28 items found for your search. If no results were found please broaden your search.
(12/06/11 11:57pm)
____simple_html_dom__voku__html_wrapper____>On the evening of Nov. 29, student protesters “in solidarity with the Occupy movement” organized a protest that crossed a line of decency and respect at the Kelley School of Business. While I respect every group’s right to peacefully assemble and protest, the actions last Tuesday in the Kelley School of Business violated University policy, state law and the ethical commitment we have to each other as fellow students to show respect in the academic process.When we become students at this University, we enter into an agreement not only with this institution but with each other, as well. At the beginning of freshman year, each of us agrees with our signature to abide by the policies set forth in the IU Code of Student Rights, Responsibilities, and Conduct.Unfortunately, the student organizers of last week’s escapade in Kelley violated that agreement with the rest of us. The student protesters grossly violated a number of the clauses that we as students agree to uphold in Part II, Section H of the Code, which deals with student conduct on campus.Their clear and immediate University violations include “disorderly conduct, including obstructive and disruptive behavior that interferes with ... university-authorized activity” while simultaneously “intentionally obstructing or blocking access to university facilities, property, or programs.” Even while they violated these University policies, what’s most disheartening to me is that their actions ultimately deprived fellow IU students from learning more about and possibly pursuing potential career opportunities. Out of curiosity, following the protest, I decided to seek the opinions of several business students and hear their perspectives. For the most part, I witnessed that business students were more outraged by the protesters’ behavior than the content of their message. The growing consensus I’ve seen is that the protesters’ actions will have far-reaching consequences for University-employer relations. It seems the looming fear among Kelley students is this may translate into a hindrance of job recruitment for students in an already uncertain economy.The student organizers of the protest argue that their act was a form of civil disobedience. I argue the contrary and say it was outright disrespectful and selfish to deprive their fellow students of opportunity.My frustration with this student protest has absolutely nothing to do with the substance of the message. Rather, as illustrated above, it is how the protesters went about delivering it. Even though I might disagree politically with the Occupy movement’s core message, the movement has the Constitutional right to protest. But it also has the duty to act within the confines of the law as set out by state statute and University policy.The Occupy movement deserves some credibility for calling attention to some critical contemporary issues of the nation. Our nation’s growing disparity in wealth and exorbitant executive compensation on the heels of taxpayer bailouts for companies are points that most of us can agree need to be addressed. — cjcaudil@indiana.edu
(11/29/11 9:53pm)
____simple_html_dom__voku__html_wrapper____>In Washington D.C., no one is taking ownership of our problems.We have a president whose lack of leadership is clearly displayed in his inability to lead through his consistent delegation of policy to his czars. Even more disappointing, we have a squabbling Congress that refuses to engage in civil debate, let alone attempt to solve some of the most pressing issues of the nation. An example of this squabbling happened right before Thanksgiving break. After months of debate, the so-called bipartisan “super committee” failed miserably to agree on $1.2 trillion in deficit reductions in the next decade. Formed in the wake of the Treasury’s credit downgrade in August, the super committee’s inability to compromise is proof of the lack of leadership that could deal another unconscionable blow to our nation’s balance sheet. Like many of you, I am tired of it. And like many of you, I am yearning for someone to lead. It is obvious the time has come for our nation’s leaders to put aside their political labels and grievances. Instead of falling victim to blaming the “last eight years” or blaming President Barack Obama, someone, somewhere, needs to step up and have the damn courage to take ownership and lead.Like it or not, I don’t see much changing in the nation’s political landscape for at least the next year. Given our current gridlock, coupled with the GOP presidential primary heating up in a campaign season that promises to dwarf 2008, there is practically no hope for the nation’s leadership to attempt to solve any of our problems.What worries me greatly is that we might end up being victims of our own ignorance. Increasingly, our electorate is uninformed about the issues. This has made our elections more like a high school popularity contest and less about the character and leadership of candidates who will have the power to return our nation to prosperity or lead us into decline. To even begin to correct this problem, you can do your part by simply taking a few hours out of your life and research. Don’t let some talking head on SNL or Jon Stewart do your thinking for you. Instead, make your own conscious decision about who you support by researching the issues and the candidates.Any election has consequences, both in the short and long terms, and even though we may not agree on the issues, we have a duty to our republic to be informed voters and make conscious decision. If you don’t know anything about politics and are curious about learning more or have questions, I invite you to email me. I am happy to use what limited knowledge I have to possibly guide you in the right direction. If you are a political junkie like me and want to meet for coffee and have someone to talk about politics with, please email me. I will never pass up an opportunity for a good debate!— cjcaudil@indiana.edu
(11/09/11 1:27am)
____simple_html_dom__voku__html_wrapper____>In American politics, it seems like statesmanship is all but dead. I think it is safe to say the few left who practice this rare craft are on their way out, given the way our politics have been heading.What saddens me most is that a populist mood of anti-statesmanship has gripped the electorate in this time of economic hardship. We witness this theme in political movements across our land with demands that respectable statesmen, such as Senator Richard Lugar, must stand aside. These demands originate from arguments that certain leaders have simply been in the system too long or have somehow become disconnected with their constituents. I truly believe that our leaders are obligated to stay in touch, and liability for current affairs should rest with those in office. But I also think we have let these movements go unchecked, and frankly, they are a little out of hand. This has caused the electorate to resort to extremism, which promotes a polarized environment where no one takes ownership of a problem and inevitably creates hostility when no progress is accomplished.Our call should be to commit ourselves to choose leaders who will take ownership of the issues and be focused on solving the problems for the nation at large. These leaders must engage in a process of civil and open debate without disparaging the character of their counterparts, which is a rare virtue of American politics today. They must also be men and women of character with the knowledge and competence to make informed decisions. I would submit to you that the greatest threat to our republic is our nation’s own civic ignorance. A recent example is from March of this year when Newsweek gave 1,000 Americans the basic U.S. citizenship test. Out of those 1,000 who took the test, 38 percent failed it. This civic ignorance, coupled with a notion that elected leaders must represent the interests of their constituents, should illustrate what I think is the greatest obstacle in solving our problems today. My assertion is that, generally speaking, most Americans are not informed about the issues but still have this unusual expectation that their representatives should represent their interests. In the Federalist Papers, James Madison warned us about this very subject. “ … a popular government without popular information or the means of acquiring it is but a prologue to Farce or Tragedy or perhaps both,” Madison said. “Knowledge will forever govern ignorance, and a people who mean to be their own Governors must arm themselves with the power knowledge gives.” My fear is that Americans are failing to arm themselves with the basic knowledge that enables each of us to be our own governors.Whether we like it or not, there is a looming fear in our land that decline is inevitable. With the rise of China and America’s status as No. 1 challenged, it is easy for one to see how that could be the case.However, I refuse to accept that. I argue the contrary and believe that while our challenges are great, we are a unique people who have overcome great challenges in our nation’s past. In the coming decade, our leaders will have to specifically address three issues that I think will be essential to inspiring American confidence in the 21st century.First, our leaders must get our nation’s treasury in order. This should include a robust discussion about levels of spending and taxation and the future of our nation’s debt.Second, our leaders must solve the crisis in America’s classrooms. In order to maintain America’s economic might, key investments and reforms in human capital are absolutely critical. Third, our leaders must make America the global leader in the fight against anthropogenic climate change. During times of challenge in our nation’s history, it was only through a shared unity of purpose and a communicated vision for the future that we began to solve our great challenges in a civil way and restored our confidence. I hope and pray we choose leaders that can do just that in the coming age. — cjcaudil@indiana.edu
(11/02/11 1:53am)
____simple_html_dom__voku__html_wrapper____>I respect the right of groups of individuals to assemble and protest whatever they want in a peaceful fashion. Recently, groups of people have begun “occupying” parks and city centers across our country.Whether in Los Angeles or on Wall Street, the Occupy movement has grown into a nationwide network of groups protesting our current economic situation. In fact, for the past several weeks, a group here in Bloomington has been “occupying” Peoples Park on Kirkwood Avenue.I commend each of these groups for exercising their First Amendment rights and calling attention to areas such as our nation’s disparity in income and the poverty rate. Generally speaking, some of this group’s grievances are warranted, but I do have some serious reservations about the motivations and actions of this nationwide Occupy movement. My first concern is the lack of a coherent message. Can someone explain what exactly these people want? More importantly, what are they doing by simply “occupying”?It’s understandable if they are angry about the bailouts and the taxpayer-funded bonuses some of the Wall Street fat cats received; so am I. But in no way will I blame the entire economic system because of a few cherry-picked examples of corruption. Instead, we should keep our political elites in Washington accountable by lobbying them at the ballot box, since they are the ones who let the corruption happen.My second reservation with the Occupy movement is that many within it seem to want to bring down the very economic system that has afforded our nation the wealth and prosperity we enjoy today. When I see people in the movement carrying signs that say the institutions of capitalism have failed, I want to ask them what they would replace them with. Do they really think that socialism or even communism would be a suitable alternative? I ask them to simply refer to the 20th century as a historical case study. Millions were slaughtered in the name of “collectivism” and “social justice” in the Soviet Union during Stalin’s rule and in Red China during the Great Leap Forward. In fact, capitalist reforms in China were the result of years of economic stagnation. Since these reforms began nearly three decades ago, China has experienced unparalleled economic growth, which, according to the World Bank, has lifted nearly 300 million people out of poverty. My third and final problem with the Occupy movement is the sheer disregard for facts about income and taxation. Recently, a new campaign associated with the Occupy movement called “We are the 99%” is aimed at vilifying our nation’s wealthiest individuals. This campaign is nothing more than a ruse. I challenge anyone to an honest, candid debate about this because the numbers speak for themselves. According to the most recent tax data available from the IRS in 2009, households considered in the “top 10 percent” have 43.2 percent of adjusted gross income yet pay 70.5 percent of federal income taxes. What’s even more interesting is that the “bottom 50 percent” pay an average tax rate of just 1.85 percent. Last week, a campaign started as a counter-protest against the “We are the 99%.” This movement is called “We are the 53 percent,” which refers to the 53 percent of Americans who paid federal income taxes last year. This basically means that, after tax deductions and other factors, 46 percent of Americans did not pay any Federal income tax last year. In closing, I leave you with these words to ponder from former President Ronald Reagan: “They tell us we must learn to live with less and teach our children that their lives will be less full and prosperous than ours have been, that the America of the coming years will be a place where — because of our past excesses — it will be impossible to dream and make those dreams come true. I don’t believe that. And I don’t believe you do, either.”— cjcaudil@indiana.edu
(10/26/11 12:51am)
____simple_html_dom__voku__html_wrapper____>If you’ve turned on the news lately, you know the season is already in full swing for those seeking the Republican nomination for president in 2012. If you have managed to see one of the GOP presidential debates, it may have given you a good feeling for the candidates and their platforms. If you have not, the goal here is to provide you with a brief overview of the current candidate field. I will report their current standings among likely Republican voters, as reported by an average calculated by Real Clear Politics of different polls across the country. I will also present what I perceive as two strengths and a weakness for each of them. Dr. Larry Sabato, a professor of political science at West Virginia University, has labeled the GOP candidates who really have no chance at the nomination as “Pretenders” and those that could take the nomination as “Contenders.” This is used in the descriptions below to help explain the viability of their candidacy.Businessman and former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney is considered among many in the Republican establishment as the leading candidate for next year. Sabato said he is a serious “Contender” for the nomination. Strengths: Romney has a good record in the private sector and name recognition among the general electorate. Weakness: His passage of “Romneycare” in Massachusetts is not popular among Republican primary voters. Former Godfather’s Pizza CEO Herman Cain came roaring out of nowhere and is now considered a serious “Contender.” Cain’s current popularity has him in a dead heat with Gov. Romney for first place. Strengths: He is an African American conservative and has a strong business record. Weakness: He will appear too conservative to moderates and independents in a general election.Texas Gov. Rick Perry was a late entrant to the GOP race, having entered in early August. Sabato said Perry is the third and final “Contender” for the nomination. Strengths: He has the ability to raise a lot of money and a strong record of job creation in Texas. Weakness: His stance about immigration will affect his position among GOP primary voters.Former Speaker Newt Gingrich has been in the race from the start and is currently polling fourth. Sabato said Gingrich is considered a leading “Pretender.” Strengths: He has a conservative record as speaker of the House and is very intelligent as a policy maker. Weakness: His personal life might polarize some GOP primary voters.Congressman and libertarian favorite Ron Paul currently polls at fifth place and is considered a “Pretender.” Strengths: He is a strong, limited conservative and is popular among young people. Weakness: His positions about foreign policy will irritate many Republican primary voters. Congresswoman and Tea Party favorite Michele Bachmann currently sits at sixth place and is a “Pretender.” Strengths: She has strong support from the Tea Party and appeals to the conservative base of the GOP. Weakness: She is somewhat controversial among the general electorate.Former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman currently sits at seventh place and is definitely a “Pretender.” Strengths: He has executive experience as both a governor and business leader, and he also has foreign policy experience as ambassador to China. Weakness: His moderate social positions will affect his chances among GOP primary voters.Last but not least, former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum sits in last place and is considered a “Pretender.” Strengths: He appeals to social conservatives and is relatively popular in Pennsylvania, a key swing state. Weakness: His zealous social conservatism will turn off moderates and independent voters in a general election.In conclusion, I leave you with my own analysis of the traits essential for a Republican candidate to beat President Obama in 2012: Whoever wins the nomination, GOP voters must pick a candidate with executive experience who will be a good contrast to Obama in the general election. It will be important for the candidate to clearly articulate his or her record and vision for the United States. This will play a large role in the general election when the candidate is up against a sitting president who has a strong ability to communicate.Lastly, it will be essential for the nominee to focus on the economy and have the strong business acumen to communicate his or her plan to get America back to work. — cjcaudil@indiana.edu
(10/19/11 10:51pm)
____simple_html_dom__voku__html_wrapper____>From Arizona to Alabama and our very own state of Indiana, the new controversial laws in these states have illustrated the serious divide in the electorate about the issue of immigration.The most recent and controversial of these laws is in Alabama. The state’s new law went so far as to require school administrators to check the immigration status of students in Alabama’s public schools. But thanks to the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta, parts of this ridiculous bill have been blocked until the Court has time to review challenges by the United States federal government. There has already been an outcry by the feds against these types of measures, with them suing states on Constitutional grounds. This issue is a matter of perspective. The serious question we should be asking ourselves is this: Why are the states passing these laws in the first place?Instead of blaming the states for trying to crack down on illegal immigration, which is a serious problem, our anger should be directed at the federal government. Above the fray of the debate about something as serious as Alabama’s recent, unbelievable immigration law, we should be blaming our members of Congress for a failure to enact sound public policy. The current status of our national immigration policy is abysmal at best. The encumbering bureaucratic hoopla of getting a visa to come here, the failure to secure the borders and the inaction in addressing the millions already here are the fault of the U.S. federal government.This is what has prompted the states to act and, rather than take out our frustrations and anger about the problem on the states, we should direct it toward Washington. In 2007, Congress failed to pass what would have been sweeping immigration reform. Since then, it has failed to bring up the issue for a candid debate. Rather than take ownership of the problem after their obvious failure to act, the feds have sued the states that have taken on the problem. Whether we disagree with the actions of a particular state, our effort should be to demand action from our members of Congress on this issue. The hope in the near future is that they can put aside their political squabbling and reaffirm that our nation will continue to be the refuge for those seeking opportunity and freedom as it has been for the last 235 years.
(10/19/11 12:00am)
____simple_html_dom__voku__html_wrapper____>As a senior, I am worried about graduating. If you are a senior, you should be worried, too, and not because our days of being able to regularly play Sink the Biz at Nicks or enjoy Wednesday night trivia at Kilroys are limited. Rather, I hope your worry is the future state of our great country and the abysmal economy that all of us will soon find ourselves graduating into.According to the Congressional Budget Office, in August the unemployment rate will remain more than 8 percent until at least 2014. When you break that statistic down by age, the current unemployment rate among 16- to 25-year-olds is a staggering 18.1 percent, the highest of any age bracket. What does this mean for you and me? If there are any jobs to be found, competition for them is fierce. As will most likely be the case, jobs will go to those with the most experience.Using this frame of reference, my appeal to all of you is to consider carefully who you will vote for next year. If you were able to vote for Obama in 2008, do not make the same mistake and vote for him again just because it was cool to do so in 2008.Don’t let the Left-wingers on MSNBC or the Right-wingers on Fox make up your mind for you. Rather, take an hour or two of your life to read up on the alternatives and make up your own mind.As the chairman of the College Republicans, I get asked all the time what the Democrats have done wrong and what I would have done differently. I tell them some of the following:First, I would not have shoved a $1 trillion healthcare mandate onto the back of an already uncertain economy. It truly is a failed piece of public policy, with the exceptions of making insurance companies allow pre-existing conditions for kids and allowing young people to stay on their parents’ insurance policies until they are 26. It fails miserably at achieving its intended purpose: making health care more affordable. I would not have filled the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) with a bunch of Big Labor union hacks. What resulted was an unprecedented intervention by the NLRB, which told Boeing it could not start a new manufacturing facility in South Carolina because it was a Right-to-Work state. The facility would have provided an additional 4,000 jobs.I would have taken the lead with both parties in Congress to ensure that an annual federal budget was passed. The furious debate about the future state of our nation’s Treasury began way before Republicans took back the house in January.Just last year, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi was the leader of the first Congress to not pass a budget since modern budgeting began decades ago. Sunday marked the 900th day since Senate Democrats have passed a budget. What’s bewildering is this was all done by a government unified with Obama in the White House and clear Democratic majorities in both chambers of Congress. Blaming our August AAA downgrade by S&P rating agency on House Republicans? I would ask you to think about that one again.I would have not put an envirostatist in charge of the EPA. Recently, it threatened to shut down many of our nation’s coal-fired power plants, which would have led to as much as an 8 percent reduction in our nation’s energy output.Instead, I would get the EPA off the backs of American business and push the nation forward on a path of energy independence. This can be achieved through harvesting our own natural resources, streamlining unnecessary bureaucratic red tape and building a new energy infrastructure that can accommodate renewable energy such as wind and solar.While I will always respect the president and his service to our country, there has to come a point when we as the people have a right to not hire him for another term. While he did inherit a mess, I think it is time to stop blaming ‘the past eight years,’ and take some ownership of the current situation. — cjcaudil@indiana.edu
(10/11/11 10:22pm)
At IU, it seems the Left always has the loudest voice.
(10/04/11 11:41pm)
____simple_html_dom__voku__html_wrapper____>Last week, Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas formally submitted Palestine’s application to join the United Nations. In his effort to have Palestine unilaterally declared an independent nation-state, Abbas’ actions only further hindered an already stalled peace process. The U.N. Security Council is the delegated final authority of considering the admission of new voting members to the U.N. General Assembly. The Security Council has 15 voting members, of which five permanent members have the power to veto any measure brought before it for consideration. As a permanent veto member, the United States must invoke its veto for Palestine’s move to declare itself an independent state without a peace deal in place. President Barack Obama has already indicated that the U.S. would take such a measure if the issue was brought to a vote. Before a Palestinian state can become a member of the U.N., it should seek to resolve its disputes with Israel. However, President Abbas’s actions now and in the recent past clearly indicate that he is not serious about achieving a lasting peace between the two states. In April, Abbas’s own Fatah party, which rules the West Bank, entered into a unity government with Hamas, which rules the Gaza Strip. Just four years ago, the two factions fought a bloody civil war for control of the Gaza Strip. Hamas is an organization that sanctions the use of terrorism to advance its political goals. The use of suicide bombers on buses and the launching of an untold number of rockets from the Gaza Strip into Israel are only the most well-known cases. It has been listed as a terrorist organization by the U.S. Department of State and the European Union.According to the Anti-Defamation League, Hamas has clearly committed itself to “destroying the Jewish state and replacing it with an Islamic state in all of Palestine.” There is no conceivable way for Israel to engage in peace talks with an organization that has factions , like Hamas, committed to Israel’s destruction. Associating with an organization like Hamas’ clearly demonstrates Abbas’ disregard for the peace process and naïve way of thinking.Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has made it clear that Israel supports peace and a commitment to the Oslo Accords, which state that both parties agree that the “Israeli-Palestinian conflict must be solved through direct negotiations between the two parties.” Abbas is violating the Oslo Accords by attempting to circumvent Israel and not engage in direct negotiations. If Abbas is serious about peace with Israel, he needs to get real. He must stop his needless efforts of trying to achieve some kind of Palestinian legitimacy through an international debating society. He also needs to consider the implications of his continued partnership with Hamas, which only undermines the process further.— cjcaudil@indiana.edu
(09/27/11 11:07pm)
____simple_html_dom__voku__html_wrapper____>In last Thursday’s Republican presidential debate, illegal immigration played a prominent role in the discourse among the candidates. The nine candidates on stage expressed their opinions about the issue, and each seemed to express similar views, although, as with any issue, there were some differences. This is one of the most pressing concerns of our day, and there are a variety of opinions and voices fighting to be heard. One voice that stands out among the crowd in the Republican primary is that of Texas Gov. Rick Perry. In Texas, Perry passed his version of the DREAM Act, which allows illegal immigrants to receive in-state tuition rates. In some circles, this seems to be the appropriate response to the issue. If illegal immigrants are going to be in this country, at no fault of their own, we might as well ensure that they are educated and are productive members of society. While I agree that we certainly want to avoid creating a class of individuals that is dependent on the government and lacking in education, I am also not sure that subsidizing attendance at a public university is the right response, either. In-state tuition for illegal immigrants provides a benefit students of the other 49 states do not receive. I understand that we are a nation of immigrants and it would be better to educate these individuals than relegate them to the bottom ranks of society. However, it still does not justify excluding other American students. Many students attend public universities outside their home states without the benefit of receiving in-state tuition rates. Perry argues that we need to provide in-state tuition for illegal immigrants or else they will become a drag on our economy. By that logic, students from Illinois who attend IU are at risk of being jobless, uneducated and on welfare because IU doesn’t provide them in-state tuition rates.No one is saying illegal immigrants should not be allowed to attend college. The question is: Why should we provide preferential treatment to this group of students and not to students who are American citizens? In the context of a 7.5 percent tuition hike at this University for out-of-state tuition, I bet it would not sit well with out-of-state students if Gov. Mitch Daniels provided illegal immigrants with in-state tuition rates. It would have attracted more illegal immigrants here while discouraging other American students from choosing to bring their talents to IU. If we are looking for ways to get our border under control, reduce government spending and regain a sense of law and order in this country, turning off the “magnet” that attracts illegal immigrants here is the first step. — cjcaudil@indiana.edu
(08/31/11 11:16pm)
____simple_html_dom__voku__html_wrapper____>It has been a month since the U.S. debt crisis reached its boiling point. With the threat of default and Moody’s Investors Service threatening to downgrade the U.S. AAA credit rating, the only hope Americans had was to sit by and wait for some sort of an agreement from Washington.What came out was an agreement that did not satisfy either side and was a product of an embarrassing feud among our nation’s political elite. In the end, it was not Moody’s, but Stand & Poor’s that downgraded the U.S. credit rating from AAA to AA+. While I was disappointed by the actions of both sides during the debt debate, I have been most infuriated with how the Left has framed this issue since. They have seemed to place convenient blame on U.S. House Republicans for the S&P downgrade.Quite frankly, I have been downright disgusted at the mudslinging and the accusations. The Left has framed Republicans as “political obstructionists,” with Vice President Joe Biden even suggesting that some of the negotiators are political “terrorists.” While I can respect the differing opinions of my friends across the aisle, they do really need to get their facts straight and stop using cheap political punch lines. For starters, in order to shed some light on this whole debt debacle, we must go back to the spring of 2010 in the 111th Congress. During this time, Democrats had unified government with clear majorities in both chambers of Congress and President Barack Obama in the White House. Under this unified government, Democrats, for the first time since modern budgeting began, failed to pass a budget by the April 15 statutory deadline.Their failure to pass such a budget has directly impacted the federal fiscal year we are currently in, which ends on Sept. 30. The government has kept its doors open only because of a series of resolutions authorizing additional spending. This illustrates a serious internal Democrat struggle about spending and the debt long before Republicans took the majority of the House in January of this year. To me, this inaction and failure of leadership to address such a challenge is a predecessor of what resulted in the hasty and reckless behavior we witnessed leading up to the debt deal. The reckless behavior was undoubtedly fueled by the political paradigm shift with a new conservative Republican majority in the U.S. House. This new majority was sent with a simple message from voters: a change in direction from the status quo is a must. At the very least, the new majority has been able to shift the debate and has been successful in enacting reductions in federal spending.Another point to acknowledge is the underlying motivation of the S&P downgrade. S&P’s provided rationale was that the downgrade reflects a “view that the effectiveness, stability and predictability of American policy- making and political institutions have weakened at a time of ongoing fiscal and economic challenges.” While it seems the Left would make one believe that House Republicans are totally to blame for the downgrade, S&P’s Managing Director John Chambers clarified otherwise in an interview earlier last month. When asked about whether or not it was a Republican downgrade, he said, “I think there’s lots of blame to go around. And what we need to come to in the United States is a way of forging consensus, so that we can make the tough choices that lie ahead, because the fiscal situation in the United States is not sustainable.” Tempers seem to have somewhat cooled with Congress out for its August recess. But the political finger pointing game must stop. I am tired of the blame game, and I think it is about time that Senate Democrats and President Obama take some ownership of this problem and lead on it.— cjcaudil@indiana.edu
(08/25/11 11:21pm)
____simple_html_dom__voku__html_wrapper____>I can clearly remember moving into Teter Quad three years ago and being overwhelmed by the world around me.Suddenly, I found that I could plan my own schedule, eat anything I wanted in Wright Quad food court, go to the gym whenever and wake up at 7:45 a.m. for an 8 a.m. class in the Kelley School of Business. Now, looking back, I can say that in three years there have definitely been some changes on campus and around the world. The crossword puzzles in the Indiana Daily Student were my only option to get me through those boring K 201 lectures. I had no Twitter, no Facebook, no smart phone and definitely no iPad to pass the time. Today, it would be hard for me to imagine life without them. The gods did not favor IU Athletics during the last three years, with the exception of soccer and swimming. In ’08, Tom Crean was new to the scene, ready to rebuild our beloved basketball program. This last spring, we finally got a new football coach, Kevin Wilson, and hope of actually winning a few games. And it seems our fortunes may finally be looking up with the addition of recruits like quarterback Gunner Kiel. In the last three years, we’ve seen “Avatar,” “Hangover” and “Hangover II” and the sun finally set on the Harry Potter series with the release of “Deathly Hallows.” In primetime, we saw the last of Oprah and great shows like “LOST” and “24.” Across the nation, we witnessed history with the election of President Barack Obama in fall of 2008. In three short years, we’ve managed to kill Osama bin Laden, lose our AAA bond rating and experience a global recession.Across the globe, we have witnessed the Japan earthquake and tsunami, the Arab Spring and the final days of Gadafi’s regime in Libya. Whatever happens in your four years here, IU provides each of us a different story to tell and a chance to see the world. Involvement in student government and a campus political group has given me a number of opportunities and relationships that will last a lifetime. I have had the chance to study abroad in Germany and the United Kingdom and to travel to Israel and Bulgaria. However your story may end, make sure to enjoy the things that are essential to the full Hoosier experience. These must include football tailgates, basketball games in Assembly Hall, late night walks back from Kirkwood Avenue and many more. My advice is get involved early this semester in a few things that you are curious or passionate about. There are clubs and activities that will cater to your needs. So, in closing, to the class of 2015, be ready to grab your North Face, put on your Sperrys, tweet from your iPhone and enjoy the next four years — they will be the time of your life.— cjcaudil@indiana.edu
(07/13/11 9:36pm)
____simple_html_dom__voku__html_wrapper____>I was forwarded an email the other day by a friend at Georgetown University: Apparently when 1,000 Americans were given the basic US citizenship test, 38 percent failed.At first I thought it was just another dumb forwarded email that contained statistics which had not been fact checked. But then, I decided to do a simple Google search.Sure enough, the first search hit was a link to a Newsweek article from February of this year which confirmed the disturbing statistic.I was stunned, so I took the test myself just to see how difficult the test actually was. It was surprisingly much easier than I had anticipated.Given that I do live in my own political bubble, I will give the average test taker the benefit of the doubt by admitting the test isn’t so easy if one hadn’t studied up on the material before taking it.But I find it quite alarming when the numbers say certain things necessary to a basic civic understanding are in jeopardy. For example, according to the article’s findings, 29 percent of respondents could not identify who the vice president was and 44 percent were unable to define the Bill of Rights. I am not sure of the demographic breakdown of the study; but speaking from personal experience through conversation with people in our generation, I get the general sense there is a threat of civil ignorance among the youth.I think the root of the problem lies within our education system and how we approach teaching civics and government. Our policymakers have failed to create an environment in education where civics and government produce an active and engaged citizenry.While I find it great the general attitude in primary education has been math and science driven, I think it is necessary to look at the threat posed by the statistic above. After graduating high school, I still felt like I knew nothing about government or civics.Most of the knowledge I have gained about civics and government has come through direct exposure to material thanks to the political science and public policy faculty here at IU. However, the overwhelming majority does not have that luxury. I think it is a huge disservice to us as citizens, to future generations and to our country if we do not tackle this problem right away. While I am not calling into question the great political science teachers out there, I do think it is necessary to warn our policymakers of this threat.Perhaps I may be overreacting somewhat, but I find the trend of ignorance quite disheartening. I just hope the trend can be reversed.In closing, I leave you with some kind words from my favorite founding father, James Madison.He said, “knowledge will forever govern ignorance; and a people who mean to be their own governors must arm themselves with the power which knowledge gives.” Perhaps if you read this and think you may be uninformed, you too can begin to arm yourself with the knowledge that is sufficient to guard against civic ignorance. — cjcaudill@indiana.edu
(06/29/11 9:29pm)
____simple_html_dom__voku__html_wrapper____>I was driving back from a political event June 24 in Lexington, Ky. when I got a phone call from a friend who said New York had just become the sixth state in the nation to legalize gay marriage. I would like to thank and applaud the New York State Assembly for standing on the side of history that Friday night in support of equality. Easily considered the civil rights struggle of our generation, I am further inspired by the prospect that equality for the Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgender community may be finally coming. Since I’ve had a few days to reflect on what I think this means for the nation, I have begun to realize what happened in New York has helped elevate the fight for equality to a whole new level across the country. Out of this victory came a realization for me that is not so politically advantageous to one side of the spectrum anymore. While the right has long been considered the majority party faction opposed to equality, the political landscape is definitely changing. “Most conservatives have reacted with calm — if not outright approval — to New York’s dramatic decision,” former senior Bush aide David Frum said in his Monday column on CNN’s website. In addition, he said he found himself “strangely untroubled by New York State’s vote to authorize same-sex marriage.”As one of those conservatives who reacted with outright approval, I would have to say for the most part, the general trend of support for GLBT equality among conservatives can be broken down along generational lines. Even so, as the leader of the College Republicans here at IU, I have witnessed members in my club that do not agree with my stance on this issue. All I can say is that we have agreed to disagree. The victory in New York is going to signal a call nationwide in the fight for equality. Sooner or later, this issue will have to be settled by the federal government.There exists a great Constitutional question of how gay marriages recognized in a state like New York are not recognized in another state like Indiana. The only way to resolve that will be through Congress or U.S. courts. The Defense of Marriage Act really is nothing more than the federal government’s refusal to take a position on the issue. Instead, it reserves the right for the states to determine what status they will give to equality. It seems that when civil rights questions of this magnitude impact such a significant percentage of the nation, it is the responsibility of the federal government to act. I will borrow a quote from an earlier article of mine about GLBT equality. I believe Thomas Jefferson put it best when he said “All, too, will bear in mind this sacred principle, that though the will of the majority is in all cases to prevail, that will to be rightful must be reasonable; that the minority possess their equal rights, which equal law must protect, and to violate would be oppression.” — cjcaudil@indiana.edu
(06/22/11 7:25pm)
____simple_html_dom__voku__html_wrapper____>Since spring semester ended last month, one of the things I’ve been trying to reconcile is my professed ideology with the pragmatic side of my brain. As a result of the reflection, I think I have come to somewhat of a realization between what I see as a young conservative and my knowledge of the traditional conservatives that comprise the movement right now.Let me begin by characterizing the schools of thought that are generally categorized within the traditional conservative movement: fiscal, social and neo. A fiscal conservative is an individual who values policies that restrict the growth of government spending and generally are opposed to deficits. These individuals can also often be characterized as advocates for free markets and limited government intervention in the economy.The second type is the social conservative, who is one that traditionally holds deeply religious values. They often are in support of marriage between a man and a woman and are generally pro-life. The last of the three is the neoconservative, who values a strong national defense and is often characterized as supporting American economic and military power to spread democracy. I think it is more than fair to characterize someone like former President George W. Bush as a neoconservative. I would have to say an overwhelming majority of traditional conservatives have values that overlap with all three characterizations above with the exception of a short few. However, I would say that my general observations of self-identified conservatives within our generation would dictate otherwise. I truly see a shifting of the winds in terms of what young conservatives place value on the most. For me, it is pretty apparent that our generation is going to be inheriting an immoral amount of debt thanks to the lack of responsibility in Washington from both sides. As a result, I see our generation of conservatives being one of fiscal hawks that place the most emphasis on sustainable public finances and as advocates of the free market.I’ve also noticed that the social issues for our generation have become less of an important topic. The two salient issues without question for our generation are gay rights and abortion.From my observations, I firmly believe that a day is coming when our gay brothers and sisters will finally be forwarded the equality they fight for every day. And lastly, I think, in our generation of conservatives, we are finding fewer neocons. I think the issue stems not from a desire for isolationism, but the realization that we can no longer afford to be the world’s protectorate. In my own opinion, I think for America to be strong in the future, we have no choice but to be the leader in global affairs. We must have the agility and swiftness to respond to global threats both diplomatically and militarily when the time calls. But we also must consider the size and scope of our presence. It will be a very difficult task in the coming future to balance the global presence of our military with our ability to afford it. In the era of encumbering budget deficits, our global military presence gets quite expensive. We must be cautious to ensure that we win the fights we are fighting while beginning to think about a long-term strategy for a draw-down while maintaining regional security, too. In closing, I do not profess to speak on behalf of all the conservatives of our generation and do not want to discount convictions that are different from my own observations. I merely feel like this is the way the winds may be shifting and hopefully you will join us to fight the good fight. — cjcaudil@indiana.edu
(06/19/11 9:08pm)
____simple_html_dom__voku__html_wrapper____>From May 29 through June 9, I had an incredible opportunity to travel to Israel and learn firsthand about the importance of the U.S.-Israel relationship. The trip occurs once a year and is called the Campus Allies Mission, which is organized through the American Israel Public Affairs Committee. As a participant in this year’s group of 39 student government and political leaders from across the United States, I can say my life was radically changed during the 11 days I spent in the beautiful country. While all the participants came from different political and cultural backgrounds, the one thing that bound us together was how strongly we felt about the importance of the U.S.-Israel alliance. The trip provided for us a unique chance to develop a personal story to tell so that we could come back home and share the truth about Israel. While there, I had the privilege of meeting with top Israeli officials to learn more about the security and political situation on the ground. No words can describe the shock I felt after observing the reality on the ground and what is often reported to us back home here in America.An example for me personally was the security fence that is being constructed between the predominantly Jewish area and an area known as the West Bank. The view of what is presented to us by the general American media and the reality on the ground are two completely different things.Before the trip, I thought the fence was a concrete barricade separating two distinct peoples without regard to demographics. During the trip I was made aware that only 6 percent of the actual fence was this concrete barrier. The rest is a series of metal fencing. I was also told by a former Israeli colonel in charge of part of the construction of the fence just how carefully the construction was planned with regard to demographics on the ground.Just one of the many benefits of the fence is that the number of suicide bombings originating from the West Bank has drastically decreased since the construction of the first section of the fence back in 2003. Other excursions on the trip included visits to the Golan Heights, the Israeli Supreme Court and the U.S. Embassy in Tel Aviv. The one thing I noticed while traveling is just how physically small everything is there. As a result, every square mile holds so much more value.I have not even begun to scratch the surface of being able to describe what the trip was like. It was an eye-opening experience to truly realize that Israel is one of America’s closest friends in the world. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu put it right in a speech recently when he said “Israel is not what’s wrong with the Middle East. Israel is what’s right about the Middle East.” This trip also helped me further understand when Netanyahu said in the same speech that the region’s problems are not solely rooted in Israel’s existence.Israel’s enemies like to scapegoat it for the region’s problems while not even fully acknowledging that nearly the entire problem is within their own borders. It seems as though the region’s despots have done a good job diverting their people’s frustrations toward Israel instead of being held accountable. My heart for engaging in pro-Israel activism was only reinforced as I traveled to this country. I would like to personally thank the AIPAC staff and supporters for making this trip possible for all of us.— cjcaudill@indiana.edu
(05/19/11 5:41pm)
____simple_html_dom__voku__html_wrapper____>This being my first real summer in Bloomington, I was shocked to find out the number of my friends that were actually staying here. It seems like the number of people who went back home have actually made this place a lot nicer to get around. Bloomington’s hustle and bustle this past semester was frustrating. The crosswalk on 10th Street by the business school — installed with care — created a traffic bottleneck. If you wanted to go through there from the hours of 3 to 6 p.m. on any given day, you could forget it. But now that summer is here, I have had no problem driving through there so far. Another positive benefit of living here during the summer is that you don’t have to wait forever to sit down at a restaurant. About a month ago, I went with some friends in an attempt to eat at Longhorn Steakhouse and the wait was over an hour. But just this past weekend I did the same thing and had no wait.Last night I went into the library and it was practically deserted. I had my choice of a few hundred PCs and even the shiny Macs that no one can ever get their hands on. If you want to print something, the problem of standing in a long line, waiting on that one person’s document that takes an entire minute to print just one page doesn’t exist. Last but not least, there is actually room to do a workout at the SRSC. If you want to get in shape this summer, now is the best time because you don’t have to worry about scheduling yourself around the SRSC’s equipment schedule. I will admit that not everything in this town is made perfect by the exodus of a majority of our classmates. The most frustrating thing right now is the construction mess on the bypass. No matter what time of day, the main intersection of the bypass and Walnut is a gridlock. If you are rushing someone to the hospital, avoid this intersection at all costs — they will probably die before you get through. Having been raised in a very small town, I can appreciate the amenities that this big metropolis has to offer. So I guess my message to you is if you are here this summer, enjoy the benefits that we have for the next few months because they will be gone before you know it. — cjcaudil@indiana.edu
(05/11/11 7:32pm)
____simple_html_dom__voku__html_wrapper____>In my three years at IU, I have come to learn that being a Republican can earn you friends and make you enemies. But through it all, I am happy to say that after three years, I am still a proud Republican with more friends — hopefully — than enemies. When I came to IU, I never thought that I would develop a serious interest in politics. After attending the College Republicans (CRs) call out my freshman year, I became involved volunteering with the Students for Mitch Daniels chapter.After the wave of Democratic victories in the fall of 2008, I felt a little disenfranchised, like many, and put my activism on auto-pilot for a few months.I felt like staying engaged was important and kept up as best I could on the headlines while I enjoyed the typical college life. When I saw the passage of the stimulus package, I decided that it was time to start going back to the CR meetings.Even though I have always liked and respected the president, there was something about his politics that I fundamentally disagreed with. After coming back to IU in fall 2009, I decided to get more involved. In February of 2010, I took a trip to the Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington. Those few days helped to open my eyes that being a conservative meant that I could unapologetically hold the deep convictions of limited government, individual responsibility and free enterprise. In the wake of this realization, politics has consumed a big part of my life. I am now the president of the CRs here at IU and I can say that it has been one of the most rewarding times of my life. I am often asked my opinion on a variety of issues from many media outlets — including the one that I am writing this article for. There are neat opportunities to even debate the College Democrats from time to time or be one of two Republicans on the IDS Editorial Board. In my experiences, I have learned that sometimes you can be upfront with folks about your convictions as long as it’s in a respectful way. A positive, respectful and civil demeanor will win you the respect of both sides.To my fellow Republicans, conservatives or anyone curious: There is a home for you in the College Republicans. For my friends across the aisle: Keep up the hard work and don’t be disappointed in the midterm results — it just shows who is Right and who is wrong. — cjcaudil@indiana.edu
(04/21/11 9:14pm)
____simple_html_dom__voku__html_wrapper____>In our state capitol, Gov. Mitch Daniels and the Republican majorities in both houses of the legislature have taken up education reform for Indiana’s schools. As I have sat by and watched, there are certain things I like and certain things I do not. For starters, to deny that education across our country has been falling would be naïve. Last December, the United States ranked 14 of the 34 Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development countries surveyed in their ‘Program for International Student Assessment.’ The OECD is an organization of states of the most industrialized economies in the world. In my own view, to remedy the problem, we need a massive overhaul of how we recruit the best teachers. I am particularly fond of Singapore’s and Britain’s models — attracting the best talent into the classrooms. From what I have gathered from natives of both countries, teaching is among the most respected and coveted professions of college graduates. Competition for these jobs is intense, and each applicant goes through a rigorous review process. These two countries also seem to have something completely different than we do — teaching is something students are incentivized to pursue. To attract the best talent, their teachers are paid above the average annual salary of a worker in the respective country. However, here in Indiana for example, teacher’s salaries are set by an archaic system based upon degrees completed and years served. The million dollar question is why on earth high-performing students would want to pursue a career in education when they can earn a lot more in the private sector. I happen to be one of those who had a dream once upon a time to go into education, and someday I may very well do that. But for now, until there is an incentive to provide a decent wage to survive on after a potential teacher graduates, the current system will continue to distance much of the exceptional talent from this noble profession. This article is in no way intended to cast doubt on the millions of great educators across our country who make their living at teaching. There are countless educators who do it for more than the dollar. But the market aspect remains clear: You have to pay teachers much better if you want to attract the talent. With that said, for the number of great educators in the system, there are a large number that probably need to find a more suitable career. That is why I applaud our state legislature for discussing an end to the archaic system of paying teachers based upon number of degrees and years served. There is absolutely zero empirical data to show the relationship between student performance in the classroom and these old metrics of measuring a teacher’s salary.I think it is also finally time for a candid discussion about abolishing the tenure system in our state. In my experience, this system only seems to promote complacency and a lack of initiative to do better. My rationale is the best job protection for educators is continued student performance. Instead of casting blame at the current education system and those in it, we should cast doubt toward the halls of our legislatures for bad policy. For too long our politicians have ignored improving the recruitment and retention policies of our educators. Politics aside, both parties are to blame for the problem. The unfunded mandate of No Child Left Behind was a product of now-deceased Democratic Sen. Ted Kennedy signed into law under then-President George Bush. I think it is about time for our leaders to come together, put away the partisan bickering and yes, ignore the calls of both the teachers unions and the school-choice advocates. It is about time to come up with some common-sense solutions that will make America’s primary education the beacon for the world once again. — cjcaudil@indiana.edu
(04/07/11 9:59pm)
____simple_html_dom__voku__html_wrapper____>If you are like me, you set the alarm on your phone before you go to sleep at night. I think it is safe to say that for our generation, the alarm clock has been replaced. And this is usually my first interaction with technology on a daily basis. Whether it is the missed texts, Tweets or Facebook updates I check from my Droid first thing in the morning, it has become an essential part of my morning routine. After getting ready and eating a quick bite of breakfast, I pop open my laptop and log in to my email to make sure my 8 a.m. class was not canceled before I make the trek across campus. After I see that my class is not canceled, I put my laptop in my backpack and pull out my iPod. I start my trip to class with Tom Petty playing to keep me awake. As I get closer to Ballantine Hall, I notice that a lot of people have earphones in just like me. I think to myself that whether we like classic rock, rap, country or any other genre, we cannot deny that music plays a vital role in our daily routine. If you’re like me, you have iTunes playing while you are working on homework or your iPod turned on in between class.After I get to my seat in my statistical modeling class, I pull out my computer for the next hour and 15 minutes. As the outlets of survival in this class, Facebook, Sporcle and Wikipedia make time go by much more quickly while the professor grumbles about econometrics. Halfway through the class, the guy to my left is asleep, the girl in front of me has one part of her earphone in her left ear covered by her hair and the guy to my right has been Blackberry messaging his girl. Before I finish playing Family Feud on Facebook, I notice that class is almost done and people have started shuffling their things. Laptops start closing and iPods start to appear, including mine.I feel my phone start vibrating in my pocket as I proceed into my 9:30 a.m. with Michael Jackson playing on the iPod. When I see the words “Aunt Jessie,” I decide to decline the call because I know for a fact that it will take a half hour and accomplish a whole lot of nothing. I sure do appreciate the value of being able to screen phone calls.After I repeat the same routine for my next three classes, send dozens of texts and take a few phone calls, I am finally on my way back home from class.I decide to immediately hash out a one-page review of an article I read the night before. Forty-five minutes later, I submit my paper via the OnCourse assignment tab, saving me paper/ink and a trip to Woodburn Hall. As I am finishing up responding to a few emails, I finally realize that it has been Tuesday all day thanks to my calendar I have in Microsoft Outlook. I yell at my roommates and tell them that it is time to go to Fazoli’s to get our $1 kids’ meal. Two hours later, we stroll through the door. We decide to stay in for the night instead of going to Kilroy’s on Kirwood and since I am finished with homework, I pick up the controller to play some Call of Duty: Black Ops. What only felt like a few games turns into a three-hour session on Xbox Live.Before getting ready for bed, I log back onto Facebook, and I start chatting with friends. A few hours later after catching up with peeps, I set my alarm again and realize that I will just have to get up in a few hours to do it all over again the next day.What I realized by observing my daily habits with technology is that without my Droid, iPod and laptop, my life would stop in its tracks. I now wonder how many of you are just like me. — cjcaudil@indiana.edu