Category: Schar School of Policy and Government

The Relationship Between Celebrity Partisanship and Celebrity Advocacy Work

Author(s): Lina Tate

Mentor(s): Trevor Thrall, Schar School of Policy and Government

In the field of political science, much has been discussed about the role that celebrities play in American democracy. With the rising levels of political influence and opinions from celebrities, the topic of celebrity politics has garnered much popularity from scholars. Countless studies prove that celebrities have a growing impact on society. Whether it be a celebrity’s political activism through donations or candidate endorsements, less is known about celebrity partisanship in a meaningful way. Therefore this, research works to place celebrities on a concrete political spectrum detailing their partisan affiliation. In doing so, this study attempts to reveal new ways in which celebrities can influence politics from a partisan level. In addition to this, this study works to detail whether the balance between celebrity partisanship is skewed in one direction over the other.

Hello, my name is Lina Tate I’m currently enrolled in the Government 491 course working on my own independent research on the topic of celebrity politics and so this is my research proposal as I plan to execute the research next semester.

In American culture, the involvement of celebrities in the field of politics is far from being a new phenomenon. It’s not uncommon for us to see celebrities like Cardi B meet with Bernie Sanders to talk about affordable health care. Jon Ossoff did an interview with comedian Leslie Jones as part of his campaign strategy. Every couple of months, whether it be Oprah or the Rock, news media outlets talk about the next potential celebrity president. Historically we’ve seen celebrities turn politicians such as Ronald Reagan and Arnold Schwarzenegger. While decades ago it might’ve seen laughable for a celebrity to be president, Donald Trump proved that anything is possible in American politics. All this is to say is that celebrity involvement in the American democracy will only continue to increase and become more the norm as time goes on.

However, while there is much literature on the topic of celebrity politics from their potential influence on elections, to their strategic candidate endorsements, little to no literature exists on celebrity partisanship and how that affects their impact in American politics. Therefore, my research question that I’m working to answer next semester is, Is There a Relationship Between Celebrity Political Partisanship and Celebrity Advocacy Work?

In order to answer this question, I will be creating a dataset that attempts to place celebrities on a political spectrum. In order to place them on this said spectrum, I will be selecting a sample size of 50 celebrities from various fields such as music, entertainment, and sports to name a few. Each celebrity must be over the age of 18 in relation to the voting age in America and those who have a direct impact on our democracy. In addition to this, while the term celebrity has broadened over time I am only considering those who have high accolades in their respective fields. Their partisanship will be examined through their political activity in three ways. This will include examining their social media following, any presence of candidate endorsements whether it be on social media or more formal endorsements from the 2020 presidential election, finally, if they have any involvement with non-governmental organizations.

By examining these factors and placing celebrities on this spectrum from liberal to conservative, I attempt to see if there are new ways celebrities influence political life from a partisan lens. In addition to this, I have come up with two objectives that my project works to meet. First, are celebrities as liberal as media and news outlets make them out to be, or are there more conservative celebrities than previously assumed. The second thing I want to find out is between liberal and conservatives, how visible and active are they in political activity? What kinds do they engage in most frequently amongst the three I will be examining. Seeing as scholars have noted the serious influence celebrities have over political outcomes it is worth exploring how their political affiliation affects that impact. Overall, with the generation of such a dataset, the hope is that it provides future studies on celebrity politics with an even more informed way of discussing the subject matter.

Schar School of Policy and Government

Research Proposal: Why is the United States such a dramatic outlier in private sector engagement in space

Author(s): Nicholas Robichaud

Mentor(s): Jim Olds, Neuroscience Program

My presentation is on a research proposal developed in the Govt-491 class that took place this fall. The focus of this proposal is to explore the factors that lead 56.4% of all space-related businesses to be located within the United States. Within the presentation, I explain the current state of commercial space, the disparity that exists between the U.S. and all other nations that are major players within space, and the methodology in which I have laid out in order to investigate the factors that have caused the U.S. to hold such a dominance.

Good afternoon everyone, my name is Nicholas Robichaud and this is my presentation for the OSCARS. So my presentation is a research proposal: why is the United States such a dramatic outlier in private sector engagement in space?
At present, there is no international legal framework that regulates the action of commercial activity in space. Despite this, commercial space has been rapidly advancing and branching off into emerging industries. While telecommunications has been the staple industry within space, innovations in technology as well as major government investments have caused many new industries to become viable. The poster child of this movement is SpaceX which made headlines proving to be an effective launch partner for the U.S. government in launching materials and personnel into space as well as Blue Origin kickstarting the space tourism industry. In the near future asteroid mining, in-orbit manufacturing, and large-scale infrastructure development are all projected to be major industries with businesses already working towards their eventual implementation.
The importance of space cannot be overstated. Space offers an endless expanse of territory to be utilized by countries. Additionally, in the asteroid belt alone there is an evaluation of approximately 700$ quintillion dollars worth in resources that are available. Society also has much to gain as investments into space have been proven to have many positive effects across many sectors. As advancements offer nations both the means and motive to invest in space, many have begun to establish individual legal frameworks over the past five years in order to attract commercial interest. With this dramatic increase in interest over the past decade the number of companies within space has rapidly increased.
However, that interest is not equally distributed across all nations. As of Q3 of 2021, the U.S. is reported to be the home of 6477 or 56.4% of all established space related companies in the world. Additionally, these companies have 84 billion dollars invested in total which is more than the next 10 countries combined.
With such a massive private sector disparity between the United States and the rest of the Globe it leads me to wonder what factors have influenced an overwhelming majority of space related businesses to establish themselves in the U.S. as opposed to other countries?
My proposal is to conduct inductive research that utilizes process tracing in order to find hypotheses that can best explain how the U.S. became such a large outlier. Some dimensions to be explored are: legislative freedom, the historical usage of outsourcing within research and development, and the projected government activity within space.
When exploring legislative freedoms I will conduct a qualitative analysis of the positive and negative freedoms offered to private businesses to evaluate the relative ease or burden that a business has when operating within the U.S.. Legislative guidelines will include directly applicable law regarding commercial activity in space as well as legislative rules for government contractors. The purpose of this research will be to establish how business-friendly the U.S. seems to have laid out its guidelines for industry to operate within.
When reviewing the U.S.’historical usage of government outsourcing I will be utilizing a quantitative analysis of how often the U.S. has tended to engage in this practice. The research will be focused on reviewing the history of agencies involved in research and development. The purpose of which is to establish if the U.S. was an attractive location for business because of the frequency with which potential opportunities would be available to businesses operating in space.
When analyzing the future involvement of the U.S. in space I will be conducting a qualitative analysis on both the short-term and long-term space investments of the U.S.. While analyzing historical trends and planned projects within different agencies of the government is important to establish a short-term projection of activity, I also want to establish the national goals that the U.S. has set for its involvement in space. In my opinion, this will be more effective in determining the level of investment the U.S. government puts into space over a longer stretch of time. The purpose of this is to establish if companies have assessed that the U.S. government will be the most involved in space which directly impacts the longevity of their company.
So why does this all matter? Businesses that wish to operate within space can choose any country in the world. However, an overwhelming majority have decided to establish themselves within the U.S.. With a greater understanding of what factors these businesses are taking into account, the federal government can make smarter choices within policy to better support their own objectives within space.

Schar School of Policy and Government

Research Proposal: Labor Market Participation: Undocumented Latinas and COVID-19

Author(s): Remmy Salinas Calderon

Mentor(s): Mariely Lopez-Santana, Schar School of Policy and Government

Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, people across the United States have had varying experiences within the labor market. One of the most hard-hit groups by the negative effects of the pandemic in the United States have been immigrants. They make up a sizeable portion of the workforce in America, especially the industries that have been hit the hardest during this time. Yet, they have less access to resources and governmental aid than the average American citizen. This project aims to analyze the effect of the pandemic on the labor market participation of undocumented Latinas within the Northern Virginia area. Working from a framework of intersectionality, I argue that undocumented Latinas are one of the most affected groups within the immigrant community in the U.S. due to how gender and immigration status intertwine with the negative circumstances the pandemic. The goal of this project is to find a bottom-up solution to advocate for. Any solution that can assist undocumented Latinas during this time would benefit the immigrant community as a whole.

Hello everybody, my name is Remmy, and this is my project: Labor Market Participation: Undocumented Latinas and COVID-19. So, what exactly is the research question that links these topics together? [Reads question]. Now that we’ve talked about the question, let me go ahead and break down what the project is about. I am going to break this section down into 2 topics that directly relate to my project and the broader discussions involved. This project originally started off with analyzing the relationship between economic shocks and their disproportional effects on immigrants within the United States. As I moved forward with my research, I had to narrow my scope a bit more. To start off, I decided to focus on one major economic shock in particular, that being the COVID-19 pandemic. Why? Because it was the most recent, and technically ongoing, event to have happened. Considering how fresh the event is, I believe that it would make it easier to facilitate interviews in the second part of my research. Why am I focusing on immigrants? Because I believe that they are one of the most vulnerable groups in the U.S. during any economic shock, and yet they are an integral part of society and the American economy. They make up a sizeable portion of essential workers within the United States AND they worked within some of the most hard-hit industries in the U.S. during this pandemic, yet their access to resources and governmental aid was much more limited than the average American citizen. Why focus on undocumented immigrants though? The simple answer is this: Not many do. It isn’t a well-covered topic and not for lack of trying, but because it is difficult to reach an accurate consensus on the conditions of undocumented immigrants within the country, let alone in specific regions or states. The fact that they are undocumented makes them even more vulnerable to the impacts of the pandemic. According to one report from the Migration Policy Institute, approximately 6 million foreign-born workers work within vital, frontline industries (health care, social services, retail, wholesale, manufacturing, agriculture, etc.) and 6 million of them work in hard-hit industries (think accommodation, food services, building services, nonessential travel, and so on). One reason I’m focusing on undocumented Latinas is because of the concept of intersectionality. According to Professor Carol Cleaveland in her article Covid-19: Threat and Vulnerability Among Latina Immigrants, intersectionality can be best understood as “an exploration of how gender, race, and class become intertwined and reinforce oppression” for certain groups within society. Viewing this population from the framework of intersectionality, I argue that due to a combination of gender and immigration status, undocumented Latinas are one of the most vulnerable groups within the immigrant community in the United States. From this perspective, I’m searching for a bottom-up solution to propose or advocate for. If a solution can be found or promoted for in regard to the disproportionate impact of the pandemic on undocumented Latinas, it could benefit the whole of the immigrant community overall. So with that in mind, what progress have I made so far? All of the progress I have made so far is purely theoretical and statistical. The bulk of my work so far has been finding sources and gaining as much perspective into the current conversations around the topics I have addressed so far. All of the work I have done was in order to build the foundations of the next phase. Speaking of which, what is next for my research? That would be conducting interviews within the Northern Virginia area. I will be reaching out to organizations within the region in order to communicate with undocumented Latinas who would be willing to take part in this process. Of course, before doing so, I will be, and I am in the process of, completing my CITI training and IRB application in order to make sure I’m conducting interviews accordingly and ethically. Thank you all.

Honors College Schar School of Policy and Government

Religious Extremism and Military Force: Charting a New Strategy for Washington’s ‘Endless Wars’

Author(s): Jad Makdissi

Mentor(s): Sharon Doetsch-Kidder, English

https://youtu.be/RwqEBd5Jeo4

On December 26, 1991, the United States declared itself the world’s superpower. 44 years of a military and ideological stand-off with the Soviet Union had culminated into a decisive ending, leaving Washington to assume the role of global leadership. The end of the Cold War had, in other words, all but confirmed one fact: that neoliberal democracy was the answer, and it remained the West’s– and precisely Washington’s – obligation to protect and promote this democracy overseas.

After September 11th, 2001, however, the notion of American leadership would change forever. Washington’s answer for peace became an extremist’s reason to fight, and in less than 10 years after the fall of the Iron Curtain, the United States found itself entangled in another “endless” conflict: the war on terror.

With $2 trillion spent, thousands of lives lost, and over 20 years spent in the Islamic world, many Americans have been left to ponder serious questions about their government’s counterterrorism policy: How have Jihadists with a fraction of America’s military power managed to exhaust the United States? Is the tactical prowess of terrorists to blame for Washington’s extended presence abroad?

It is this project’s hope that by embarking on an analysis of drone warfare against terrorist groups, we can pave the path for future research on this subject by discovering a meaningful relationship between Washington’s asymmetrical war tactics and the length of its “Endless Wars.”

SLIDE 1

Hey everyone, my name is Jad, and for my presentation I’m going to be focusing on the effects of U.S. drone strikes on America’s “endless wars.”

SLIDE 2

Though prior to delving into the effects of U.S. drone strikes on America’s foreign engagements, we first must ask ourselves, well, why are we having this discussion in the first place? Where did the term “endless wars” come from?

On December 26, 1991, the United States declared itself the world superpower. Almost 40 years of a military, political, and ideological standoff against the Soviets had culminated into a decisive ending, leading Washington, upon the Union’s collapse, to assume the role of global leadership.

Though in just under 10 years, the United States would find itself entangled once more in another dangerous standoff. Only this time it would be not against a Soviet adversary that threatened its very existence, but rather against a network of jihadists with half its military might.

The September 11th attacks had many impacts on American history, and one of them, undoubtedly, is the fact that 9/11 would change American foreign policy in years to come.

SLIDE 3

The September 11th attacks made it imperative that the United States declare war on terrorism and invade Afghanistan. Also known as “Operation Enduring Freedom”, the Afghan invasion took place for two main reasons; first, to deliver to justice those responsible for 9/11; and second, to render inoperable the operations of Al-Qaeda – and terrorist groups alike – in the country to ensure that another 9/11 doesn’t happen again.

What’s interesting about the Afghan invasion, however, is that it took place for nearly twenty years. You would assume that for a country with the military supremacy of the United States at the time – and arguably still today – that such an operation, premised on two justified objectives, would be feasible, swift, and decisive.

Explanations for Washington’s extended footprint in Kabul are widespread and diverse, ranging from the failure to nation-build in the country to the military underestimation of the stamina of the terrorist enemy. In my research I decided to adopt a different approach to explain the length of the Afghan war; I decided to focus on the role of U.S. drone technology in the conflict, and specifically, how the increased reliance on U.S. drone strikes against terrorists in Afghanistan over the campaign has contributed to the length of the war itself.

SLIDE 4

In the context of the Afghan war, many of my sources of consequence emerged as supporters of drone strikes against terrorists in Afghanistan. To defend their positions, these scholars employed a study of Islamism in their research, suggesting that the inherent animus of Jihadists toward the West renders drone strikes as a necessary deterrence mechanism against terrorists. In this regard, the war on terror is viewed just like the war on crime here in the United States: It will forever be an endless one, and Americans ought to tackle it strategically. This leads to the third point, which makes drones favorable for the very fact that they preserve American life. Drones allow the United States to maintain a military footprint in places of interest without needing to station U.S. troops on the ground.

SLIDE 5

There were, however, scholars in my research who believed that the use of drones against terrorists is counterproductive and hence a very big factor behind the length of the Afghan war
itself. These scholars emphasize the death of innocent Afghans at the hands of US drones throughout the war, suggesting that the dangerous inaccuracy of unmanned aircraft leads to
innocent casualties that in-turn bolsters terrorist recruitment and expands jihadi networks. Innocent deaths at the hands of American drones are also argued to have inspired the evolution
of terror strategies for U.S.-designated terrorist groups like Hamas in Palestine and the recently non-designated Houthis in Yemen. These groups are alleged to have grown to base their
operations in civilian-dense areas, such that when they provoke the United States, Washington will retaliate by killing more innocent civilians, which in-turn bolsters terrorist recruitment and keeps such terrorist groups relevant in their countries’political scenes.

SLIDE 6

My scholars’strict focus on drones as a means of defeating terrorists thus leaves me with a clear research gap to explore, mainly: Can a counterterrorist strategy that is led by a humanitarian compass be more effective against Jihadists than military tactics?

SLIDE 7

I propose a new model of counterterrorist policy that reconsiders terrorist designations and abandons unilateralism. This approach intends to, first, facilitate access to humanitarian aid to
innocent civilians; second, to place pressure on Islamist groups seeking political legitimacy; and third, to give greater bearing to intelligence cooperation to increase the accuracy of future drone strikes if they are needed.

SLIDE 8

Thanks for listening to my presentation.

Schar School of Policy and Government

AI Supremacy (2016-2021): A Comparative Study of the State of Ethical National AI Strategies and Human Capital Challenges and Opportunities

Author(s): Pearl Matibe

Mentor(s): Dr. Aditya Johri, Volgenau School of Engineering, Information Sciences & Technology

From the virtual voice assistant, SIRI, to voice-based AI-powered digital assistant, Alexa, to search algorithms by Google, to lethal autonomous weapons automated to eliminate life; to kill, Artificial Intelligence (AI) is already widely used in the daily lives of humans. The goal of this independent research is to examine the state of developing and implementing ethical, national artificial intelligence (AI) strategies of 7 regions of the world and 22 countries over a five-year period, 2016-2021. Many research publications and reports have written about ethics in AI in several sectors; education, defense, health, manufacturing, and many more. In contrast, this research focuses on examining the national strategies-human capital nexus in ethical AI agendas and whether the national blueprints provide, expand, or omit strategies and resources aimed at education for AI stakeholders. This research aims to contribute to academic scholarship and the body of knowledge on ethics in AI and merit the research community even as culture, morals, and values differ from region to region and from country to country. How elements of diversity factor into ethical AI strategies are studied. On the AI nexus with training, the research found that how to make best use of and grow human capital ought to be a priority objective of all countries. Yet, many countries had not reached 60% human capital by 2017 according to the World Economic Forum (WEF), and at least 1 country is isolated due to sanctions. The paper seeks to provide an easy-to-understand broad overview about ethics in national AI strategies and education agendas. From principle to implementation, as governments around the world plan and develop national AI strategies, their national efforts ought to—in every instance—be to lessen harm, not increase it.

Pearl Matibe: This summer, I conducted research on:  Artificial Intelligence Supremacy covering the period 2016-2021: It is a Comparative Study of the State of Ethical National AI Strategies and Human Capital Challenges and Opportunities  My name is Pearl Matibe, I’m a Research Assistant at the Engineering Education and Cyberlearning Lab, George Mason University. To lay out the background for this presentation, here is a preview of what topics I will be covering. Under Background & Context in the paper, I covered why there is a need for a government to implement an AI strategy and why that is closely linked with achieving 60% human capacity. The paper has 5 Sections: Executive Summary Literature Review The methodology Then I talk about what I discovered I go into the conclusion And end with recommendations Why AI supremacy is important to examine? 3 things are important to consider, and these are the principles as a government is heading into: • National AI Strategy planning • Ethics in AI • And issues revolving around human capacity and why it’s important for a government to be educating all of its stakeholders. And why this matters? • It is essential so that a government and the entire country can help humanity flourish. I covered 7 regions & 22 countries In the literature review, I looked at whether or not an individual, or an entity, or a government looks at ethical plans. The decisions that they make. Some considerations were, for example: Does it conflict with fundamental ethical values like is it legal, trustworthy, fair, or does it abide by the local, cultural norms of caring for a human being? Is the pre-planning of a national AI strategy and the process they use, is it inclusive? Does it not leave any groups out? And at the experts table, was there gender parity? The 4 aspects of my literature review are: a) Does the country have an AI plan? b) Does it prioritize human capacity building for all AI stakeholders? c) Does it provide a national budget resources for educating its AI stakeholders? And is the process, from principle to implementation, ethical throughout? The regions I covered were Africa, Asia and the Middle East, Eastern Europe, Latin America & the Caribbean, North America, The Pacific, and Western Europe. The study included a review of international and non-government organizations, and they did significant global work in AI. In particular: • UNESCO • OECD, and • ACPHR (which is a body in the African Union) Method • The methods which I used, point to, for example, how useful and whether that mechanism was useful and also • Left room for further methodology, in the future that can be conducted, examples would be like surveys and interviews. In this research, I used 4 Methods: 1. Primary Research 2. Secondary Research 3. I used the CRAAP Model 4. And rankings from SRJ and World Economic Forum Within the discussion There is a section in which I talk about the implications of cultural norms, morals, ethics, education as government created their AI national strategies as well as where they now collaborate. Before I conclude, here is some data and memorable quotes, I found. • SRJ Rankings for 2021 and the WEF’s Global Human Capital Index for 2017. • And that concludes my AI Supremacy research comparative study. • The findings were that a country’s human capacity, is its most important resource for these 22 countries.