November 2024 APA Newsletter
Foreword
Following an incredibly difficult and divisive election cycle, we find ourselves facing a very new elected government for the upcoming four years. For some this was an unexpected result, while for others this came as no surprise. Former President Trump won with dramatic turnout and electoral shifts - which should cause both parties to critically analyze this election, and what it tells us about the American populace. Regardless of who you voted for, we urge people to continue to engage in discussions with friends, family, and strangers. A better understanding of why the election played out the way it did will surely foster a stronger democracy rooted in the principal ideas of our nation. Although the election may be over, and the results tallied, the debates that we saw this past year are far from over. We encourage continued engagement in politics, with the underlying promise of respect and understanding.
Best,
APA Newsletter Committee
@americanpoliticsassociation
Mission Statement
The American Politics Association (APA) aims to provide the St Andrews community with a platform for open and nonpartisan conversation surrounding U.S. politics.
With frequent discussions, podcasts, newsletters, and more, the APA strives to promote awareness of the changing political environment and recent developments. We also seek to support students who are interested in a career in U.S. politics and foster a space for networking.
We encourage people of all backgrounds and subject areas to join us on our mission to increase engagement and awareness surrounding U.S politics in the St Andrews community and beyond.
Election 2024
Election Overview - Ainsley McLoy
After months of candidate selection, campaign rallies and emboldened speeches, the race for Congress and the White House has concluded. With both electoral college and popular vote, Former President Donald Trump prevailed against Vice President Kamala Harris. The Republican Party has also claimed majorities in both the House of Representatives and the Senate. Overall, the 2024 election cycle resulted in a Republican sweep across the board. The 47th occupier of the Oval Office is determined by an electoral system where votes are totaled up state by state. Each state victor is allocated a number of Electoral votes that mirrors the number of senators and representatives in their national delegation. To win the electoral college, a presidential candidate needs at least 270 (more than half of total) electoral votes. In November, seven swing states (Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, North Carolina, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin) ultimately decided the fate of the US election. Contrary to poll predictions, Mr. Trump won every swing by a margin of 1-2%. These crucial victories resulted in a conservative electoral result with 312 of 538 total votes. However, while the Republican candidate’s victory was clear, he did not achieve an overwhelming majority. Ms. Harris gathered 48.3% of the popular vote compared to Mr. Trumps’ 49.9%. This narrow margin, the first republican popular victory since 2004, demonstrates how close the 2024 election was on an individual-voter level.
After the election was called, Ms. Harris addressed her voters, assuring them of the peaceful transfer of power and calling supporters to not lose hope and to continue fighting for their ideals. Mr. Trump recognized his supporters in an acceptance speech that reemphasized his commitment to policy plans and anticipated America’s success by “putting America first.” His victory speech also brought forth key staff appointments, namely Susie Wiles, Robert F Kennedy Jr., and Elon Musk. In addition to the presidential appointment, congressional elections took place during the 2024 Election cycle. The 119th Senate had 34 seats up for election. This year, Democrats were in a sub-optimal position to maintain their majority because more democratic seats were available for reelection. Democrats (and Independents) lost 4 net seats to Republicans, resulting in a Conservative majority of 53 seats to a minority of 47 seats. The House of Representatives had all 435 seats up for election, of which Republicans won 220 (218 to win), thus securing another Republican term for the House. The results of the 2024 Election secured a Republican trifecta, giving the party more power to pass legislation during the next two years (until the 2026 Congressional elections). To sum up, the 2024 election marked a decisive victory for the Republican Party. Former President Donald Trump won over Vice President Kamala Harris in both the popular vote and the Electoral College, while Republicans also gained control of both the House of Representatives and the Senate. In their final speeches, both presidential candidates looked to the future with hope for a greater America and a better world.
BBC (2024). US Presidential Election Results 2024. BBC News. [online] Available at: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election/2024/us/results.
Harris, K. (2024). 2024 Election Concession Speech. [online] Available at: https://time.com/7173617/kamala-harris-concession-speech-full-transcript/
Trump, D. (2024). 2024 Election Victory Speech. [online] Available at: https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-victory-speech-full-transcript-1981234.
Financial Times. (2024a). House of Representatives: Live 2024 Election Results. [online] Available at: https://ig.ft.com/us-elections/2024/results/house/.
Financial Times. (2024b). Senate: Live 2024 Election Results. [online] Available at: https://ig.ft.com/us-elections/2024/results/senate/?seat_id=S-AZ-01 [Accessed 29 Nov. 2024]
Senate and House Races - Ellen Winters
Beyond the Presidential election, the 2024 election cycle saw critical races for both House and Senate. Realizing the stakes of the presidency, both parties emphasized the importance of control of Congress. A party majority in both chambers will be incredibly influential to the efficacy of the next presidency, regardless of who won.
Beginning in the House of Representatives, majority control consists of 218 seats. In the 118th Congress, Republicans hold a slim majority of 220 seats, with Democrats holding 213. After the election, Republicans continue to hold 220 seats, with Democrats holding 215. Compared to the Senate, the Republican side of Congress is very diverse in terms of views, meaning that although Republicans hold a majority, it is not an entirely comfortable majority for the Trump Administration.
The Senate of the 118th Congress began at a similar close margin, with 47 Democratic seats, 49 Republican seats, and 4 Independent seats. Importantly, neither party had a majority, meaning that Vice President Harris served as a tiebreaker vote. However, following the results of this past election, Republicans now control the Senate by a narrow margin, with 53 seats. Republicans flipped 4 seats, and Democrats flipped 1 seat. Among these races were some incredibly close races - such as in Pennsylvania, where incumbent Senator Casey was ousted by a margin of 0.2%, resulting in over a week’s delay in calling the election.
Overall, the nation saw a rightward shift almost unilaterally. As the New York Times reports, “Of the counties with nearly complete results, more than 89 percent shifted in favor of former President Donald J. Trump.” This will give the Republican party control of the Presidency, House of Representatives, and Senate. Additionally, the Supreme Court is comprised of a majority of conservative justices. This being said, full Republican majority does not mean that President Trump will have universal power. Both the Senate and House remain within relatively small margins, and a great deal of bipartisanship already exists. As seen with President Trump’s cabinet picks, there already has been disagreement amongst the Republican side of the aisle. As for how legislation will be treated, we will have to wait and see. In this Republican era of American politics, it is likely that conservative lawmakers will find it easier than before to pass legislation, but the threat of fighting and discord within the party could cause issues for them in making any radical reform.
FitzGerald, James. 2024. “Slim majority for Republicans after Democrats flip final House seat.” BBC News. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cwyder59wn9o.
U.S. House of Representatives Press Gallery. 2024. Party Breakdown. https://pressgallery.house.gov/member-data/party-breakdown.
U.S. Senate. 2024. Party Divisions. https://www.senate.gov/history/partydiv.htm.
NPR. 2024. Senate Results. https://apps.npr.org/2024-election-results/senate.html.
Bloch, Matthew, Collins, Keith, Gebeloff, Robert, et. al. 2024. “Election Results Show a Red Shift Across the U.S. in 2024.” The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2024/11/06/us/politics/presidential-election-2024-red-shift.html.
Adragna, Anthony, and Ursula Perano. 2024. “Negative signs for Gaetz as senators brush off questions amid Trump pressure.” Politico. https://www.politico.com/live-updates/2024/11/18/congress/gop-senators-on-gaetz-ethics-report-00190295.
Domestic Policy News
Abortion Policy - Sophia Kazan
The 2024 election had mixed results for abortion rights. Voters in ten US states voted on whether to protect the right to abortion in their state constitutions, with seven of those states voting to protect abortion access.
Ballot measures passed in Arizona, Colorado, Maryland, Missouri, Montana, Nevada, New York, and failed in Florida, Nebraska, and South Dakota. There was one restrictive measure, Nebraska Initiative 434, which proposed an amendment to the state constitution banning abortion in the second or third trimester, with exceptions in the case of medical emergency or in pregnancies conceived through incest or sexual assault. This measure passed with 54.9% of votes in favor of the restriction. In South Dakota, Florida, and Nebraska measures to protect abortion rights did not pass. In Florida, although 57% of voters supported amending the state constitution in favor of protecting the right to abortion up until fetal viability or to protect the pregnant person’s life or health, the measure required 60% of votes and thus did not pass. In South Dakota, the measure’s failure preserved a state law which dictates that it is a felony to perform an abortion, except to save the life of the mother.
A highlight for supporters of abortion rights though is Missouri, where voters undid one of the nation’s most restrictive abortion bans, now establishing a constitutional right to abortion up until fetal viability. According to polling done by the Associated Press, about half of Missourian voters supported legal abortion in all or most cases. The seven states which passed protection measures, join California, Michigan, and Vermont which passed ballot measures in 2022, and Ohio who passed a protection measure in 2023. Additionally, in 2022 voters rejected measures intended to restrict abortion access in Montana, Kansas, and Kentucky.
These measures all come back to the 2022 Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization Supreme Court decision, which returned the ability to regulate abortion to the states and thus overruled Roe v. Wade. After this overturn, twenty one states have either restricted or banned abortion. Abortion remains legal in eleven states until fetal viability, in one state until 22 weeks, in four states until 24 weeks, and in eight states there is no limit. Thus, the question of fetal viability has become central to the preservation of abortion rights, but this ill-defined term may be more problematic than helpful. The term refers to the point in a pregnancy at which a fetus can survive outside of the womb, but it is not medically universal and is often plagued with ideological interpretations rather than scientific ones. In 1973 when Roe v. Wade was passed by the Supreme Court, fetal viability was considered to be around 28 weeks of pregnancy, but thanks to advancements in medicine and treatment, babies born earlier have greater chances of survival outside of the womb and it is now closer to around 24 weeks. However, including this open ended language in legislation may make it more difficult for women to receive reproductive healthcare if dealing with questions of viability, complicated by factors such as gestational age, tubal ectopic pregnancies, genetic or isolated structural abnormalities.
Ultimately, though there were several victories for abortion rights with voters in seven states enshrining protections for abortion in their state constitutions, there are clear concerns across the country of what is to come under the impending second Trump presidency.
Eunjung Cha, Ariana and Roubein, Rachel. “Fetal viability is at the center of Mississippi abortion case. Here’s why.” The Washington Post. December 1, 2021. https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2021/12/01/what-is-viability/.
Lee, Chantelle. “How the 10 States’ Abortion Ballot Initiatives Fared in the 2024 Election.” Time Magazine. November 6, 2024. https://time.com/7173410/abortion-ballot-results-2024-election/.
Mulvihill, Geoff and Fernando, Christine. “Abortion rights advocates win in 7 states and clear way to overturn Missouri ban but lose in 3.” Associated Press. November 6, 2024. https://apnews.com/article/abortion-ballot-measures-harris-trump-florida-missouri-49c9073cbb6056b66a8a7d0d099795d1.
New York Times staff. “Abortion on the Ballot.” The New York Times. Last Updated November 29, 2024. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2024/11/05/us/elections/results-abortion.html.
Sherman, Carter and Witherspoon, Andrew. “Tracking abortion laws across the United States.” The Guardian. November 6. 2024. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2024/jul/29/abortion-laws-bans-by-state#:~:text=Since%20Roe%20was%20overturned%20in,referendums%20to%20protect%20abortion%20rights.
Foreign Policy News
Biden approves Ukraine’s use of US-made long range missiles - Zachary Mandosa
(11/19/2024) In a stunning policy reversal, President Biden has given Ukraine permission to use long-range missiles to attack Russia, despite warnings from the Kremlin that doing so would be an act of war. This policy change is likely a response to North Korea sending thousands of soldiers to Russia’s front lines to support the invasion of Ukraine and comes after months of pressure from Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. The missiles which Biden has approved, the Army Tactical Missile System (ATACMS) rockets, have a range of up to 190 miles and carry a 500 pound warhead. (Davis, 2024). This marks a strategic shift in the conflict, escalating tensions amid fears of Russian attacks on Ukraine’s power infrastructure ahead of the winter. Long-range strikes could allow Ukraine to carry out strikes on targets deep within Russia, such as ammunition depots and critical infrastructure. Ukraine carried out its first strike using ATACMS on the same day on a weapons depot near the city of Karachev, more than 70 miles away from Ukraine’s border. Following this strike, Putin updated Russia’s nuclear doctrine to say that Russia will consider using a nuclear weapon if it or its ally Belarus faces aggression from “the use of conventional weapons that created a critical threat to their sovereignty and (or) their territorial integrity.” On November 21st, Vladimir Putin announced that Russia launched a new hypersonic ballistic missile against Ukraine. According to Ukrainian air defense forces, the missile has a range of more than 3,400 miles and can carry nuclear warheads, though this is contested by a US assessment. Ukraine claims that the missile was an intercontinental ballistic missile, which would make it the first missile of its kind used in the war, though the assessment believes it was more likely to be an intermediate-range ballistic missile, which is backed by an address Putin gave to the Russian people where he called it an “one of the latest Russian intermediate-range missile systems.” This new missile, combined with Putin’s updated nuclear doctrine, may serve as a threat to countries that continue to supply arms to Ukraine, such as the UK and the United States. Analysts and observers say that the loosening of restrictions on Ukraine’s use of Western missiles is unlikely to change the course of the war, but it puts the Russian army in a more vulnerable position and complicates the logistics that are crucial in warfare.
Davis, B. (2024) ATACMS: Long-range missiles Ukraine could use to strike Russia after Biden decision, The Independent. Available at: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/atacms-ukraine-long-range-missiles-putin-biden-b2649495.html (Accessed: 22 November 2024).
Mayes-Osterman, C. (2024) Putin lowers bar for Russia to use nuclear weapons as Ukraine launches long-range missiles, USA Today. Available at: https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2024/11/19/vladimir-putin-russia-nuclear-weapon-policy-ukraine-atacm/76422107007/ (Accessed: 22 November 2024).
Croft, A. (2024) Putin says Russia fired experimental ballistic missile at Ukraine, The Independent. Available at: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/russia-ukraine-war-putin-missile-hypersonic-b2651372.html (Accessed: 22 November 2024).
United States Vetoes Security Council Resolution Calling for Ceasefire in Gaza - Sofia Panek
Last month, the United States used its veto power to prevent the passing of a United Nations Security Council draft resolution that called for “immediate and unconditional” ceasefire in Gaza, which would include full withdrawal of Israeli forces from Gaza. The draft resolution additionally called for civilians in the Gaza Strip to gain immediate access to basic services and rapid humanitarian aid. The text stressed the need to prevent “any effort to starve Palestinians” amid the impending threat of famine in Northern Gaza. Security Council members had displayed a large consensus of support for the draft resolution, with fourteen of the fifteen members (all but the U.S.) voting in favor of the resolution.
The U.S. Ambassador to the UN Robert Wood defended his position, stating that the resolution would present a “dangerous message" to Hamas, leaving the group with no incentive to return to the negotiating table. Wood emphasized that the US could not support an unconditional ceasefire without guarantees that the hostages being held by Hamas would be released,
“We made clear throughout negotiations we could not support an unconditional ceasefire that failed to release the hostages…There are still seven American citizens in the hands of Hamas. We will not forget them.”
This comes after Hamas rejected the U.S. backed three-phase, hostage-for-ceasefire proposal which had been endorsed by the Security Council in June. Additionally, Wood expressed regret that the resolution failed to condemn Hamas. Israel’s Ambassador to the UN, Danny Danon, described the draft resolution as a “roadmap to more terror” and thanked the US for exercising its veto power.
The U.S. veto has received significant backlash from other Council members, as well as the international community at large. Representatives from both Russia and China, also permanent Council members, joined in criticizing the U.S. veto. Russia’s representative declared that the actions of the U.S. do not correspond to the wishes of the Security Council or most UN member states. The representative of China expressed regret towards the U.S. veto, acknowledging that this will contribute to more deaths in Gaza. Human Rights Watch condemned the veto, stating “Once again, the U.S. used its veto to ensure impunity for Israel as its forces continue to commit crimes against Palestinians in Gaza.” This is now the fourth instance since the outbreak of the conflict that the U.S. has used its veto power in support of Israel.
“Adopting Resolution 2735 (2024) with 14 Votes in Favour, Russian Federation Abstaining, Security Council Welcomes New Gaza Ceasefire Proposal, Urges Full Implementation” , UN Meeting Coverage and Press Releases, 2024. https://press.un.org/en/2024/sc15723.doc.htm
Cursino, Malu. “US vetoes Security Council's Gaza ceasefire resolution.”BBC News, 2024,
“Explanation of Vote on a UN Security Council Resolution on the Situation in the Middle East.” United States Mission to the United Nations, 2024, https://usun.usmission.gov/explanation-of-vote-on-a-un-security-council-resolution-on-the-situation-in-the-middle-east/
“UN security council endorses US-backed hostages-for-ceasefire Gaza deal.” The Guardian, 2024, https://www.theguardian.com/world/article/2024/jun/10/un-security-council-us-gaza-ceasefire
“United States vetoes Gaza ceasefire resolution at Security Council.” UN News, 2024, https://news.un.org/en/story/2024/11/1157216
“US lost credibility by vetoing Gaza ceasefire resolution: Russia”. Islamic Republic News Agency, 2024, https://en.irna.ir/news/85670998/US-lost-credibility-by-vetoing-Gaza-ceasefire-resolution-Russia
“US vetoes UN security council push to call for ceasefire in Gaza.” The Guardian, 2024 https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/nov/20/un-gaza-vote-veto
Opinion Pieces
Tech King or Court Jester? Elon Musk’s Orbit Around the Trump Presidency - Sam Fayhee
Elon Musk is known for many things: being rich, having a dozen children, trolling, and more. But can his political aspirations take him even further? He is hoping to be “first buddy” of President Elect Trump, but his alliance seems doomed to collapse.
Capitalists have historically been entangled in presidential circles, so it is not a surprise that Musk is attempting to do the same. However, relationships of this calibre are prone to failure. Hearst and FDR fell out, Rockefeller and Morgan both had fallouts with Theodore Roosevelt. Trump, though, has a different bearing. Perhaps this relationship diverges from the historical predecessors due to the augmented exposure of presidential relationships.
Recent reports found that Elon contributed $200 million to the campaign, and this was the root of the relationship. The benefits of being friends with the president would be numerous. Musk is currently facing lawsuits and investigations from upwards of twenty groups, his companies such as Starlink and SpaceX could receive more government contracts, and he has been promised a position in the yet to be formed Department of Government Efficiency. Trump’s first term was not known for ethical practices or close following of the law, so a second term could see Musk freed from his legal burdens and made even richer due to policy influence. Cutting the federal budget by a significant amount from an advisory role would limit federal regulations and social spending which make business more costly. It would also allow Musk to skirt the ethical rules surrounding a proper government position.
Musk is well known for his takeover of Twitter, but since becoming X there has been a massive series of layoffs accompanied by a drop in share value. The likelihood that a similar plan of cutbacks would be effective for the federal government is near zero. There have also been clashes between the Trump team and Musk as he has pushed for specific cabinet picks when he is not qualified. Trump has also promised continued spending on Medicare and Social Security, so ruptures between the two are likely to be forthcoming from a budgetary perspective. Although the actual value of Musk’s presence beyond funding is unclear at this point, once the transition team’s work is finished the funding will no longer be necessary for the president. His large personality is beneficial for business, but clashes with Trump’s equally large ego.
Donald Trump decided to take on Elon as a friend due to the funding possibilities, but Musk has his own set of interests. Trump must maintain his strongman persona for his fanbase, but Musk will seemingly not play second fiddle. Acting like he is co-president will not help Elon, especially as he does not officially hold a position within the federal government. If Trump really wanted him to help pass legislation, Musk would have been in consideration for an existing position like director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy or even director of the Office of Management and Budget. It will be difficult for Musk to run his multiple enterprises and America at the same time, and it looks like Trump is now trying to get him out of the way.
“Elon Musk and Donald Trump seem besotted. Where is their Bromance Headed?,” The Economist, November 21, 2024, https://www.economist.com/briefing/2024/11/21/elon-musk-and-donald-trump-seem-besotted-where-is-their-bromance-headed.
Chris Isidore, “Elon Musk bet big on Trump. Here’s what he stands to gain – and lose – from his win,” CNN, November 7, 2024, https://edition.cnn.com/2024/11/06/business/elon-musk-election-bet/index.html.
Rhian Lubin, “Elon Musk mocks own government efficiency department with ‘I can’t believe DOGE is real’ post with laughing emojis,” Independent, November 25, 2024, https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/elon-musk-trump-doge-department-government-efficiency-b2653310.html.
How to make Elon Musk’s budget-slashing dreams come true,” The Economist, November 17, 2024, https://www.economist.com/finance-and-economics/2024/11/17/how-to-make-elon-musks-budget-slashing-dreams-come-true.
Comments