The Red Folder

Archived from September 16, 2024. 

Key stories for the week, brought to you by Lindsey Zhao and the Red Folder team.

Reading for the sake of reading sucks. Telling yourself to read to win a round is nice but ineffective. This condensed news brief helps you understand current domestic and international issues, analyze the news, and gives you opportunities to read more.

Publishing since January 2024. 

Domestic Stories

4 key domestic stories for the week:

1) Who’s Afraid of Little Old Debt? Daniel Song


Right after the September 2024 presidential debate, Taylor Swift endorsed Kamala Harris. But it seems that neither Harris nor Trump is willing to speak now (Taylor’s Version) about the rising US national debt and its serious consequences for the economy in both the short and long term.


Driven by continuous federal budget deficits over the past few decades, the US national debt has ballooned to over $35 trillion, or 123% of GDP, from just 32% of GDP in 1979. Even excluding debt held by federal government trust funds like Social Security, the number still comes out to over $28 trillion. Just paying interest on the national debt costs the government $956 billion dollars annually and as a result, Americans are recognizing it as an important issue: 57% said reducing the deficit should be a priority for Congress and the president. Unfortunately, neither presidential candidate has been particularly helpful in this regard. Kamala Harris’s economic proposals would increase the debt by at least $2 trillion over the next decade, while Donald Trump’s plans would increase it by $4.8 trillion.


But more than just an statistical abstraction, the growing debt has real-world consequences and costs. The significant sum spent on interest alone decreases the fiscal capacity to invest in other social programs. There are also other costs, as a largesse of federal spending crowds out private investment in the economy and is projected to reduce projected income by about $14,500 per person by 2054. Most troubling, the Penn Wharton Budget Model forecasts that even under the best case scenario, the United States cannot sustain more than 20 additional years of projected deficits as they currently stand. Without debt reduction policies in these 20 years, no amount of future tax increases or spending cuts could avoid the government defaulting on its debt. The consequences of a debt default would be nothing short of catastrophic. Economic forecasts find that just a 4 month default would shrink the US economy by 4%, cause 6 million Americans to lose their jobs, and plunge the global economy into a financial crisis and recession. 


Although the Federal Reserve plans to cut interest rates, which will relieve some pressure on the debt by decreasing interest payments, the rate cuts will be gradual. With the federal budget deficit projected to be at historic levels every year for the near future, even a lower cost of borrowing does not mean we are out of the woods. 


However, many argue that reducing the national debt should not come at the expense of necessary investments in social welfare, climate, health, education, defense, etc. This is a fair point, as austerity policies have been counterproductive across the globe. The nuance is not that the debt must stop growing in absolute terms - that would require steep spending cuts and draconian tax increases that would be politically toxic and likely counterproductive - but that debt as a percentage of GDP should be stabilized.


Nobel Prize-winning economist Paul Krugman suggests that the debt is not an issue, but even he concedes that the US must cut spending or increase taxes by 2.1% of GDP to reduce the debt to a sustainable figure. That may seem like a small percentage, but given the enormous size of the US economy at $28.65 trillion, even 2.1% of that comes out to over $600 billion per year in combined spending cuts and tax increases. 


Understanding the pressing priority of reducing the national debt to sustainable levels, the Peter G. Peterson Foundation created a Solution Initiative 2024, where it gathered 7 respected think tanks, from the left to the center to the right, to each develop a set of specific policy proposals and recommendations to put the United States back on stable fiscal footing within 30 years. In a rare instance of unity, all 7 organizations agreed that the current trajectory of the US national debt is unsustainable. While varying in content, all 7 proposals would reduce the debt-to-GDP ratio by at least one-third over the next 30 years, and lower 30-year interest costs by at least $13 trillion. Regardless of political leaders’ partisan preferences, the ideological diversity amongst the think tanks provides palatable options for both parties. The only question is whether our leaders have the appetite to stomach these difficult but necessary reforms. If they don't, the US’s fiscal future looks treacherous. 


Read more here:

2) Swinging in the States Post-Debate Roshan Shivnani


Most people familiar with the United States’ electoral college know that some states are more important than others. Notably, swing states like Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, North Carolina, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin are regarded as having the most electoral importance. For the upcoming election, those decisive and large states will ultimately decide our next president, meaning their reaction to political events like the presidential debate are magnified. So what is the political consensus in these areas?


For starters, voters in these swing states seem just as politically uninvolved as any other state with 37% to 42% of voters in some swing states knowing virtually nothing about Kamala Harris except that she serves as Joe Biden’s vice president. Unsurprisingly, Trump is much better-known in these areas, with most swing voters carrying strong or negative perceptions on him.


Those facts alone have given both candidates a clear agenda of priority heading into the presidential election. For Kamala, it’s giving voters in swing states an actual vision of what her presidency would look like. For Trump, an already polarizing figure, it’s making Kamala look like an extreme candidate for these critical voters. 


From the minor polls we’ve seen post-debate, it also seems that Kamala largely obtained what she wanted: to not be viewed as extreme and appear as a reasonable candidate for independents. In fact, even the right-leaning Fox News acknowledged victory for Kamala, finding in polls of independent voters that Harris came out on top – earning 54% of the vote compared to Trump’s 45%.  Another 1% thought it was a tie. 


While the initial reaction isn’t an election-deciding outcome, it gives both candidates a clear gauge of their own performance and what they need to change. Harris can feel comfortable knowing that the policy her aides asked her to talk about has tangible appeal in Rural America. In contrast, Trump may need to deviate from past strategies that have allowed him to strongly capture the MAGA vote, but may have isolated him from winning independent ballots.


Read more here:

3) A Higher Standard in Higher Education Boyana Nikolova


The term affirmative action first came around under former President Lyndon B. Johnson, intended to be one of countless “affirmative” steps towards equality. Today, however, America is divided on whether the policy truly reaffirmed equality or whether it was a step in the wrong direction. With the class of 2028 now preparing to enter college, the country has reached a turning point at which it may finally learn the answer to that question. Depending on admission statistics this year, the process of getting into college for high school students may or may not be changed indefinitely.


Regardless, the US isn’t looking to see if affirmative action policies work the same in 2024 as they did in the past. Rather, it’s comparing decades-worth of these policies being used with a world in which they no longer exist, at all. Last August, the US Supreme Court ruled in the Students for Fair Admission case that colleges and universities could no longer consider an applicant’s demographic as part of the admissions process. Portfolios now had to be completely judged based on the student’s academics, extracurricular activities, awards, and other high school experiences only. Concerns that applicants from minority backgrounds would be discouraged or discounted while applying surfaced, but until this month, these worries have been without foundation.


The first post-affirmative action class applying to college has arrived which means, so have the percentages. Brand new data published by Harvard University and MIT’s currently accepted students already points to a significant dip in the percentage of black and hispanic applicants, while the share of Asian applicants has spiked. Of course, these aren’t necessarily trends that are spanning the rest of the college realm. Prestigious names like Princeton and Yale University reported in heavy contrast that their racial diversity stayed stable compared to the prior year’s.


While some are intent on believing that college admissions for minority students are now more difficult than ever based on Harvard and Yale’s current stats, they’re still not seeing the full picture, even if reports like those of Princeton and Yale are ignored. As explained by the Massachusetts education secretary, the most recent numbers only reflect the situation in elite schools, where just a marginal part of the class of 2028 will end up going. The vast majority of other public and private colleges have yet to reveal their demographics and unsurprisingly, these kinds of middle-range schools are what most students will attend.


Without a complete understanding of the post-affirmative action admissions process, it’s not yet time to make deductions… especially based on the numbers published by two hyper-selective universities. On another hand, some universities actually appear to be benefiting from the new status quo. Interest in Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) has surged, showing that for these gradually declining and often underfunded schools, there may be a silver lining. Additionally, for many other underprivileged identities, there doesn’t appear to be a significant difference in the admissions process. Although the ratios of women to men can vary by school and don’t necessarily have to be attributed to discrimination, the latest data from selective colleges doesn’t suggest an affirmative action-free world changes them much. 


In any case, 2024 won’t be the end of the road for college hopefuls or for those who aren’t sure college is the right path. Rising student debt and overcrowding of cities means that a top-notch education might not be all it makes itself to be. Investing in one’s startup ideas or their professional development could also go a long way. Whatever this year’s rising class of seniors chooses, the decision is up to them regardless of what their college decisions want to dictate.


Read more here:

4) Shoot Me Baby One More Time! Ruhaan Sood


Oh Donnie Donald, how were we supposed to know… that something wasn’t right here?


Trump’s world has collapsed more times than we have fingers on our hands. Take January 6th, the allegations of election fraud, Stormy Daniels, the two survived assassination attempts, and of course, being denounced by Taylor Swift and her army of “swifties.”


FiveThirtyEight explains that Trump’s current favorability rates stand at 52.8%, the highest it’s ever stood. Somehow, the former president hasn’t buckled yet under his large criticism. Senators have called for his removal, some activists have completely denounced his authority, and the only ones left on the Trump side are the self-proclaimed “MAGA” republicans. All of it caps to a certain extent, though.


The question is: when did Trump start believing those in Springfield were eating dogs and cats? (His Descent Into Madness)


Donald Trump is the fourth heir under his father Fred Trump.  Fred was estimated to be worth up to 300 million USD which Donald doesn’t like to credit for his success, stating he “came from nothing.” In a 1980 interview, a 34-year-old Donald Trump referred to politics as "a very mean life" and suggested that "the most capable people" tend to opt for business instead. However, by 1987, he began hinting at a potential run for president. Trump flirted with the idea of entering the 2000 race under the Reform Party and later considered running as a Republican in 2012. He became one of the loudest voices promoting the "birther" conspiracy theory, which falsely questioned whether Barack Obama was born in the U.S. He didn't acknowledge the falsehood until 2016 and never issued an apology.

In June 2015, Trump officially launched his presidential campaign, declaring that the American Dream was dead but vowing to "bring it back bigger and better." His unconventional announcement highlighted his wealth and business achievements while accusing Mexico  and other Central American countries of sending drugs, crime, and rapists to the U.S., alongside a promise to make Mexico pay for a border wall. His aggressive debate performances, controversial policies, and bold statements captivated both supporters and detractors, while fueling an avalanche of media coverage.

In the most recent survey, 58% of women expressed support for Harris, while 36% backed Trump. This is an increase from last month's Quinnipiac poll, where 53% of women favored Biden and 41% supported Trump. Men's preferences remained relatively stable. In the latest poll, 53% said they would vote for Trump, with 42% choosing Harris, compared to December's figures of 51% for Trump and 41% for Harris. "The gender demographic reveals an important trend to watch," explains Tim Malloy, a polling analyst at Quinnipiac University. "In just a few weeks, support from female voters has shifted Harris from a tie with Trump to a modest lead."

Females are the least bit of criticism that Donald should be worrying about, however. In reality, the entire population of the GOP may be switching on him. The actions of his vice president, J.D Vance, haven’t been of good intentions either. Multiple times, J.D Vance described unmarried women as “childless cat ladies,” including Taylor Swift. Swift promptly responded with a cat-themed photoshoot and a full endorsement for Harris-Walz. The incident brought upon the following:

Over 406,000 people were redirected to vote.gov in likely favor of Harris.

Trump proclaimed on Truth Social: “I hate Taylor Swift.”

On September 15th, 2024, Trump was implicated in an attempted assassination for the second time in a row since his original rally, which left his ear injured. 

With election day just 2 months away, how many times will Trump take on criticism before the next bullet hits a major organ?

Read more here:

The Red Folder is brought to you by Lindsey Zhao and the News Brief Team:

Interested in becoming a contributor? You can apply to join our staff team here.