The Globe: 2010 CI Edition

Message from the Chair

Congratulations – welcome to CI, If you are interested in International Affairs, you have found the right student organization. e International Affairs Society is the largest non-partisan student organization on campus. We are International Affairs, Political Science, Art History, Economics, and Business majors – but this list is hardly exhaustive. You will find students in all majors, all schools, and from all different countries and states. rough the International Affairs Society you can take advantage of these memorable, rewarding, and even educational opportunities—

Visit Embassies, attend career panels with representatives from government and international agencies, and listen to high profile ambassadors, legislators, military officers, and other government officials through our Academic Programming.

Represent countries at Model United Nations Conferences on college campuses throughout the country and abroad with one of the best Model United Nations Teams on the college circuit. We attend conferences that cater to all skill levels, and have bulked up our training program for this coming semester.

Chair your own Model UN committee, or serve as a vice-chair or crisis staffer at one of the IAS’ very own Model UN conferences. The George Washington Conference on International Affairs is held for middle school students in the fall. e Washington Area Model United Nations Conference is hosted in the spring for over nine-hundred high school students.

Escape the Foggy Bottom bubble and go horseback riding in the Shenandoah Valley at our annual Fall & Spring Retreats. Take a look back at the year at one of our Annual Formals at venues such as the Kennedy Center and La Maison Française.

Train DC high school students in Model United Nations and engage in other philanthropic activities through our Program for International Education and Outreach programming.

Write for the premier undergraduate academic journal at George Washington focusing on international relations, e Globe.

is special edition of e Globe offers more detail on the different experiences you can have in the IAS next year. Enjoy your Colonial Inauguration experience. We’ll look forward to seeing you in the fall at our first General Membership Meeting during Welcome Week. Regards, Geoffrey LoudenChairman

e Globe: World News From All Sides e International Affairs Society

2

Model United Nations Model United Nations is one of the most exciting things you can do in college. It allows the opportunity to use classroom knowledge in another atmosphere, enhance debate and public speaking skills, and network with students from all around the world. roughout the year, the George Washington Model UN team travels to over eight cities and three countries, allowing students of all years to experience the world outside of Washington. For those of you that have Model UN experience from high school and want to continue competing against students from universities from across the globe, look no further than the International Affairs Society’s Model UN team. For those of you not entirely familiar with Model UN but are interested in international affairs, politics, or economics, I would encourage you to check out the team. Model United Nations simulations are designed to teach participants about the dynamics of international affairs, diplomacy, and international organizations in an interactive way that cannot be learned by traditional study. e experience helps participants learn more about themselves and the rest of their world. e experiences gained through Model UN are not strictly academic; conferences offer students unparalleled opportunities to travel, to meet new people, and to bond with peers. e George Washington Model UN team is one of the best on the national circuit. Our awards and debate skills speak for themselves. Whether you have experience with Model UN or not, I sincerely hope to meet you in person and see you become an active member of our Model UN team.

Sincerely,Sheng Zhou, Model United Nations Coordinator

To learn more about getting involved with Model United Nations, contact Coordinator Sheng Zhou at [email protected].


3

mailto:[email protected]


Washington Area Model United Nations Conference

WAMUNC is the International Affairs Society’s Model UN conference for high school students. If you love competing in Model UN, this is your chance to go behind the scenes and learn what it feels like to be on the other side of the gavel. Hosting over nine-hundred students from around the world, this year’s thirteenth annual WAMUNC conference is set to be the greatest yet. WAMUNC needs over one-hundred-and-fiy volunteers to serve as chairs, vice-chairs, crisis directors, and crisis staffers to help run traditional United Nations and regional committees such as the Security Council and European Union, as well as new and innovative committees such as the Joint Crisis Committee on the 1979 Iranian Revolution. We are looking for George Washington students with a wide variety of international affairs interests to make WAMUNC a memorable experience for delegates and staff members alike. WAMUNC is a great way to explore international issues and make new friends in the International Affairs Society. I hope to see you there.

Sincerely,Kelsey King, Secretary-General

To learn more about getting involved with the Washington Area Model United Nations Conference, contact Secretary-General Kelsey King at [email protected] or visit the conference website,

www.wamunc.com.

Greater Washington Conference on International Affairs

e Greater Washington Conference on International Affairs is a day long Model UN conference hosted by the International Affairs Society for about three-hundred middle school students each fall. is November the conference will feature classic Model UN committees such as DISEC and the Security Council, alongside regional and historical committees, including the European Union, the Treaty of Versailles, and a United States-Soviet Joint Crisis Committee set at the height of the Cuban Missile Crisis. For those new to Model UN, GWCIA provides a great opportunity to gain experience for collegiate conferences. It offers an opportunity to learn more about parliamentary procedure and international organizations, as well as a chance to meet people in the International Affairs Society and have some fun.

Sincerely,Dan Hennessey, Secretary-General

To learn more about getting involved with the Greater Washington Conference on International Affairs, contact Secretary-General Daniel Hennessey at [email protected] or visit the conference

website, www.gwcia.net.


4



http://www.wamunc.com

http://www.wamunc.com



http://www.gwcia.net/

http://www.gwcia.net/

Academic Programs

We as an organization have the wonderful ability to take advantage of all the opportunities that this city has to offer. e International Affairs Society hosts Embassy trips to countries that are important players in international affairs, discussions with both leading policy makers and think tanks, and panel talks with Elliott School professors. is past year we have had trips to both the Saudi Arabian and South Korean Embassies. We hosted a discussion with two members of the Central Intelligence Agency regarding the resurgence of Russia as a global player. We have had the honor of hosting General William E. Ward, the commander of US AFRICOM and Reza Pahlavi, the Crown Prince of Iran this past year. is upcoming year the International Affairs Society will continue to provide the diverse academic events we are known for.

Sincerely,Chris Longman, Academic Coordinator

To learn more about our Academic Programs, contact Academic Coordinator Chris Longman at [email protected].

Social Programs

e programming of the International Affairs Society is not limited to Model UN trips and speaker panels; there is a social aspect to this organization which you might not expect, but whose place you will come to appreciate. e International Affairs Society provides you with opportunities to experience what your DC surroundings have to offer, both on and off campus. We welcome you with a slew of events, ranging from a barbecue to trips to sporting events, galleries, and cultural performances. We host club nights at various DC hotspots and bi-annual retreats. In addition, we boast a history of successful end-of-semester formals, from riverboat cruises on the Potomac to galas at the Kennedy Center and La Maison Française. When you join our organization, you will find yourself amazed at all we have to offer, and you will find yourself proud to be a member. Sincerely,Aria Varasteh, Social Coordinator

To learn more about our Social Programs, contact Social Coordinator Aria Varasteh at [email protected].


5





Outreach Programs

One of the most notable of aspects of the International Affairs Society is its ability to improve upon the opportunities which it offers to its members and the George Washington community. e Outreach Program for the 2010-2011 academic year is no exception. Continuing our focus on service to global causes, the International Affairs Society outreach program allows members to participate in a wide array of philanthropy initiatives that combine competition and entertainment in order to raise funds and awareness for international humanitarian and political causes. Outreach programs collaborate with academic, social, and Model UN programming. We promote international awareness on campus by coordinating quality programming and philanthropy with other student organizations, University departments, and an array of external institutions. is year, outreach programs will work closely with the Program for International Education (GWUPIE) to raise global awareness in the DC metro area by facilitating quality Model UN programs for middle and high school students. We are always looking for fresh new ideas and volunteers, and would like to invite you to participate in the great activities which our Program can offer.

Sincerely,Mateo Forero, Outreach Coordinator

To learn more about our Outreach Programs, contact Outreach Coordinator Mateo Forero at [email protected].

e George Washington University Program for International Education

e George Washington University Program for International Education serves as the direct link between the International Affairs Society and DC community. rough various community service and outreach activities, members will promote global awareness by volunteering to underserved D.C. area schools. GWUPIE, in collaboration with the United Nations Association Global Classrooms initiative, will bring members’ passion for Model UN to DC area schools. Members will have the extraordinary opportunity to implement Model UN curriculum at local DC high schools. In the fall, we will personally go into classrooms to introduce topics on international affairs and expand global awareness. Furthermore, we will host numerous educational and panel events for the community in pursuit of promoting foreign affairs. Most importantly, the GWUPIE serves our University’s greater mission to have a global impact through leadership and public service. If you are interested in Model UN, foreign affairs, working with students, and making a positive impact on your community, GWUPIE is perfect for you.

Sincerely, Daniel Morales, GWUPIE Director

To learn more about getting involved with e George Washington University Program for International Education, contact GWUPIE Director Daniel Morales at [email protected].


6





e Globe: World News From All Sides

e International Affairs Society partners with the Elliott School of International Affairs to publish e Globe, the Elliott School’s only undergraduate research publication. e Globe provides students the opportunity to express their personal opinions on a range of global issues. Published twice in both the Fall and Spring semesters, e Globe covers topics that reflect both relevant international concerns as well as in-depth reevaluations of historical events. Submissions to e Globe are welcome from students of all years. For those more inclined to work behind the scenes, applications for Assistant Editor positions will be posted in the Fall. I look forward to meeting those of you that share my passion for both International Affairs and copyediting.

Sincerely,Ellen Rajnisz, Editor-in-Chief

To learn more about getting involved with e Globe, contact Editor-in-Chief Ellen Rajnisz at [email protected].

e Globe: World News From All Sides

COPYRIGHTED 2010 ©Copyright © 2010, [e Globe]. Unless otherwise noted. All rights reserved.

Reproduction of any content, in whole or in part, without the express permission ofthe Chairman of the International Affairs Society is strictly prohibited. Violations aresubject to legal action. e Globe is a production of the International Affairs Society

and is a registered student organization of e George Washington University inWashington, D.C. e views expressed in this publication are those of the authors,and not necessarily those of e George Washington University, its entities, or the

International Affairs Society. If you wish to reply to the following columns, send eithera letter or a full-length commentary to the editor at [email protected]

Strategies for Regional IntegrationBy Samuel Myers

e new government of Japan has begun a push for a regional organization for East Asia modeled on the

European Union. While the government of China has no need to directly respond to these idealistic goals, it

would be remiss to underestimate the forces of regionalism. A trend toward global, and especially regional,

integration has taken place in the last two decades. e Ministry of Foreign Affairs should look for options to

make best use of the coming shi in international politics.


7





Chinese grand strategy has been toward encouraging a peaceful and stable international stage on which

to emerge. is is necessary in order to accomplish the goal of major economic growth. To foster growth, both

stable foreign trade and secure resources are necessary. For the past two decades China has attempted to mollify

its neighbors regarding its rapid rise in both economic and military strength. is policy has emphasized non-

combative actions toward China’s Asian neighbors, with special mind paid toward the United States. Toward this

end China has become increasingly tied to the rest of Asia, to the point where some type of regional integration

seems feasible. Intra-region trade has become increasingly important over the past 20 years. Exports to countries

in East Asia, including ASEAN, from other East Asian countries rose from 32 percent in 1985 to 40 percent in

2005. A similar trend is present in imports, increasing from 40 to 46 percent of total imports. ree over-arching

policies exist for China to deal with growing regionalism. A major investment in regional growth and increased

connectivity is one. e second pursues increased bilateral connections and maintaining alliances and markets in

that manner. Most beneficial, however, would be a synthesis of these two options, strategic regionalism.

e first is for China to pursue globalization and regionalism as whole-heartedly as possible. Many of the

advantages of this strategy lie in the economic realm. Currently exports and imports make up a large portion of

China’s gross domestic product (GDP). Up to 75 percent of China’s GDP comes from trade. Intra-region trade

has become increasingly important over the past 20 years. Exports to countries in East Asia, including ASEAN,

from other East Asian countries rose from 32 percent in 1985 to 40 percent in 2005. A similar trend is present in

imports, increasing from 40 to 46 percent of total imports.1 While other East Asian countries have also reaped

the benefit of increasing intra-regional trade China has gained the most, not in raw numbers but in a steady shi.

China’s imports and exports to East Asia have remained relatively stable in the past twenty years. What this does

not show however is that China has supplanted Japan as the major regional importer and exporter. Japan’s

imports from East Asia are now equal between China and the rest of Asia, a dramatic growth of 5 percent coming

from China in 1985 and 22 percent in 2005. A majority of ASEAN’s imports now come from China as well.2

Along with this trend, China now absorbs the largest share of ASEAN’s exports. What this data shows is that

China is now the economic hub of Asia and should assume its role as such. is means that China will need to

play a larger role in regional economic integration. Until now Japan has been the leader in regional growth efforts,

such as free trade deals. In 2000 the East Asian nations (ASEAN, China, Japan, Korea) agreed to create a system

of foreign exchange swaps. An expanded effort along these lines, headed by China, would be very beneficial in

securing China’s place at the forefront of regional trade initiatives. Other efforts, such as the Asian Bond Fund,

came out of the Asian financial crises in the late 1990’s. e recent economic crisis provides China a chance to

assert leadership in further connecting the economies of the region. As the strongest economy in the region,


8

1 Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development, “China,” OECD Country Statistics, http://www.oecd.org/country0,3377,en_33873108_36016481_1_1_1 _1_1,00.html.

2 Association of Southeast Asian Nations, “External Trade Statistics,” Statistics, http://www.aseansec.org/18137.htm.

measured by growth rate, China should take the initiative to increase regional financial regulation. Outside of

economic benefits there are several security benefits in increased regionalism. China has become dependent on oil

from the Middle East as a major energy source; this oil is shipped in via the Straits of Malacca. If a viable regional

joint force were created, it would most likely be able to protect the Straits. Now China’s navy is too weak to

protect the area on its own, and the region relies on the United States Navy for security. While there are many

benefits to greatly stepping up regional integration, China would face some drawbacks as well.

Several of the actions that would be required for further integration contradict Chinese domestic policy,

and if regional integration were pursued then China would need to alter its domestic policy. First, and most

important, is the issue of the Renminbi. Currently the RMB is pegged to the value of the dollar, holding at 6.82

yuan to the dollar.3 All the other economies in East Asia have floating currencies, and are unlikely to adopt

China’s peg. erefore in order to create greater financial cooperation China would be required to un-peg from

the dollar. It is also extremely likely that China would be forced to adopt certain consumer protections and

regulations as part of an East Asian regional group. A more structural impediment to regional integration is

affluence disparity. Developing countries undertake strategies to protect developing industries, and increase their

competitiveness on the world stage. In order for greater regionalism to occur China would be forced to privatize

many of its state enterprises. Richer countries also have industries that they wish to protect from competition,

such as agriculture, and would push back against regional integration. China would face this problem with Japan,

which has many protections for its agricultural sector. Until the structural factors are rectified China is unable to

pursue full scale regional integration. Additionally, China is not willing to make domestic concessions in order to

increase regional cohesiveness.

China’s second option is to push bilateral agreements and negotiations. is method has several inherent

advantages to China over regionalism. First is the fact that in negotiations China will be stronger. When

negotiating with smaller nations it is in China’s best interest to negotiate bilaterally. If China engages the ASEAN

states collectively they are able to bargain more effectively due to their group power. One on one however these

states are much weaker than China, giving China the advantage in negotiations. is is also true in negotiations

with other powerful countries. If China were negotiating with Japan, it would ideally be backed by all of the

ASEAN states. is is oentimes not the case since these nations have prerogatives of their own. In negotiations

where one side is in discord the other has the advantage. By pursuing bilateral negotiations China would avoid

this pitfall. A second major advantage of bilateral talks is in resolving economic problems. e structural

problems mentioned between developing and industrialized countries can be more easily resolved through

bilateral negotiations than through group negotiations. An excellent example of this is the Doha round of the

World Trade Organization talks. It has stalled due to agricultural subsidies by industrialized countries and

industrial support by developing countries. Meanwhile bilateral trade negotiations have flourished in the past ten


9

3 Bank of China, “Bank of China Exchange Rates in RMB,” http://www.china.org.cn/english/TR-e/43805.htm.

years. A greater ability to negotiate trade agreements will also allow China to maintain its domestic institutions

along with expanded trade. Another inherent advantage to bilateral negotiations is that they can be held in secret

from other countries. is is especially advantageous when planning joint military exercises, or weapons sales. If

China were to create an integrated region these type of closed door negotiations would become nearly impossible.

As with regional integration, bilateral negotiations have draw backs.

Foremost is China’s relationship with the United States. Currently the two nations have reached a

relative accord, neither attempting to increase its influence in Asia at the expense of the other. If, however, China

began to undertake secretive, bilateral negotiations it would destroy much of the idea of a peaceful rise of China.

e United States would soon step up efforts to hedge against future Chinese capabilities. is would probably

include increased arms deals with Taiwan, and increased naval presence in the Straits of Taiwan. Along with

increased military presence the United States may be tempted to begin imposing trade restrictions on China.

Automobile tires have recently become a dispute between the United States and China. With the United States

alleging unfair trade practices on the part of Chinese industries. If China were to pursue bilateral negotiations, it

should expect much more of this behavior. China cannot and should not be willing to sacrifice its relationship

with the United States in order to procure some short term benefits in East Asia.

In order to avoid the fairly major shortcomings of both of the previous policies a third option is needed.

Instead of being reactionary, as in the second policy, it is a policy directed toward greater regionalism, but with

several caveats. Consider it as selective regional integration. e worst side-effect stemming from either policy is a

weakening of United States-China relations. In order to avoid this outcome a mixture of the two policies is

required. When China engages in multilateral talks with East Asian nations, it must also engage the United States

in bilateral talks. is will reassure the United States of its place in East Asia, and maintain China’s relationship.

Additionally it is imperative that when deals are reached on military cooperation and arms sales that United

States be party to the talks. So when China negotiates with East Asia multilaterally, it should negotiate with the

United State bilaterally, and when it negotiates bilaterally in East Asia, China should share information with the

United States. Another major facet of this strategy is domestic policy first. While this is not extremely different

from the status quo, there are some important caveats. China should avoid any regionalism that involves

interference by other nations into its domestic priorities. Fortunately the signatories of the Treaty of Amity and

Cooperation have already agreed to this. As the region becomes more integrated however the demand for more

closely matching domestic institutions will also become stronger. When this occurs China should participate in

selective regionalism, whereby it guides policy toward domestic changes that are relatively small and harmless. For

example it would be a small matter for China to agree to regional safety standards or consumer protections. In

fact adopting policies along this line would help china’s domestic growth. On other fronts however China should

resist regional pressure. China should not feel obligated to privatize state corporations, or to create a floating

Renminbi. e largest challenge in this area will be environmental. China’s domestic environmental policy affects

all of the other nations in East Asia; as such it will likely be the target of regional pressures. To guard against too


10

much pressure on China alone, regional guidelines should be set up on environmental policy. is already falls in

line with China’s recent domestic policy calling for a massive environmental cleanup. A regional direction on

environmental policy would help prevent future international incidents, such as the one in 2005 between China

and Russia over a benzene spill. It is in China’s best interests to become integrated with the East Asian region and

to resist other outside interests in domestic policy. Another major benefit to selective integration is that China

would be able to direct Asian regional policy, while remaining outside of direct control. Currently China is

indispensable in the East Asian economic and political system. is position gives China incredible leverage over

the direction of integration. It would be possible, for instance, to create regional trade systems that favor China as

a destination for goods over the United States or Japan. At the same time China would be able to opt out of

certain agreements, dooming them to failure for lack of participation. By remaining a selective regional integrator,

China stands to control the direction of integration. e only downside would be minimal. It is likely that some

of the nations in the region may begin to resent the puppet-master style tactics. While this is unlikely to greatly

affect the direction of regional policy, it may make it more difficult to negotiate bilaterally with these nations. e

trade off is between excellent bilateral relations and the ability to direct the regional policy of East Asia.

All of the policies outlined in this paper are viable policy options for China going forward. It is vital,

however, that Chinese policy makers accept that China can no longer remain on the sidelines of East Asian

regional integration. e time has come for China to begin to lead internationally, and the best opportunity

presents itself in East Asia. Here China has the option to participate in selective regionalism and shape the future

structure of the East Asian system. e Ministry of Foreign Affairs would be remiss to pass up this opportunity.

e Great Disconnect and e Impossibility eoremDiscrepancies between Public Opinion and Congressional Immigration PolicyBy Mateo Forero

e phenomenon of immigration into the United States has been a crucial factor in the development of

American society throughout its 233 years of existence. Each generation of Americans has been faced with this

relentless element of globalization – at times embracing those seeking the American lifestyle, and at others,

explicitly preventing them from even touching the ‘sacred soil of the Forefathers.’ In today’s world, the issue of

immigration has again gripped the political limelight. As the luxuries of wealth, civil equality, and social justice

became brighter in the post-Cold War era, millions of disenfranchised and unattended Latin Americans

(particularly from Mexico and Central America) flocked to the United States in hopes of finding personal

success. Yet, the number of people seeking residency on American soil was so great, that the immigration system

which had worked for decades became overloaded and dysfunctional. Now, as a new generation of politicians

enters the public sphere, the demand for policy changes on immigration is greater than ever.


11

e problem with this demand, however, is that there is a discrepancy between the requests and needs of

the American public, and the debates and policies forthcoming from Capitol Hill. In general, an overwhelming

quantity of Americans tend to display restrictionist attitudes toward immigration, but their counterparts in

government have consistently upheld expansionist immigration laws since 1986. In his academic treatise on

Congressional behavior, David Mayhew argues that legislators have the sole end of reelection in mind – and that

for those ends, they will cater to their constituencies via advertisement, credit claiming and position taking. In

other words, Congressional opinion should reflect the views of the national public on a specific issue. However,

the reality of immigration policy and the differences in opinion surrounding it lead us to understand that

Mayhew’s theory is invalid, and that other factors are at work in explaining this political conundrum. In fact, this

gap between public opinion and Congressional policy can be clarified unmistakably by Kenneth Arrow’s

Impossibility eorem, which was presented in the monograph, Social Choice and Individual Values. In that

treatise, Arrow argues that no polling system exists which can translate an aggregate of individual values into a

collective social choice. In terms of immigration policy, this means that the public opinion expressed through

polls and national surveys does not represent the true position of ambivalence and tolerance which is expressed

on Election Day. To better elucidate this argument, this paper will first study the details of Arrow’s Impossibility

eorem, and then apply them to the political situation surrounding immigration policy in the United States.

Arrow’s Impossibility eorem At its core, Kenneth Arrow’s studies attempt to shed light on the mechanisms communities use to make

collective choices. According to Arrow, societies have two main instruments for this regard: free markets, for

making economic decisions, and voting systems, for making political decisions. In Social Choice and Individual

Values, Arrow observes voting systems, and analyzes whether they are effective in translating aggregated individual

choices into a collective social choice that is reflective of the community’s preferences.4 To best understand his

study, Arrow outlines some basic principles associated with voting systems. In the most basic sense, the system

itself is a tool by which voters express their preferences over a set of distinct social states. A social state can be

expressed as a bundle of commodities, or traits that the voter may want or need – which is oen represented by a

candidate in elections, or a position statement in polls. e voting mechanism has the end of collecting each

voter’s social state preference, or ordering, and adding it to other collected orderings of similar nature. is

collection of votes, then, is supposed to show the preference of a majority of voters – making it the default social

choice.

Upon looking closely at a variety of voting systems, however, Arrow discovered that the social choice

represented in election and polling results oen did not match the commodities most desired by each individual

in the community. Based on this and other observations, he theorized that in order for a voting system to be fair

and reflective of individual values, all of the following conditions must be true: 1) non-dictatorship, 2)


12

4 Kenneth J. Arrow, Social Choice and Individual Values (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1963), 60.

monotonicity, 3) independence of irrelevant alternatives, 4) unrestricted domain, and 5) non-imposition. Arrow,

then, described each condition in mathematical terms. For the purpose of this discussion, however, the five

conditions will be expressed in pragmatic terms. Non-dictatorship implies that the social choice given by the

system must account for all orderings expressed in the vote, not just the winning set of orderings. Monotonicity

refers to the correlative relationship between an individual choice and the social choice outcome – meaning that

if an individual ordering is promoted through a vote, then that specific ordering will either be promoted or will

not change at the social choice level. Independence of Irrelevant Alternatives expresses the notion that socially

ranked sets of orderings will not fluctuate if a subset of the orderings is taken, or if one specific social state is

eliminated. Unrestricted domain refers to the fact that the voting system accepts all possible sets of orderings that

may be expressed by an individual, and accounts for them at the social choice level. And finally, non-imposition

expresses that all sets of possible social choices can be reached by a distinct configuration of individual preference

aggregation.

is five-point supposition, which Arrow called the General Possibility eorem, then served as a tool to

better analyze those systems which were producing outputs incongruous to the individual values accounted for in

the vote. Based on statistical analysis and field research, Arrow concluded that there existed no voting system

which could meet the five conditions at once – meaning that there was no possible mechanism which can

translate individual values to a communally accepted political norm. In his treatise, Arrow states that although

“we wish to make social welfare judgments which depend on the values of all individuals, i.e., which are not

imposed or dictatorial… there is no meaningful interpersonal comparison of utilities…which will be satisfactory

for all sets of individual values compatible with those restrictions.”5 is Impossibility of Systems highlights, then,

the political realities of modern society – namely that democracy can be a flawed vehicle of governance, that

polling incorrectly measures political climate, and perhaps most importantly, that policy regimes can remain

unaffected even in light of public opinion.

Impossibility of Systems and Immigration Policy

Having now a more firm understanding of social preference systems and their inability to correlate

individual values to a community-based choice, our discussion of the divide between public opinion on

immigration and the policy outcomes pertaining to it becomes more productive. Before analyzing this

disconnect, however, it is also important to understand the nature and roots of the opposing views that are

expressed in the disconnect. In terms of immigration, the public opinion tends to be restrictionist by nature –

meaning that Americans distrust incoming immigrants, and therefore, wish to see policies that severely limit legal

migrants and solidly punish illegal ones. is viewpoint was, for many years, the policy regime that existed in the

United States. e trend goes back to the Immigration Act of 1917 and the Emergency Quota Act of 1921,

which restricted immigration from Europe. e Immigration and Nationality Act of 1954 further strengthened


13

5 Kenneth J. Arrow, Social Choice and Individual Values (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1963), 60.

this trend by empowering the government to deport illegal aliens. By contrast, the Congressional viewpoint today

is expansionist by nature. is means (1) laws that admit a number of legal permanent residents (more than

946,000 in 2004) that is relatively large in historical terms, and (2) a policy that tolerates, for want of a better

word, the long-term presence, if not permanent settlement, of a number of undocumented immigrants (at least 10

million in 2004) that is also relatively large in historical terms.”6 is trend was initiated by the Immigration

Reform and Control Act of 1986, and has been the norm ever since.

In observing this phenomenon, we can see how public opinion (as represented through elections and

Congressional policy) has shied since the earlier years of the 20th century. Yet, the polling mechanisms used by

society to gauge these shis have been determinately unsuccessful at fulfilling their purpose. Having as our

background Arrow’s Impossibility eorem, we can thus explain this failure of polls in very clear terms. In order

to conduct this comparison, however, its important to know what Gallup polls on immigration are like and how

they are run. In the monthly polls conducted from 1995 onward, American citizens are asked: 1) if they think

levels of immigrations are too high, too low or acceptable, 2) if they think immigration is good for the country or

not, 3) if they think immigrants eventually pay their share into the country or not and 4) if they think immigrants

take jobs Americans don’t want. ese Gallup polls are oen conducted online, but are also carried out via mail

service and orally. Having these parameters as factors in measuring public opinion on immigration, we can now

make appropriate observations about how the poll itself fails to meet Arrow’s conditions for synthesizing a

collective social choice.

To begin, non-dictatorship is accounted for in the Gallup poll conducted monthly. is is because the

winning vote in each question is not the only trait represented in the report. Instead, all preference orderings are

shown holistically, and have an equal effect on the outcomes that the poll induces. In terms of monotonicity,

however, voters expressing a specific preference may not affect the overall social choice, and may in fact deter it

from moving in that direction. As for independence of irrelevant alternatives, the Gallup poll demonstrates that

taking out a specific preference ordering from the available bundle of choices affects the outcome of people’s

attitude toward immigrants to the United States. e poll also fails the test of unrestricted domain; meaning that

it asks only a limited amount of questions that express the social norm., rather than asking all the possible

elements that go into the issue of immigration. e final condition of non-imposition, like that of non-

dictatorship, qualifies as successful in the Gallup poll. is is because any combination of preference orderings for

each individual question will yield a distinct social choice in the end. So, say, if a specific aggregate value changes,

then the collective social choice will also change. What, then, does this mean?

Considering Arrow’s Impossibility eorem in light of the polls used to gauge public opinion on

immigration, we found that Conditions 1 and 5 were met, but not 2, 3 or 4. So, because not all five points were

fulfilled, then it can be said that the polling mechanism used for immigration is flawed and does not accurately


14

6 Peter H. Schuck, “e Disconnect Between Public Attitudes and Policy Outcomes in Immigration,” Political Science Monthly 39 (2006): 158.

reflect the social values that an aggregate of individual preferences would give. is could mean one of two things

for the immigration disconnect: 1) as was mentioned earlier, that public opinion has shied but the Gallup poll

hasn’t been able to measure that shi, or 2) that public opinion has not been able to deter expansionist policies

because its magnitude is irrelevant in scope – something that the poll fails to illustrate. Although the former

seems to be the more widely accepted conclusion, many scholars have begun accepting the latter explanation as a

more viable rationalization. In his essay on this observed disconnect between opinion and policy, Schuck asserts

that the American public is indeed restrictionist in thought, but that a feeling of ambivalence on the issue has

prevented citizens from pursuing activism through the various channels of collective action available.7 Whatever

the conclusion may be, however, it is clear that the polling system must change in order to better represent the

social choice on immigration policy, and that Congress ought to begin pursuing an active agenda for fixing the

immigration problems that this country faces.


15

7 Peter H. Schuck, “e Disconnect Between Public Attitudes and Policy Outcomes in Immigration,” Political Science Monthly 39 (2006): 158.

George Washington Model United Nations Team

2009-2010:

Georgetown University

Columbia UniversityOutstanding Small Delegation

Yale University

University of Pennsylvania

McGill University

University of California at Berkeley

World Model United Nations in Taipei, Taiwan

University of Chicago

Alumni and External RelationsAmerican University

Boston CollegeBoston University

Catholic UniversityCambridge University

City University of New YorkColumbia UniversityDartmouth College

Georgetown Universitye George Washington University

Mercy CollegeMonterey Institute of International Studies

Nova Southeastern UniversitySt. George’s UniversityUniversity of ChicagoUniversity of Denver

University of PittsburghWebster University

Aegis Capital GroupAmerican Near East Refugee Aid

Associated PressBoeing Corporation

e Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

Center for Strategic & International StudiesCentral Intelligence Agency

Computer Sciences CorporationCreative Associates International

Department of JusticeDepartment of State

Federal Bureau of InvestigationsNational Geospatial-Intelligence Agencye National Iranian American Council

e New America FoundationPeace Corps

Program on International Policy AttitudesTeach For America

UN AssociationU.S. Congress

U.S. NavyWorld Affairs Council

World Bank


16

The Globe: 2010 CI Edition

Documents