment.

Of course, what Capriles hopes is for the final count to change, but I don't think that is the same as a recount as generally understood. Either way, though, it's not clear to me how intimidation could be measured at the vote level. He may not care, as his goal is to cast sufficient suspicion over the process itself to undermine Nicolás Maduro's legitimacy.

Maduro has said he'll accept what the CNE decides, which is at least a shift from saying Capriles is a fascist golpista with unreasonable demands. There is not a tremendous amount of horizontal accountability in Venezuela, so he'll be sending plenty of signals about his preferences. If they reject a full recount again but accept something smaller, that may well take some of the air out of the opposition's sails.

Read more...

Maduro vs. Capriles

I'm quoted in this story on Venezuela. The basic question was how the stand off would likely end, and what the political consequences would be. As it stands, Nicolás Maduro's strategy is to shout Henrique Capriles down and hurl a blizzard of accusations using the words "coup" and "fascist" in sometimes incoherent ways, along with blood, death, murder, etc. Even while Capriles was calling off a protest march (which Maduro had already banned) the government cut him off with a cadena, the forced broadcast of a government message. When Capriles called for peaceful banging of pots and pans, Maduro told his supporters to shoot firecrackers in response.Maduro has even compared the opposition to those in Syria and Libya, as if that was a bad thing.

My take was that at least in the short term this makes Capriles look more presidential than Maduro. The government keeps saying he is inciting violence without showing any evidence of it, while Capriles called off a march that almost certainly would resulted in violence in some way. This is Maduro's chance to find a face saving compromise--even dialogue without promises would calm things down. If he continues to dig in, then there is a much higher chance that protests will happen anyway. Perhaps that's what the government wants, as the violence could then be blamed more squarely on the opposition.

But this is no way to start a presidential term and will be counterproductive for Maduro. Venezuela can't be held together by force alone.

Read more...

Majorities and Coups in Venezuela

In Venezuela there is apparently a new definition of "coup."

"Mayoría es mayoría y debe respetarse en democracia, no se pueden buscar emboscadas, inventos para vulnerar la soberanía popular (...) eso sólo tiene un nombre: golpismo. Quien pretende vulnerar la mayoría en la democracia lo que está es llamando a un golpe", dijo durante el discurso que pronunció Maduro en el acto de proclamación ante el Consejo Nacional Electoral (CNE).

So a "coup" refers to questioning the majority, and that includes asking for a recount. We can hark back to the famous Federalist 10, written by James Madison:

Complaints are everywhere heard from our most considerate and virtuous citizens, equally the friends of public and private faith, and of public and personal liberty, that our governments are too unstable, that the public good is disregarded in the conflicts of rival parties, and that measures are too often decided, not according to the rules of justice and the rights of the minor party, but by the superior force of an interested and overbearing majority.

Henrique Capriles may have no case. But asking for a recount is reasonable, whereas the idea that merely asking for it equates to trying to overthrow the government is not.

Read more...

Venezuela Election Aftermath

So that happened. Conventional wisdom was that Nicolás Maduro would defeat Henrique Capriles but by a smaller margin than what Hugo Chávez achieved in 2012, and that's what we saw, albeit with a really slim margin (50.7%-49.1%). Capriles is calling for a recount, but as yet I've heard no specific accusations of systematic fraud so it seems unlikely that a recount would change the outcome. Francisco Toro at Caracas Chronicles says otherwise, but as of now there's nothing specific. Stay tuned on that.

As for implications, the first thing that comes to mind is that this margin shows that Madurow will have to shore up support very quickly. I've argued at Americas Quarterly that he would have to downplay ALBA to focus resources more on his domestic constituencies. There are signs that he wants to normalize relations with the United States, but he will find it very hard to resist waving imperialist red meat to keep up nationalist enthusiasm. It's not at all clear how long he can milk the "son of Chávez" message.

Along similar lines, given the margin I have to figure the opposition will soon start talking about a recall. From Article 72 of the constitution:

Artículo 72. Todos los cargos y magistraturas de elección popular son revocables.Transcurrida la mitad del período para el cual fue elegido el funcionario o funcionaria, un número no menor del veinte por ciento de los electores o electoras inscritos en la correspondiente circunscripción podrá solicitar la convocatoria de un referendo para revocar su mandato. Cuando igual o mayor número de electores y electoras que eligieron al funcionario o funcionaria hubieren votado a favor de la revocatoria, siempre que haya concurrido al referendo un número de electores y electoras igual o superior al veinticinco por ciento de los electores y electoras inscritos, se considerará revocado su mandato y se procederá de inmediato a cubrir la falta absoluta conforme a lo dispuesto en esta Constitución y la ley.

Halfway through would be three years, so this isn't coming soon.

My hunch is that conventional wisdom (outside Chavista camps anyway) will shift toward the idea that this victory marks the beginning of decline, so in the long-term is more loss than win. Chavistas, meanwhile, will see the outcome as this, which is making its way all over Twitter (link to original tweet):

It's a landslide!!

For other election thoughts see Colin Snider, Boz, David Smilde.

Read more...

Panama Canal Children's Book

I went to a book sale of the Friends of the Mecklenburg County Library and came across a children's book on the Panama Canal, by Bob Considine. I bought it without hesitation because I find it fascinating to read about how Latin America was portrayed in the past in the U.S. Normally it is a lot of superior tone and chest thumping.

So I was surprised when the book actually rejected chest thumping. Could America just go in there and do the job easily? Well, no.

The Americans who believed that the hacking out of a canal across Panama would be a simple task, easily solved by American cleverness and drive, had many disappointments in store for them (p. 95).

It talks about labor conditions:

Deaths were greatest among the Chinese (about 400). Many of the Chinese either bought or were supplied with opium, to make them forget the hardships of jungle and mountain grade. The Chinese produced the greatest number of suicides (pp. 35-36).

It talks about race, with even a baseball reference:

Because of Jim Crow laws, Panamanians were unable to get proper schooling, housing, wages and equal opportunities. These unjust laws also applied to people who were grouped into the "Panamanian" class by Zone officials--notably the large number of Jamaicans who did so much of the manual labor attending the digging of the canal.

The color line was extended even to the American Negro who found work in the Canal Zone or visited there. When the Brooklyn National League baseball team appeared in the Canal Zone in the late 1940s during a Spring training tour, their Negro star "Jackie" Robinson was not permitted to eat with his teammates." (pp.157-158).

Finally, it even has extended quotes from primary documents. I had not heard of Bob Considine before, but my hat is off to him. We need a kid's book like this for the Middle East.

Read more...

Venezuela Numbers

On Twitter and in news stories over the past week or so, I've seen numerous references to a tightening of the Venezuelan presidential race. But I didn't see any numbers. I kept thinking of Mitt Romney and his supporters, who believed he was going to win without any empirical evidence for it.

However, a quick exchage with Frank Bajak alerted me to the fact that Nicolás Maduro's lead over Henrique Capriles shrunk to 7.2%. Meanwhile, Credit Suisse says Maduro has a 70% chance of winning, down from 95%. James Bosworth does his best Nate Silver impression by running simulations and determining Maduro has a 81.7% chance of winning.

What does this mean? It is very common for presidential races to tighten right at the end, and for lots of unsubstantiated assertions to follow, usually focusing on specific issues that people are "sick of" and so will change their votes in huge numbers (which also occurred with the Romney camp). Even after the polling shift, Maduro has a very large lead and it will be a huge shock if Capriles overcomes it. He lost by 11 points last year, and now is down by 7 or so. We might say the difference is the Chávez effect since Maduro does not generate the same level of devotion.

Read more...

Latin American Politics Textbook

I just sent the latest draft of my long-simmering Latin American politics textbook to the publisher (Pearson). This process has been painfully long. Years ago I wrote a post about the process of getting my first textbook (U.S. and Latin American Relations) published. We're talking molasses. For this one the latest plan is a 2014 publication date, but these things are always subject to change. I am keeping my fingers crossed.

Read more...

Impossible Goals in Immigration

This is just plain impossible:

Federal authorities would be required to establish vast new border fences and surveillance as part of a bipartisan Senate plan aimed at allowing the nation’s 11 million illegal immigrants to earn permanent residency and, potentially, citizenship, aides familiar with the proposal said Wednesday. 

The provisions would call on the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to increase surveillance to cover 100 percent of the Southwestern border and to apprehend 90 percent of the people who attempt to enter the United States illegally, said the aides, who spoke on condition of anonymity to disclose private negotiations.

Requiring 100% of anything cannot work. If this is the required trigger then we'll never see immigration reform unless the numbers just get made up. If this is the case, then it will generate opposition and cynicism pretty quickly.

Advocates also have voiced concerns about tying border security to the path to citizenship, saying they feared that disputes over the effectiveness of the new measures could delay the process for undocumented residents.

Exactly.

Further, it is a dumb idea. We already know very well how poorly the fences have worked up to this point, so this will be an extraordinarily costly measure to achieve very little. But it is the cost of doing business with a nativist Congress.

Let's hope it is just a trial balloon. John McCain sums it up:

Asked if the provisions were strong enough to convince his GOP colleagues to support the bill, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), a member of the working group, said Wednesday: “Damned if I know.”

Read more...

Quote of the day: Central America

One bit of impact, however, is that just as Plan Colombia helped push the focus of criminal activity and presence north to Mexico, so has the impact of the Merida Initiative pushed the same activities into Central America itself.

--William Brownfield, Assistant Secretary, Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs speaking on Central America.

It is nice to hear officials acknowledge the balloon effect. In general, whether you agree or disagree with the answers, this speech seems like a good faith effort to address critics.

Read more...

Debating ALBA

I have a short piece in Americas Quarterly on whether ALBA will outlive Hugo Chávez. I debate (indirectly, since we were unaware of each other) with Pablo Solón, former Bolivian Ambassador to the UN. His bottom line: there is a lot of solidarity and it will keep going. Mine: if he wins, Nicolás Maduro will focus more on keeping his domestic coalition in place. At whatever time the opposition wins, it is kaput.

This was an interesting exercise for me, since I was asked to make a one-sided argument. That's not typical for social scientists, who see the political world as complex and sloppy and therefore qualify everything. In that sense it was fun.  It also means it'll be much easier to see whether I was completely wrong!

Read more...

Op-ed on CMS and autism

This blog focuses on Latin America, yet one of the most viewed posts was on Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools (CMS) and how it utterly fails with regard to autism. I took my family's own very negative experience and boiled it down to an op-ed, which was just published in Charlotte Viewpoint. My son has truly blossomed in the months since we finally removed him from CMS. It is a terrible and even damaging environment for children with autism.

Read more...

Cuban Dissidents and U.S. Support

It is important for the credibility of Cuban dissidents to avoid getting assistance from the U.S. government. Tracey Eaton notes how incredibly savvy Yoani Sánchez has been in that regard, getting money on the fly from a very broad array of supporters in the United States for her trip.

This alone should give pause to those who support the current policy toward Cuba. Over the years that policy has become so morally bankrupt that the people we purport to help run away from us as quickly as possible. Ironically, many of the people Yoani Sánchez met up with also support a policy that makes her want to run away from it.

That brings up a question for which I don't have a good answer. As she met with hardcore hardliners, I wondered whether such meetings were essentially the equivalent of accepting money from the U.S. government. Is there a substantive difference between getting money to attend a State Department conference and meeting up with Ileana Ros-Lehtinen?

Read more...

Eva Golinger Jumps the Shark

Take some disparate facts, add some speculation, sprinkle in some ideology, then stir them together and serve up a tasty bowl of conspiracy theory. Eva Golinger, who is known for arguing at the far fringes of credulity, puts together a mashup of arguments to show why she thinks the U.S. government murdered Hugo Chávez by somehow giving him cancer.

I like this part in particular:

La naturaleza agresiva y desconocida de la enfermedad del Presidente Chávez, además de la inexistencia de una herencia de cáncer en su familia, apuntan claramente a la real posibilidad de que el líder de la Revolución Bolivariana haya sido asesinado.

The "unknown" part of the cancer, of course, is related to the fact that the Venezuelan government refused to tell anyone anything and lied constantly about the president's condition. The conspiracy, then, is internal. And aggressive? Every one of us knows someone who died tragically and quickly from cancer, even though just days before they were fit and healthy.

Go ahead and read the whole thing. At the very least, I believe she's managed to convince herself.

Read more...

Jorge Dominguez talk

Jorge Dominguez came and gave a talk today on campus. He had a discussion framed as whether U.S. policy toward Latin America was irrelevant. He used that as a sort of provocative frame, but in fact wasn't really trying to argue that U.S. policy didn't matter. Instead, he was noting how in many ways U.S. policy achieves its stated goals quite well when there is less policy. In that regard he used the example of the U.S. working with Brazil and allowing it to take the lead in Haiti. He also mentioned the policy under Thomas Shannon to stop talking about Hugo Chávez.

In short, not doing things is often a good idea. Scholars of Latin America won't be too surprised by this assertion, but it bears repeating (especially with plenty of students in the audience, many of whom were unfamiliar with the examples he was giving). Let's do less!

Read more...

Digital Divide in Latin America

A ministerial meeting of the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean yielded some interesting insights into digital development:

The components of the digital economy are the telecommunications infrastructure - particularly broadband networks, information and communications technologies (ICTs) (software, apps, hardware and ICT services) and the level of digital numeracy of users. According to preliminary measurements carried out by ECLAC using 2008 data, the digital economy represents an average of 3.2% of the economy of four of the region's countries (Argentina, Brazil, Chile and Mexico).  This is a significant figure if we compare the European Union average of 5%.

However, there is serious intra-regional and inter-regional inequality in this regard:

The ECLAC Executive Secretary cited the asymmetrical development of critical infrastructure with mobile broadband penetration in the region: the three most advanced countries have 15 times as much development than the ones lagging the furthest behind. Furthermore, the digital divide between Latin America and countries of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) in terms of mobile broadband is getting wider (11% versus 55% penetration in 2011).

So Latin America is not well enough connected, and is not promoting enough industries that foster such connection. This represents another opportunity to reduce the region's dependence on commodity exports. It also is a way for governments to reach out more effectively to citizens and generate at least some more measure of efficiency and transparency.

Read more...

Chávez Gives Maduro the Bird

Yesterday I saw on Twitter that Nicolás Maduro claimed that Hugo Chávez took the form of a small bird and blessed him. I was having a tough day, so the laugh was welcome. Then I wondered whether this was a joke, or residual April Fool's. But no. He was seriously saying this.

This particular personality cult is really unique, though the Guardian article gives the context of non-Catholic beliefs. One difference is that saints and spirits don't tend to be politicians (though in fact this would be an interest area of research).  Both in Latin America and around the world, dead presidents are just that. Dead. You might embalm them and put them up for people to shuffle by in a line and stare at, or you might just have lots of portraits around that people salute. But you don't often pretend that they're coming back to life in alternate forms.

So does this have legs? It's hard to see it. On the other hand, a month ago I wouldn't have guessed that things like this would actually be spoken by a presidential candidate.

On the other, other hand, it might disappear once the election is over and--presumably--Maduro is president and trying to govern. It's one thing to say it on the campaign trail, but another to be in a cabinet meeting and telling everyone to wait while you go chat with the pajarito.

Read more...

Poli Sci & Blogging

Robert Farley on political science and blogs:

This article is a response to John Sides’April 2011 article “The Political Scientist as Blogger.” Core argument is this: Sides treats blogging (and what I tend to think of as associated “public intellectual” activities) as adjunct to a successful political science career.  I, on the other hand, think that we should take seriously the possibility that these activities should become the main course of a successful career in political science (and other fields).

I've been blogging regularly for over six years now, but I'm not ready to go this far. The essential question is of "blog as research" vs. "blog complementing research." I'm not sure how we would measure the former (Dan Drezner makes a similar point). On the other hand, I agree with this:

we have to take seriously the problem that career incentives in our field do not support the efforts of scholars to make significant, timely policy contributions early in their careers

That is absolutely true. What we need to figure out is what outcomes we want. However, blogging per se shouldn't be an outcome--you could write two lines of junk, add a picture of your cat, and that is blogging. Instead, it could potentially be one means of reaching broader audiences outsides academia, i.e. engagement. Individual faculty members could explain how their blogging and other such activities lead to external recognition of some kind that reflects well on the department and university.

Read more...

Twitter and IR Theory

A big story on Twitter this weekend, which then made its way into the press--Spanish-language at least, as I haven't yet seen mention in English-language MSM--was the Twitter war between Nicolás Maduro and Alvaro Uribe. They hate each other, and made that very clear.

Twitter should soon get into IR research. Bear with me, I'm not joking. What I wondered--let's call it "hypothesized" to make it sound better--is that dialogue on Twitter is a way for leaders (and in this case an influential ex-leader) to express raw views without the same backlash as a formal media event. We see it on Twitter and chuckle (or get annoyed, depending on your views) but it stays low level.

A counterargument is that Maduro for sure, and probably Uribe these days too, makes plenty of aggressive arguments in formal settings that don't get taken all that seriously. But still, Twitter seems to be perceived differently. It's not "leaders are arguing" but rather "leaders are tweeting at each other."

Twitter is not used uniformly by Latin American presidents, and in some cases not at all. But those that do are communicating in new and creative ways, 140 characters at a time.

Read more...

Bachelet's Return

I am way behind in mentioning Michelle Bachelet's grand re-entry both into Chile and into Chilean politics. Maybe because I can't help but find it a bit distasteful, this image of her returning for the good of the people. It's a veritable Chilean political Easter!

I like Bachelet, so I'm not sure why my immediate reaction has been quite so negative. I will be curious to see how my views change over the course of the year.

She has a very good chance of winning the presidential election in November, but there is an equally good chance that she'll generate impossibly high expectations. Politically, she has nowhere to go but down. She left office with an amazingly high approval rating and it is hard to imagine keeping it there. She will represent a coalition that has yet to reinvent or reimagine itself after its defeat. It is also a coalition with leaders not terribly happy about the fact that she hamstrung potential presidential candidates by remaining cagey about her future plans until the last minute.

Robert Funk talks about some of her challenges. There are quite a few.

Read more...

Governor McCrory and Latinos

Governor Pat McCrory closed the Office of Hispanic/Latino Affairs:

“We are committed to serving the needs of all of North Carolina’s citizens,” Thomas Stith, the governor’s chief of staff, said in a statement. “We don’t segment our constituents by race or cultural background any more than we separate them by age or gender. In addition, the Governor’s Advisory Council on Hispanic/Latino Affairs is a valuable resource to help us address culturally sensitive issues.” 

But advocates such as Jess George, executive director of Latin American Coalition in Charlotte, sees the move as a contradiction to national efforts by the Republican Party to appear more welcoming to Latinos. Those efforts include officially supporting calls to legalize the nation’s 11 million illegal immigrants.

The governor appears to be intentionally tone deaf when it comes to Latinos. This comes on the heels of taking a while to back off the pink licenses for undocumented immigrants whose deportation was deferred under the new federal program. It was hard to see the original proposal as anything but vindictive.

As Charlotte's mayor, McCrory was commonly viewed as moderate, but has veered sharply to the right (see my last post on higher education). From an electoral perspective, as I've written many times, Latinos in North Carolina represent only a tiny fraction. So it is politically safe for McCrory to do this. But it will hurt the Republican Party a lot in the long run, since the Latino population has been growing so much and before long will be a nontrivial chunk of the electorate.

Read more...

U.S. Policy and Incentives

I get tired of reading op-eds on U.S.-Latin American relations these days, as they all seem to be about the same:

1. Assert the U.S. is losing influence
2. Make reference to left-right split in the region
3. Say we need to "engage"
4. Give 1-2 policy examples

Some of that is in Peter Hakim's op-ed at Reuters but he adds a good conclusion that moves away from platitudes and gets to important things like incentives.

Recent developments suggest, however, that for Washington to regain clout in regional affairs, it must it end its standoff with Cuba. U.S. policy toward Cuba sets Washington against the views of every Latin American and Caribbean government. Long-standing U.S. efforts to isolate and sanction Cuba, have, counterproductively, brought every country in Latin America to Cuba’s defense with a general admiration of Havana’s resistance to U.S. pressures. 

Because this U.S. policy is viewed as so extreme, no Latin America country is willing to criticize Cuba — almost regardless of its words or actions. Chavez, with his close association with Cuba, possessed some of that immunity — with his neighbors leaving him unaccountable for his violations of democracy, human rights and decency.

From a policy perspective, this gets to the heart of things. It's not that we should change policy to achieve some vague ideal of "engagement" or to do the right thing. We need change because it will alter the incentives  of Latin American leaders. We need it because our current policy hurts us more than anyone else.

Read more...

Drug War in Mexico

The Council on Foreign Relations has a short (8 minutes) video on Mexico and drugs.

It is a solid overview of the situation and the challenges the country faces, along with a discussion of some of the more positive developments over the past twenty years (e.g. democratization). One thing I found missing, though, is the question of why Mexico is facing this situation at all. The video is titled "Mexico's Drug War" and although the second half of the video brings up U.S. policy options, it does not mention how in many ways this is the U.S. drug war brought to Mexico.

Read more...

A Lesson in Journal Article Publishing

I was pleased to see that my article "Immigration and Transnationalism: Rethinking the Role of the State in Latin America" was just published in "early view" form in International Migration.

However, that article was a lesson in the difficulties of traditional journal publishing. You see, after a revise & resubmit, the final version of the article was accepted on October 23, 2009. That was 3.5 years ago. I am thankful that the topic was not terribly time sensitive.

I don't want to come down too hard on the journal, because I am well aware of the things that can delay publication (and I'm sure I've had authors annoyed at me) but this many years is over the top. It's about as inefficient a way you can possibly find for diffusion of ideas.

Read more...

Blogging the Revolution

I read Francisco Toro and Juan Cristobal Nagel's Blogging the Revolution, a book comprised of posts from their very well-known opposition Caracas Chronicles blog*. They started the blog in 2002 so there was plenty of material to choose from.

It's an odd exercise to review a book that is a collection of posts (jumping around chronologically), though certain patterns do show themselves in place of the kind of central argument you'd find in a conventional book.  It's a good read, rich with detail (their interpretation of the coup events is an especially interesting read) and sometimes also with snark. Here are some themes I found in this not-exactly-book-blog-book:

First, Hugo Chávez's political use of oil revenue represents strong continuity with the past, even if the recipients are different. One of the nice things about the blog is the keen sense of history. Toro and Nagel really dislike Chávez, but they don't sugarcoat the past. You read about historians, novels, and all sorts of people the authors interview, both formally and informally. Even if you disagree with the posts, they are generally very thoughtful. The authors also don't tend to offer much hope that the opposition would do any better if it took power. They periodically come back to the question of how Venezuela can break out of it.

Second, past leaders were corrupt, but Chávez takes it to a new level. The corruption is supported by many anecdotes, though with less of the historical comparison (how much did the dominant parties shake people down for political support or money in the past?). From the neighborhood level to the top echelons of government, corruption abounds. Demonstrating that it is worse, however, doesn't always come out. Could it be that corruption also represents continuity?

Third, the country is moving toward authoritarianism. This tends to veer around, and the lack of chronological order of the posts exacerbates it. There are discussions about how totalitarianism is a totally inappropriate term, then later "we really do have all the characteristics of leftist totalitarian communications here" (electronic page 142). But there is a lot of interesting discussion about the disjuncture between the precise wording of the Venezuelan constitution and the way politics actually works.

I like the idea of taking a blog and trying to contextualize it. If a few people write for years, they do develop certain ideas and themes that persist, and they help orient unfamiliar readers. If the blog is, and this one is, then it's worth the read.

* FWIW, I was given an ebook version for free.

Read more...

McCrory and Higher Ed 3

First two installments are here and here.  What we're hearing a lot is "efficiency." The governor wants universities to be run more efficiently and be more accountable. This means evaluation. This is a perfectly reasonable idea, but very few people see how all too often it is operationalized on the ground level, namely in individual departments. As department chair, I receive instructions on evaluation and assessment and I have to carry them out. There is an enormous gap between the governor or state legislator and me. They make a speech about efficiency and have no idea whatsoever how it is measured.

So let me explain.

No matter how lofty it sounds at the beginning, evaluating academia at the ground level means a tremendous amount of paperwork, more bureaucratic rules, and new administrators to watch over it all. We do a ton of it now. We come up with new measures, forms, tables, matrices, student learning outcomes (SLOs), target percentages, and test questions. The culmination of this process is the spitting out of numbers, and then we are judged by those numbers. We are already doing plenty of this for accreditation from the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS). It is very time consuming, so if the legislature adds more, we will be spending quite a lot of time with paperwork. Staff time will have to be sucked up even more to collate everything into one big fat report.

Professors are considered easy targets since lots of people believe we waltz in, teach, and then nap all afternoon. What people don't realize is that--in addition to many other things--lots of professors have to spend quite a bit of time doing this. Evaluation gets integrated into classes, requires countless meetings, and faculty must collect data.

So, taxpayers and students, watch out for a plan that involves spending money on more evaluation in the name of efficiency and accountability, which means funding the creation of new bureaucrats (and yes, the governor's budget proposal does include that spending even as it cuts elsewhere). It also necessarily means less money for instruction. That means not hiring new tenure track faculty and relying ever more on part-time instructors. It means your professors will also spend more of their time on paperwork rather than classes.

Read more...

McCrory and Higher Ed 2

Part I is here. Today I want to note the concrete effects of budget cuts. Governor McCrory's budget proposal calls for cuts totaling $135 million from the UNC system. Some of this--how much is open to debate--will be offset by charging out-of-state students more. But this constitutes a significant cut at a time when we've already suffered $1 billion in cuts over the past five years.

I don't think students or parents fully grasp the impact that massive cuts have. The reality is that at a minimum students will:

• find it harder to get the classes they need to graduate
• have bigger classes
• see more part-time instructors (because budget cuts mean not hiring permanent faculty members)
• see more faculty members leave for other universities

These things do not add up to the quality education that Governor McCrory claims to value. At UNC Charlotte we're down faculty and have not been given the funds necessary to replace them. You can keep cutting in the name of market efficiency, but quality will suffer, and students will bear the brunt.

Or McCrory and the legislature will simply go for the nuclear option, which is to dissolve one or two universities entirely. They're already talking about it.

Read more...

McCrory and Higher Ed 1

There are all kinds of things wrong with Governor Pat McCrory's proposed budget with respect to higher education. I am going to address them separately. First up is "marketability." From the governor's website:

As governor, Pat McCrory will work with education and industry leaders to develop a comprehensive and innovative approach to measure program success rates and student job attainment. This approach must encompass both community colleges and universities, and draw on existing resources from North Carolina’s already substantial performance measurement systems to create a single, transparent operation.

He has repeated something similar many times. What this means is that universities will be judged directly by jobs*. The essential problem here is that this is not a trade school--our mission is to teach people how to think, write, etc. These are critical skills for a job, but most disciplines don't funnel you directly into a specific trade.

What we know for sure is that a college education is highly advantageous both for employment and wages. From my own perch, UNC Charlotte is a school where many students are the first in their family to attend college, are not that well off, and are often transfer students who only have a short time with us. We need to give them as many skills as we can to succeed as engaged citizens--above and beyond just getting a job--but there is no way we can compete with schools that don't share the same challenges we do. We are giving our students a big advantage they would not have otherwise, but we're not magical job makers. We will therefore be punished for something beyond our control.

Don't get me wrong. I want every student to get a job. But McCrory's view is that the state decides on a few job-specific majors to load up with students, and then winds them up and lets them go get jobs in a few chosen fields. We need to make sure we don't move away too far from our broader goal, which is to create citizens. From my dean's letter on the college website:

Our mission is to advance the discovery, dissemination, and application of knowledge in the traditional areas of liberal arts and sciences and in emerging areas of study. Our world-class faculty aspire to be thought leaders -- passionate about their teaching and scholarship -- who model ethical and engaged citizenship for their students. Our faculty and students actively engage with local, national, and global communities and seek to transform the world through creative and innovative solutions.

This is true.

* I won't even get into the mess of the money, paperwork and bureaucracy required to create and maintain a database of student job outcomes for the entire UNC system.

Read more...

Latin American Catholicism

Omar Encarnación has an article in Foreign Affairs on the decline of Catholicism in Latin America. Some of it is a bit overdone, since I am not sure that Latin Americans view the new Pope warily just because he is Argentine.

Beyond Bergolgio’s personal baggage, there are other reasons to doubt whether he will be able to revive Catholicism in Latin America. Although Catholics in the United States and Western Europe Catholics are leaving the church atop a tide of secularism, in Latin America, Catholics are leaving because they find other religious options more appealing. The decline of Catholicism in Latin America has been met with an explosion in Protestantism. It is estimated that approximately 15 percent of all Latin Americans are Protestant -- a startling figure considering that, as recently as the mid-1990s, only about four percent were Protestant. The most “extreme” case is Guatemala, where approximately 30 percent of the population is Protestant and three presidents have identified as Evangelical. 

In Brazil, an estimated 500,000 people are thought to be leaving the Catholic Church per year, with the bulk of them converting to Protestantism. Those flocking to the Evangelical mega-churches of Rio de Janeiro cite the Catholic Church’s authoritarianism and strict hierarchy -- embodied, curiously enough, in the pope -- as the primary reason for leaving. By contrast, they point to the opportunities that Protestant churches afford for women and minorities to ascend the ranks. In addition, they appreciate the positive message of self-empowerment and teachings on how to accrue wealth and prosperity. It is hard to imagine that Bergoglio’s message and example of humility and frugality, however virtuous, will resonate with these folks. 

Interesting cultural question, though I think Catholics can still happily get rich while liking Pope Francis, just as they've passed liberal laws about a host of different issues. The overall point about not losing ground to other religions, however, is a good one, especially since it is clearly a reason for choosing him in the first place.

Frances Hapogian basically agreed in a New York Times piece. Latin America is increasingly more politically and religiously plural. Catholicism has to compete.

Read more...

Maduro dice

Via Manuel Rueda on Twitter (@ruedareport) I found Maduro Dice (Maduro Says). It claims to catalog every time Nicolás Maduro has mentioned Hugo Chávez since the latter died (or, as the site says, "since the announcement of his physical disappearance). It is updated frequently, with funny commentary. As I write, it says 3,195.

For whatever reasons, Hugo Chávez has generated some of the funniest Spanish-language stuff there is. Just read El Chigüire Bipolar. It is all absurdist, like The Onion in the sense of showing how absurd reality is such that you can barely tell them apart.

So did Maduro really refer to Chávez 3,195 times by now? The point is that it doesn't matter. He did so in a hat, without a hat, in a box, with a fox, in a house, with a mouse...well, you get the idea. The point is the obvious absurdity of the constant mentions, which is going viral and becoming comedy gold.

Read more...

The Way of the Gun in Mexico

Very interesting study commissioned by the Igarapé Institute (in Brazil) and the University of San Diego's Transborder Institute: The Way of the Gun: Estimating Firearm Traffic Across the U.S.-Mexico Border.

We tackle the challenge of estimating arms trafficking from the U.S. to Mexico differently. We apply a unique GIS-generated county-level panel dataset (1993-1999 and 2010-2012) of Federal Firearms Licenses to sell small arms (FFLs), we create a demand curve for firearms based on the distance by road from the nearest point on the U.S.-Mexico border and official border crossing. We use a time-series negative binomial model paired with a post-estimation population attributable fraction (PAF) estimator. We do so controlling for determinants of domestic demand (e.g., income, political leaning, population density, and spatial auto-correlation). We are able to estimate a total demand for trafficking, both in terms of firearms and dollar sales for the firearms industry. 

And they find:

• A significant proportion of U.S. firearm dealers are dependent on Mexican demand: 46.7% (95% C.I.: 39.4 - 52.7%) of U.S. FFLs during 2010-2012 depended for their economic existence on some amount of demand from the U.S.-Mexico firearms trade to stay in business. This percentage has steadily risen from 37.4% (95% C.I.: 28.2 - 45.0%) in 1993;

• A sizeable and growing percentage of US firearms sales are destined for Mexico: 2.2% (between 0.9% and 3.7%) of U.S. domestic arms sales are attributable to the U.S.-Mexico traffic. This percentage is up from roughly 1.75% (between 0.66% and 3.15%) in 1993;

• The volume of firearm crossing the U.S.-Mexican border is higher than previously assumed: 253,000 firearms (between 106,700 and 426,729) were purchased annually to be trafficked over 2010-2012. This number is starkly higher than the 88,000 firearms (between 35,597 and 152,142) trafficked in 1997-1999, during the federal Assault Weapons Ban (AWB);

• The value of firearms sales destined for Mexico are significant and growing appreciably: The trade represented annual revenues of $127.2 million (range: $53.7 - $214.6 million) for the U.S. firearms industry during 2010-2012 - nearly four times higher than during 1997-1999, when the trade ran to just $32.0 million (range: $13.0 - $55.4 million); 

• The U.S. and Mexican authorities are seizing a comparatively small number of firearms at the border: Based on seizure reports for 2009, U.S. and Mexico authorities in recent years have been seizing just 14.7% (between 8.7% and 35.0%) of total arms bought with the intention of trafficking them. Specifically, Mexican authorities have seized roughly 12.7% of the total annual trade whilst the United States has intercepted around 2.0%.

Not a fun read, but a necessary one. One serious obstacle is that control of guns in the United States is viewed entirely as a domestic issue, whereas (like immigration) it really is also foreign policy. As the report points out, Mexico has few guns and has tight regulations, so lax laws on the other side of the border carry considerable international consequences. The United States needs to share responsibility for the problem of gun violence in Mexico.

Well worth a few minutes of your time to read.

Read more...

Videla Calls for Coup

Staying classy until the very end, former dictator and frequent jailbird Jorge Videla has called for the Argentine military to rise up and overthrow the government.

This is someone who overthrew the government, ordered the use of extraordinarily repressive means to maintain political control, helped with the theft of babies, oversaw the unraveling of the Argentine economy, and contributed to the almost total de-legitimization (and de-funding) of the Argentina military. Despite that, I guess he figures his opinion matters within the ranks.

It is also a reminder that the age-old habit of calling the military to cut resolve political conflict is very hard to stamp out. However, it is also reasonable to assume that this particular convicted criminal's views aren't widely shared. Or at least we can only hope.

Read more...

Seed of Chávez

Nicolás Maduro just started a Twitter account (@NicolasMaduro), where he describes himself as a (the?) "son of Chávez." The obvious and intended comparison is Jesus Christ, but there are other--and much less pleasant--possible comparisons.

For example, is Maduro like the seed of Chucky? Not so pleasant.

Or maybe the son of Sam? Equally unpleasant.

A more optimistic comparison would be Sanford and Son, because you know Lamont would run things better than Fred.

Maduro seems intent on criticizing heretics. For the country, he'd be better off trying the Lamont model.

Or even better, don't say you're the son of a dead president for political gain.

Read more...

Feedly

Like so many other people, I was annoyed when I learned that Google Reader was disappearing in July. I'm actually not a devotee per se, but I just don't want to spend time searching for and switching to something different. I decided on Feedly, primarily because it allows you to quickly and seamlessly move all your Google Reader feeds.

So far, it is working really well and I don't miss Google Reader. It is very easy to organize and access all your feeds, and on an iPad it has very intuitive features. My only complaint is that it seems to take too many steps to copy a link--I wish you could quickly open it in Safari. Maybe I am just missing something. Update: I WAS missing something. There is a circle icon at the top right of the page that immediately opens the blog post (or whatever it is) in Safari.

Another issue is that for years I've been sharing blog posts I like, which then show up on my blog, and Feedly does not have the same feature. However, increasingly Twitter is serving that purpose for me, and since my tweets also show up on my blog, sharing is actually just duplication.

In short, you can give it a test drive with minimal waste of time and effort. Just do so before July 1.

Read more...