I've decided (in an effort to blog more) that I'm going to do posts like this regularly (thanks @katelinnea for the idea!). I figure I'll just post article/sites I've found interesting recently.
House Foreign Affairs Committee unanimously passes LRA/Uganda bill
Yay! The last step is a full vote of the House. I can't believe it's almost been a year since How It Ends.
"Make A Difference" flyer
I love this, such a great idea.
Nice article on the FL Senate race with the advantages and challenges for each candidate from the NY Times.
This site lets you pick a word or activity or whatever and makes a playlist according to it. I haven't used it extensively but I like the idea.
Nice list of spring cleaning tools for your twitter from Mashable. I found it very helpful although I need to find an efficient way to go through the ridiculous number of people I follow and clean it out.
"Imagine if the Tea Party Was Black" - Tim Wise Really interesting article, I just finished my racial and cultural minorities class and Tim Wise's articles actually helped me understand the concepts of the class better.
Online advocacy wilts into slacktivism: Experts Not much to say beyond the fact that I'm not surprised.
And a funny video that explains why I hate the news:
Friday morning was another early day. We were on the bus to head to Langley before 7am. When we arrived we went through their (very thorough) security. After that we headed inside. I managed to forget the thank you treats we brought with us and rode in a CIA police car to get them. After that we had our meeting with Mike Ard, National Intelligence Officer for the Western Hemisphere. After that we visited their museum which contains artifacts from all different time periods (the war in Afghanistan had a very large section, for example). I have no pictures at the CIA because we could not even bring cameras into the building.
After leaving the CIA we headed back to downtown DC for the rest of the day. We had lunch on the bus and took a group picture in front of the White House (I'm squinting in every version I've seen):
We spent most of our day on Friday at the Inter-American Dialogue, a major think tank on Latin America. Our first meeting there was with four diplomats from the Brazilian embassy. This was probably the most interesting meeting we held the whole trip. We realized pretty quickly we probably should have tweaked our paper to remove more of the American bias before we handed it to the Brazilians. They had lots of tough questions and, honestly, we couldn't answer all of them. It was a pretty lengthy meeting but they provided us cookies and coffee before the next one which was nice. After that meeting we met with Peter Hakim, an expert on Brazil who runs the Inter-American Dialogue. This meeting was pretty laid back and he had lots of insights on Brazil and our paper.
After leaving the Inter-American Dialogue, we headed to the Hill to meet with the staff on one of our Senators. Senator Nelson's office is in the Hart building and as we walked in we passed Claire McCaskill's (one of my favorite senators) office (I also saw on the board that Sen. Feingold and Sen. Franken appear to have offices very close to each other which made me happy). Of course, Congress was in recess so we were not able to meet with our Senator but we did meet with his legislative correspondent for foreign and military issues, Yariv Pierce. He was so young he looked like part of our class. Another interesting thing about this meeting is the fact that two UNF students are currently interning at Sen. Nelson's office. The office looked like a NASA museum, there were pictures and models of space shuttles everywhere (Sen. Nelson was an astronaut, fyi). Our meeting went well, this one was similar to the meeting with the member of the NSC because he asked question that related to the way he writes memos for his boss.
Me with Senator Nelson:
After leaving Senator Nelson's office we drove to a few of the monuments and walked around. It was cold so we didn't take much time. We had Ethiopian food for dinner in Adams Morgan and two of my friends from my internship last year (one of whom went to UNF) joined us. Shannon (my roommate) and I were exhausted so we headed back to the hotel and went to bed. The next morning we took our time getting up and checking out then headed out for some sightseeing. It was incredibly busy all over the mall, as the Cherry Blossom parade was just ending when we got there. We spent some time at the Natural History Museum and the Air and Space Museum before Shannon and Tejas (another classmate who went with us) had to head to the airport. At that point I went and got my stuff and headed to where I was saying (with my friend Kari in Silver Spring, MD). Kari and were roommates last year when we were interning and now she is a social worker in Maryland. One of our other former roommates is in grad school at Galludat and came over for game night. We had a nice time and got to bed because we were planning a day trip to Annapolis the next day.
Sunday's weather was perfect for Annapolis. We walked around on the water, did a little shopping (I finally got sunglasses so I wasn't constantly squinting), had lunch (at a restaurant that had been on Man vs. Food and where John McCain had eaten during the campaign), and walked around the Naval Academy. It was a really beautiful day.
Boats:
My (ex)roommate Kari and I squinting in the sun:
Now I'm seating in Reagan National writing this and waiting for my flight. I always hate leaving DC and this time is no different. While I was here I found out I did not get the Summer internship at the White House that I applied for. I'm upset but I know it's for the best. I just keep telling myself that everything will work out. There is a reason I did not get the internship, just like there is a reason I can't graduate until Spring of next year. I just have to figure out what that reason is.
Update: Right after writing this, as I was coming out of the bathroom I saw Nancy Pelosi! All of the sudden I heard someone say "Madam Speaker!" and when I turned around, there she was (full pantsuit and everything). To me her height was more surprising then the fact she was flying commercial! She was at most, my height (5'2").
Also, one of my classmates managed to get a picture of our little run in with David Gergen (sort of). He's the one at the top (red tie) and I'm just to the right of the girl with the green bag (I was basically wearing all black so it's hard to see):
It's now 10:03 and I am finally back in my hotel room. We got up at 6am this morning so our bus could leave exactly at 7am. First we visited the Pentagon. When I toured the Pentagon through TWC we got a standard issue tour. One of my professor's friends gave us a mini-tour ( a little different from the standard tour, we even got to visit “The Tank” where the Joint Chiefs of Staff hold meetings) and also told us at the beginning of the tour that he would have to leave at some point because he had to brief members of Congress on the new defense treaty that Admiral Mullen will be signing on Monday. The timing for our topic could not have been any better. The first group presented their ideas to Paul Stockton, Assistant Secretary of Defense for Homeland Defense and Americas' security affairs. He was very receptive to our ideas and said many were in the beginning stages of development.
After leaving the Pentagon, we headed to the State Department. We arrived late because our Pentagon tour ran over but were able to join the 8th floor tour in progress. After that tour we headed to our meeting. I was presenting in this meeting to Deputy Assistant Secretary Chris McMullen and the United States Permanent Representative to the Organization of American States (OAS). The meeting went well and we were also joined by a man who works at the State Department in refugee issues and is originally from Jacksonville (Secretary McMullen always went to Jacksonville University for a year). I really enjoyed being able to discuss refugee issues, as they are something I feel very strongly about. The discussion and presentation went well and we also got to see a good portion of the building. To be honest., I found most of the building to be very unappealing (lots of plain white halls) but enjoyed the experience.
The 8th floor of the State Department: 
After the State Department we visited Office of American States. It was an incredibly beautiful building and I learned a lot about the organization, something I didn't know much about before that trip. There we meet with the Brazil Ambassador to the OAS and a few staff members. The best part of this was learning about the “peace tree.” When we first came in, our tour guide pointed to a picture near the door. The OAS is about to celebrate its 100 birthday and when it first opened President Taft gifted them a peace tree. They are asking for President Obama to come to their 100th anniversary gala to plant another tree (we actually mentioned this to the member of the NSC we met later that day).
The outside of the OAS:
Meeting table at the OAS:
The original peace tree (it was maybe 4 feet tall when President Taft planted it):
After our tour and presentation at the OAS, we walked across the street to our meeting at the Old Executive Office Building (OEOB). As we came through security, my professor pulled three names from a bag to decide who got to go with her to a tv interview she was taping that evening. I did not get picked but my roommate did. As we headed up stairs for our meeting all of the sudden I hear my professor say “Oh, David! How are you?” I looked up and saw she was hugging David Gergen. I'm still pretty shocked he was just wandering the halls but I was excited (and the teasing for that has been constant). We met with Luis Rossello, the director for the Southern Cone at the National Security Council and Special Assistant to the President and Senior Director for Western Hemisphere Affairs: Dan Restrepo. This meeting was a great learning experience. Both men explained what points could be expanded, what was logical, etc. They did a great job explaining exactly the questions we should be asking ourselves when writing a paper like and the questions he has to answer when he wants to bring an issue to his boss. This was, without a doubt one of the best meetings we had.
My EEOB pass:
After that meeting (our final for the day), we split up. A few members of the group headed to Ambassador Soderberg's interview while the rest of us visited the Kennedy Center. Because we were running late we missed the free performance but walked around and took it all in. Following that, we all meet up at dinner. We ate a very tasty Peruvian restaurant (El Chalan on 19th and I). It was deliciously and a great way to end the night. Shannon and I went right to our room and to sleep.
If you have any interest in the (quite lengthy) paper our class wrote and is presenting over the next few days, here it is. My goal is to blog after each day of meetings so I have some sort of record of how things went.
MEMO TO: The Obama Administration
FROM: University of North Florida “Real World” Political Science Class
DATE: April 7, 2010
RE: Strengthening US - Brazil Engagement
Brazil is increasingly important to the U.S., not only in terms of economic prosperity but also in meeting the myriad international challenges we face -- global warming, infectious diseases, terrorism, narcotics trafficking, reducing trade barriers, and the global financial crisis. While the U.S. has tended to look east and west, it is time to look south and forge a new partnership with the fastest growing economy in this hemisphere -- Brazil.
Ranked among the top ten world economies and the sixth largest population, Brazil has arrived on the global stage as a major player. Recently discovered oil deposits will only strengthen that position. While still a country struggling with poverty, corruption, crime, and social inequalities, its recent governments - both former President Fernando Henrique Cardoso and President Luis Inacio Lula da Silva -- have made real progress in addressing these challenges with visionary and responsible leadership.
A major participant in Haiti and other peacekeeping operations, an aspirant for a permanent seat on the UN Security Council, a leader not only in Latin America but also in the G-20, Brazil is poised to be a world political leader. Host to the World Cup in 2014 and Olympics in 2016, Brazil will be increasingly in the limelight. In recognition of the growing importance of Brazil, the Obama administration is intensifying U.S.-Brazil engagement, with a State Visit by President Lula in 2009, a visit by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in March, and an upcoming visit by Secretary of Defense Robert Gates in mid-April. Handled right, the U.S.-Brazil relationship can enhance opportunities to advance US interests in trade, investment, counternarcotics, anti-terrorism issues, and expanding a political partnership to promote our shared interests.
With an estimated population of nearly 200 million, half of which is in the work force, Brazil provides great opportunities to enhance the prosperity of both our countries. USAID currently provides fund in five areas: (1) the deforestation and protection of biodiversity, (2) reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, increased employment for youth, (3) HIV/AIDS prevention, (4) the establishment of free trade and (5) small to medium size enterprise development. Further expansion of trade agreements is hampered by the current WTO dispute over cotton and U.S. ethanol subsidies. The Brazilian Cooperation Agency (ABC-Agência Brasileira de Cooperação) of the Brazilian Ministry of External Relations and the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) are the point of focus for this cooperation.
Our two governments also have a major disagreement over how to address Iran’s effort to acquire a nuclear weapon, with Brazil refusing to pressure Iran to abandon its quest or to support international sanctions. The history of U.S. activities in Latin America and Brazil’s strong nationalistic politics means we require a sophisticated approach to the bilateral relationship. We offer four areas in which to strengthen U.S.-Brazil engagement and advance our joint interests.
I. Enhanced bi-lateral US-Brazil Engagement: Establish a U.S.-Brazil Strategic, Economic, and Military Dialogue, expanding on the model currently used with China. The Dialogue would promote business, trade, transnational threats of nonproliferation and terrorism, peacekeeping, and help to better manage bilateral disagreements, such as Iran. It would vastly expand on the CEO Forum by engaging on a regular basis a broad range of cabinet officials in deepening and widening U.S.-Brazil relations. One of the goals of the enhanced engagement would be a U.S.-Brazil Bilateral Investment Treaty. As part of this enhanced engagement, President Obama should reciprocate President Lula’s DC visit by visiting Brazil this summer.
II. Updated International architecture/Transparency: The U.S. should recognize the growing importance of Brazil and endorse formally its candidacy for a permanent seat on the UN Security Council. In recognition of the growing importance of the G20, the U.S. should propose at the G20 meeting in Canada this June that the G-8 be formally disbanded over the next ten years. While being phased out, all G8 meeting should be partnered with a G8+5 (or G13) and G20 meeting to underscore the importance of the developing countries. The U.S. should also propose a new initiative on transparency, chaired by Brazil, to encourage best practices and open reporting on investment in strategic resources, as well as all military sales and bases in the hemisphere. Such transparency would help assuage Brazil’s concern over U.S. activities in Colombia. Such a step will build confidence not only in U.S.-Brazil relations but also throughout the hemisphere.
III. Regional Center of Excellence (RCE): The US should propose a regional Center of Excellence be established in Brazil to train regional security and judicial forces in peacekeeping, policing, judiciary, and forestry. Based on UN best practices and doctrine, the RCE would be run by the OAS. Eventually, the system would be global, with other RCS’s located in the world’s main regions of Asia, Africa, and Europe.
IV. EPECC: The U.S. and Brazil should build upon their 2007 MOU by forming an OPEC type of group for ethanol producers, the “Ethanol Producing and Exporting Countries Consortium” (EPECC). EPECC’s objectives will be to ensure stable and fair prices for ethanol producers, expand the market for ethanol, and ensure a fair return on capital to those investing in the industry.
Enhanced Bilateral US-Brazil Engagement
Brazil has become progressively more involved in both regional and global affairs, helping to stabilize troubled regions and leading UN peacekeeping missions in places like Haiti. It is in the best interest of the United States to ensure that U.S. plans for the region work effectively alongside Brazilian plans for the region, as it has the largest economy in South America. Brazil is growing at a quick pace, and many U.S. companies view Brazilian companies as an appealing place for investment. Suspicion is high among many Brazilians over past U.S. policies, including the more recent invasion of Iraq and other Middle East policies, U.S. policy toward Colombia, and the banning of Bolivian textile imports to the U.S.. The United States and Brazil do not always see eye to eye on all issues, but deeper engagement would enable progress on many areas.
Establish a U.S.-Brazil Strategic, Economic, and Military Dialogue
The US has in recent years expanded its engagement with Brazil, including with the Economic Partnership Dialogue between the Minister of External Relations and the U.S. Secretary of State but deeper engagement is required, perhaps modeled on our Dialogue with China. In recognition of the myriad interests between the U.S. and China, in 2006 President Bush initiated the Strategic and Economic Dialogue, involving regular visits between senior State Department officials and the Secretary of the Treasury. Hosted by Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner and Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, the first joint meeting of the U.S.-China Strategic and Economic Dialogue was held in Washington, D.C. from July 27-28, 2009. Such a forum underscores the growing influence of China in a range of issues and fosters better cooperation on issues and a similar group could foster better U.S.-Brazil cooperation.
Earlier this year, Secretary of State Clinton visited Brazil to sign the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) which increases cooperation between the U.S. and Brazil on issues pertaining to technology, climate change and the advancement of women’s rights. A more formalized Dialogue would provide a broader framework for further engagement and help ameliorate areas of disagreement, such Brazil’s ongoing support for Iran in direct contrast to U.S. policy. It would also vastly expand on the CEO Forum by engaging on a regular basis a broad range of cabinet officials in deepening and widening US-Brazil relations. Given the importance of Brazil’s role in peacekeeping, the China model should be expanded to include a Dialogue between our Secrataries of Defense.
Recommendation: Establish a U.S.-Brazil Strategic, Economic, and Military Dialogue. The Dialogue would promote business, trade, transnational threats of nonproliferation and terrorism, peacekeeping, and help to better manage bilateral disagreements, such as Iran. It would involve annual meetings of State, Treasury, and Defense Cabinet Secretaries, with lower level meeting occurring regularly during the year.
US-Brazil Bilateral Investment Treaty
Despite the importance of foreign investment in Brazil, it is not a party to any bilateral investment treaties (BITs) and has not ratified the International Center for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) Convention. ICSID is an autonomous international institution established under the Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes between States and Nationals of Other States, with over 140 member states. Brazil is reluctant to bind itself to such agreements because of the legal uncertainty regarding whether ratification of such agreements is prohibited under Brazilian law on grounds that it impedes the sovereign right of the state. However, given Brazil’s growing economic strength, it is time for it to join ICSID. As the U.S. supports the growing role of Brazil in the international arena, it should encourage more engagement in such agreements, bilaterally and in the G13 and G20. A good place to start is with a bilateral investment treaty.
Recommendation: The U.S. and Brazil should seek to negotiate a Bilateral Investment Treaty (BIT). The BIT will help protect private investment, develop market-oriented policies in partnering countries, and promote exports in other industries.
Obama Visit to Brazil
In March 2009, President Lula visited Washington to strengthen bilateral relations, discuss the agenda for the meeting of Summit of the Americas last April, and review how the G-20 could best combat the financial crisis. President Obama promised a reciprocal visit, but none is currently scheduled. The U.S. has a tradition of meeting early in any new administration with the leaders of Mexico and Canada. An early meeting with Brazil should now be added to that practice. Since the new Brazilian administration will be elected in October, it would be prudent to conduct the first meeting this summer. That would establish a precedent for the meetings to continue with the new administration.
Recommendation: President Obama should visit Brazil this summer, well in advance of the presidential elections in October in Brazil. The U.S. should add Brazil to the list of meeting held early on for new U.S. presidents.
II. Updated International Architecture/Transparency
Endorse Brazil Seat on Security Council
Simply put, Brazil has earned a seat on the UN Security Council. It now clearly meets our own criteria that new permanent members have the economic size, population, military capacity, commitment to democracy and human rights, sufficient financial contributions to the UN, contributions to UN peacekeeping, and a strong record on counterterrorism and nonproliferation that reflect its global importance. Brazil has already served nine terms as an elected member of the Security Council.
When the UN last seriously addressed the issue in 2005, there was initial agreement that Germany, Japan, India, and Brazil would gain a permanent Security Council seat but agreement was never reached on how best to allocate the allotted 2 seats for Africa and the veto. Nigeria, South Africa, and Egypt were all leading candidates and African nations, in general, opposed joining the Council so long as the P-5 maintained its exclusive rights to the veto. To date, the U.S. has only formally endorsed the candidacy of Japan.
Recommendation: It is time the U.S. formally endorse Brazil, as well as Germany and Italy for a permanent seat on the UN Security Council. It should also initiate a new effort at the UN to secure expansion of the Council, perhaps by agreeing on a separate seat for an Arab nation, with Africa receiving two seats. Providing 7 additional permanent seats to the UN Security Council would not significantly hamper its effectiveness. With the 10 elected seats, the total membership would be 22, from the current 15. The contentious issue of the veto and whether the EU and AU should evolve into assuming the region’s permanent seat should be discussed after the new Council has been in place for ten years.
Phase Out G8/G13 and Focus on G20
The G8, which includes the United States, Russia, France, Germany, Italy, United Kingdom, Japan, and Canada, has been the most influential forum for the world’s leading economies to discuss major international affairs. In recognition of the growing influence of the developing world, the G8 regularly meets with the “Outreach 5” (O5), which was formed in 2005. The group consists of Brazil, China, India, Mexico, and South Africa, the top developing economies. In 2006, the G8+5 formed the Climate Change Dialog to collaborate on environmental issues. Although a permanent relationship was formed between the two groups in 2007, the G8+5 have met only rarely.
The G20 has traditionally only been a meeting place for the top 19 countries and the European Union to discuss financial matters. However, at the G20 meeting in Pittsburgh last September, it was decided that the G20 would become the official body in charge of international economic collaboration. As a result, the G8 will now cover issues mostly pertaining to international security topics such as nuclear non-proliferation and counternarcotics measures. But the gatherings are increasingly resented by those not included. The United Kingdom and France have each independently supported of the integration of the O5 to the G8 (a new G13). However, the United States and Japan argue that officially enlarging the group will decrease its effectiveness and defeat the purpose of the larger G20.
Recommendation: One way to minimize frustration would be to agree to phase out over 10 years the G8 and G8+5 meetings, leaving the G20 as the key forum for discussions. During that time, the G8 and G8+5 would each meet preceding any G20 meeting. In order to address the concerns of the US and Japan on effectiveness, the G20 would form subcommittees on the key issues of concern, thus limiting the discussions to a manageable size. The US should support holding the G20 in Brazil as soon as possible.
Transparency Initiative in the global investment and financial system
When the world’s largest economies - the G20 - meet in Toronto on June 26-27, 2010 they will have an unprecedented opportunity to institute changes to create a transparent global financial system that is open, accountable, fair and beneficial for all. Corruption is widespread not only in Brazil but also across Latin America. Of particular concern is the lack of transparency in the oil industry. For instance, China’s state run China Development Bank signed a $10 billion agreement with the Brazilian government and Petrobras, exchanging financing for 150,000-200,000 barrels of crude oil per day for the next 10 years. On February 1, 2010 Royal Dutch Shell invested $21 billion in Cosan to make the largest biofuels joint venture in the world. The US would benefit from increased engagement in the oil industry in Brazil, which is very stable compared to the other sources of our oil such as Saudi Arabia and Venezuela. A new effort to make public the investment decisions will help reduce corrupt practices in the region and open the region to fairer competition. Illicit outflows of capital from developing countries are a severe drain on their development potentials. Such an initiative would assist in poverty alleviation and economic development.
Recommendation: The US should work with Brazil to propose at the G20 summit in June a new initiative on transparency. All foreign investment must be reported to the G20 and the International Accounting Standards Board on an annual basis, including multinational corporation and state-owned corporations. Each must also report their income and taxes paid on a country-by-country basis. The ownership of all companies, trusts, foundations, and charities must also be reported.
III. Regional Center of Excellence (RCE)
Brazil faces many challenges in developing effective forces to address its challenges in policing, the judiciary, forestry protection, and peacekeeping.
Police and judiciary
Brazil is one of the many Latin American countries with corruption on all levels of police and the criminal justice system. Homicide rates are at an all-time high and Brazil faces extra-judicial murders. Its criminal system is underfunded and many of the accused lack aspects of a fair trial, such as a thorough investigation. In many cases, people who are arrested are held in jail for years without any trial. The jails in Brazil are much more corrupt than the U.S. jails, and trafficking and prisoner abuse are very common. Brazil regularly faces riots. Drug trafficking, trafficking of children, and forced labor are common. Brazil and other countries in the region could benefit greatly from increased police and judicial training.
Forestry Protection
A major problem is Brazil’s continued environmental challenges and the ongoing deforestation of the Amazon Rain Forest. The importance of the Amazon Rainforest cannot be understated, as it accounts for one of the largest sources of fresh water and zoological diversity on the Earth. Continued deforestation occurs due to a myriad of factors, most of which are economic. In 2007 alone, almost 3200 square kilometers (sq km) of Amazon Rainforest was lost to deforestation and logging, and the number of square kilometers lost continues to grow. The continued escalation of market prices for agricultural products is the primary economic factor, but the demands for timber and grazing land have also had an impact. Conflicts between powerful ranchers and poor farmers over land rights have led to 1,200 murders across Brazil in the last 20 years. A top activist for land reform in Brazil's Amazon was recently murdered, hours after a delay in the trial of a man accused of masterminding the slaying of another rain forest activist, an American nun named Dorothy Stang, who was shot and killed in 2005 in the notoriously violent Para state.
The Lula administration has attempted to put in place policies to help farmers work the land they already have. In addition to farming best practices, some of the programs the government in Brasilia has established include: setting aside land as natural habitats and wildlife reserves, installing sensors and monitoring stations throughout the Amazonian borders to catch illegal logging, and increasing the number of military and police patrols in the Amazon regions. Yet, these efforts are insufficient to meet the challenge of protecting the vast Amazon.
Peacekeeping
Brazil has consistently contributed to UN peacekeeping across the globe, including in the Middle East, the Belgian Congo, Cyprus, Mozambique, Angola, East Timor, and Haiti (where Brazil is currently the largest contributor of peacekeeping troops). As such, Brazil is well placed to lead an international effort to train and equip other regional forces in peacekeeping. Currently, each country involved in these peacekeeping missions currently trains its own soldiers, without standard UN doctrines and the benefit of best practices.
Recommendation: The U.S. should encourage the formation of Regional Centers of Excellence (RCE) for training through the UN in the areas of peacekeeping, policing, judiciary, and forestry management. Brazil should host the RCE that would service the Western Hemisphere. The UN should develop a standard doctrine and best practices that would eventually be used in RCEs worldwide. The Department of Defense could help develop training modules and help monitor compliance of standards.
IV. Establish Ethanol Producing and Exporting Countries Consortium (EPECC)
The U.S. and Brazil, the world’s two largest ethanol producing countries, signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) in 2007 to “promote greater cooperation on ethanol and biofuels in the Western Hemisphere. The agreement involves: (1) technology sharing between the United States and Brazil; (2) feasibility studies and technical assistance to build domestic biofuels industries in third party countries; and, (3) multilateral efforts to advance the global development of biofuels.” Both countries have moved forward on all three points. The MOU to date has produced positive results in the Caribbean and Central American countries and is expected to begin soon in African countries.
However, a thorny problem exists in the form of the U.S. tariff on Brazilian ethanol and US subsidies of its own ethanol industry. The U.S. government subsidizes the corn ethanol industries with over $7 billion in subsidies, which translates to 73 percent of all U.S. renewable energy tax breaks. The U.S. also imposes a 2.5 % ad valorem and a 54 cent per gallon tax on ethanol, effectively placing a 30% tariff on imported Brazilian ethanol. President Lula has made no secret of Brazil’s desire to have that tariff reduced or eliminated. Brazil’s ethanol industry is not subsidized by its national government. In a signal of growing competition in the market, China recently lowered its Brazilian ethanol tariffs from 30 percent to 5 percent, which opens that market to Brazil.
Corn based ethanol, however, is increasingly viewed as too expensive and a significant source of carbon emissions, especially when compared to sugar or other non-corn based sources, such as the new generation of biofuels involving cellulosic ethanol made from algae, grasses, and non-edible plant material. Demand for ethanol in the U.S. is increasing and the U.S. Congress has passed legislation requiring the increased use of advanced biofuels, such as ethanol. The mandate requires all gasoline sold by 2015 will contain 10% ethanol and the blending ethanol into gasoline of at least 36 billion gallons per year of biofuels into U.S. gasoline supply by 2022, triple the current level. California’s new law will take effect in 2011, requiring a phased-in carbon emission reduction by 2020.
The increase in US demand is unlikely to be met by domestically produced corn-based ethanol. Therefore, the US should begin to prepare now for a shift away from its domestically produced corn-based ethanol and work to achieve market dominance in other types of ethanol. The way to do this is to work with Brazil to develop and control where possible the ethanol market.
Recommendation: The US and Brazil should form an OPEC-type group for ethanol producers, the Ethanol Producing and Exporting Countries Consortium (EPECC). EPECC will coordinate and unify the ethanol policies of its member countries. EPECC’s objectives will be to secure fair and stable prices for ethanol producers, efficient, economic and regular supply of ethanol to consuming nations, and a fair return on capital to those investing in the industry. EPECC will improve and advance all three points in the 2007 MOU. While the current US domestic politics will prevent an elimination of the U.S. protection of its corn-based ethanol industry in the near term, over time, EPECC will help pave the way for new market opportunities for the U.S. which can help ease a transition from such subsidies and corn based ethanol. Eventually, EPECC can include any country in the western hemisphere - and eventually worldwide - interested in developing domestic ethanol industries.
For an extra credit assignment for my social work class we had to pick a topic and write a "letter to the editor" about it. Here is mine, the topic is FL SB 6. More information on the bill is here (you can also google FL SB 6 for tons of info).
Florida Senate Bill 6 has proven itself an emotional bill that brings out strong feelings, both for and against its passage. The bill would tie teacher pay to student performance. All over the state teachers have been protesting its passage and asking it be thrown out. The bill would require at least half of a teacher's salary to be tied to their students performance on the FCAT, AP testing, or some other form of testing (as yet to be determined).
The bill, as it is now, is almost impossible to understand. It establishes categories of teachers as "unsatisfactory," "needs improvement," "effective," and "highly effective" based on student "learning gains" without any explanation of what any of those words mean. They say that part will be decided later by the State Board of Education. It also says teachers could get additional pay for teaching in "high priority locations" or "critical teacher shortage areas" without explaining what either of those things mean. They say that part will be decided later by the State Board of Education, too. There is also no explanation of how exactly those "learning gains" will be determined. Are all students in the same age group competing against each other? Will special needs and gifted students be judged differently?
Another major issue with this bill is that it shys away from rewarding teachers with advanced degrees. Currently, in the state of Florida to teach you must have a bachelor's degree (in any subject) and pass a proficiency test in the subject you are teaching. You do not need a degree in education or the subject you are teaching. Why would any teacher both to further their education if there was no reward for doing so? This bill would also get rid of bonuses currently awarded to teachers for a National Board certification.
For some reason, politicians in Tallahassee seem to think pushing teachers even more towards "teaching to the test" is going to bring success. It's not. I was in 4th grade when FCAT began. By the time I was a junior in high school I'd passed every part of the test that needed passing. I could write a fantastic five paragraph essay. I was consistently scoring in the highest percentiles (sometimes better than 97% of students taking the test). I became a great guesser on multiple choice question (I must admit, that one still helps me out today). My junior year I was placed in Advanced Placement English (my highest test grades were always on the writing and reading sections of the test). When I walked into Mr. Shannon's class I learned one thing, I could not write an actual, high school or college level essay. Seven years after I had started taking FCAT tests, I was sitting in a classroom learning to write an essay. Luckily I had a great teacher at a great school (one of the best schools in one of the best counties in the state). I still don't feel that I write at the level I should but that is another story. What about the students who going to schools that are overcrowded and don't have teachers who can take the time to reteach high school juniors and seniors? What about students who don't take AP classes (and that is most students)? They get to college and have no idea what to do.
Last year, Florida ranked number 41 in per student spending. Maybe if we worked on increasing spending on education the legislators in Tallahassee wouldn't have to resort to such ridiculous ideas.
Brazil was one of the first countries to recover from the global economic meltdown and has consistently shown itself to be the strongest economy in Latin America. While the country is not without its faults and problems, a closer relationship with Brazil would be immensely beneficial to the United States. Besides the economic opportunities a close relationship would present, Brazil is also a regional leader in technology and bio fuels, and is a growing political force. We must use this period of growth in Brazil to cement ourselves as a strong regional partner to Brazil.
To cultivate our relationship with Brazil , we must encourage the United Nations Security Council permanent members to give it a permanent seat on the United Nations Security Council. Our full support would be a huge advantage to make this happen. To encourage an increase in trade between the United States and Brazil, a trade agreement is necessary. The last important step in building and maintaining this relationship is encouraging trade, business, and other ties through diplomatic means.
While Brazil is currently member of the United Nations Security Council, this term ends in 2011. The United States must push for a permanent seat for Brazil on the UNSC. The lack of a permanent seat for any Latin American country (as well as the lack of African and Middle Eastern representation) leads to an unfair balance of power within the Security Council. Brazil's role as a regional leader, economically and politically, makes it the logical choice for the representative of Latin America.
The addition of a permanent seat for Brazil also adds a potential ally for the US. Both France and the United Kingdom have previously voiced support for a permanent seat on the UNSC for Brazil. They want the US support and, while our support will not guarantee the seat, it may help sway some countries unsure of the role that Brazil should play in the UN.
It is clear from recent actions that Brazil is very serious about becoming a major player on the world stage. Brazil is already working to assist farmers in sub Saharan Africa with agricultural issues and has also begun to invest money into the IMF. The Brazilian government has worked very hard to keep the HIV rate in the country low and has successfully worked to reduce drug prices by working to mass produce generic prescriptions. If we do not voice our support now, we may be left behind when they gain even more power and ability.
Obviously, we already have ties to Brazil diplomatically but we must be willing to increase these very publicly. Brazil sees itself as a growing superpower (rightfully so) and wants to be in the spotlight next to the major players on the world stage. By sending high level diplomats (perhaps the Vice President and/or Secretary of State) to Brazil to meet with their high level diplomats on various issues (trade, nonproliferation, energy, agriculture, etc) and inviting their diplomats to visit us, we can increase the visibility of the relationship. This will not only benefit the US and Brazil but will show other countries (i.e. Iran, China) that the US is supportive of Brazil and its policies.
Another idea for diplomatic engagement with Brazil is to form a commission of sorts with other countries (preferably in Latin America). Vice President Al Gore took part in these commissions during the Clinton Administration and Vice President Biden could follow a similar path. Gore worked with the South African Deputy President to strengthen the relationship between the two nations. Something similar could be set up either between the US and Brazil, or including other countries. As mentioned, issues addressed could include trade, nonproliferation, energy, agriculture, regional issues, drug trade, and many others.
Clearly there are many options for exactly how we can improve and strengthen our relationship with Brazil. The question is not whether or not these improvements are necessary but how they can be made. A stronger relationship with Brazil would benefit both the US and Brazil and can help improve the Western Hemisphere as a whole. Brazil is on the way to the top, both economically and politically, and we need to find a way to insure we are standing next to them the entire way up.
In exactly 1 week's time I will touring the State Department (then having a meeting with State Department officials). All because of one UNF class.
Ambassador Nancy Soderberg (formerly the third-highest-ranking official at the United States National Security Council under President Clinton and US Representative for Special Political Affairs at the US Mission to the United Nations) is a distinguished visiting professor UNF. I'm not sure exactly what that means for the school but I know what it means for me. The class I'm taking with Professor Soderberg is titled "Real World/Super Power Myth," a title I find very misleading. The class basically works like this, the first half of the semester we covered foreign policy topics all over the board (from Russia to North Korea, from terrorism to foreign aid, we read extensively on all topics). At about the half way point of the semester, the class choose a topic to take to DC with us. Our original list included nonproliferation, North Korea, Turkey, and cyber security, among other things. The criteria for choosing a subject was that it was a topic on which we wanted to advocate change in government policy and one that was a bit "off the radar." The goal was to get "ahead" of the government in our recommendations, present our ideas to the bigwigs in DC, and learn something while doing it.
The topic we choose was Brazil. I'm more than wiling to admit I knew little about Brazil before this class (lots of rain forests, lots of crime, lots of drugs, that was about it) and I still wouldn't consider myself an expert on the country but I have a learned a lot. A few of my favorite Brazil facts:
Brazil is the 5th largest country in the world (by land mass and by population).
About 12% of the fresh water in the world is in Brazil.
Brazil has the 2nd largest number of airports in the world (after the US).
Brazil has the largest population of Japanese descent outside of Japan.
Anyway, our recommendations range from increased cross training for police and peacekeeping forces to UN Security Council reform to strengthening economic ties. While we are on DC some of the people we are meeting with are: Department of Defense Deputy Secretary, William Lynn; Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for the
Western Hemisphere, Dr. Frank O. Mora; Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Counternarcotics and Global Threats, William Wechsler (who was on the NSC with my professor) (all at the Pentagon); Assistant Secretary of State for Western Hemisphere Affairs, Arturo A. Valenzuela (who also spent some time on the NSC); Assistant Secretary of State for International Organizations, Esther Brimmer (both at the State Department); Special Assistant to the President for Latin America, Dan Restrepo (at the White House); the staff of Sen. Nelson (Congress is out of session of course); someone at the CIA (not sure who yet); Deputy U.S. Permanent Representative at the Organization of American Sates, Lewis Amselem; and someone at the Brazilian embassy (we are also not sure yet who exactly this will be). We may also have a catch to meet Secretary Clinton and Former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright.
All that having been said, I need to work on my assignment for class tomorrow! I plan to blog on the trip as I really want to have a record of the meetings we hold. The assignment due tomorrow for this class is the first draft on an op-ed we will be sending to the Florida Times Union about Brazil. When I finish this and feel good about it I plan to post it here as well.
