Category Archives: Politics

Republicans Who Address Income Inequality

Posted on September 10, 2008 | Leave a comment

It deserves notice that there are a few Republicans who are taking income inequality seriously and see it as something which needs to be addressed.

David Frum wrote an article in Sunday’s NY Times about how regions with high income inequality tend to vote democratic. He pointed out that if Republicans don’t address growing inequality, they will keep losing districts. Politically expedient, yes, but Frum has written an entire book on the need for a more compassionate conservatism.

Atlantic editors Ross Douthat and Reihan Salam also have a book out: Grand New Party: How Republicans Can Win the Working Class and Save the American Dream. And Minnesota governor Tim Pawlenty, who was reputedly on the shortest of short lists to be McCain’s VP, is credited with coining the term “Sam’s Club Republicans.”

Are these guys purely recognizing that working class whites are a bulwark of the Republican base, and therefore must be helped? Or do they actually recognize a moral or fairness problem with growing income inequality? I don’t know, and I haven’t read their books yet to find out. But either way, they are rare, and should be saluted at the very least for thinking differently.

Plus, I am about to start a series of posts that will attack Republican thinking and policies, so I feel like I should say something positive first.

Leave a comment

Posted in Politics, Trends

Tagged , , ,

Why Voters Hate Campaign Spinners

Posted on September 4, 2008 | 2 comments

Why? Because they lie and/or refuse to answer questions.

Example one: McCain’s senior advisor Steve Schmidt was quoted in today Wall Street Journal about whether Sarah Palin had been fully vetted:

This vetting controversy is a faux media scandal designed to destroy the first female Republican nominee for vice president of the United States.

That is nonsense, a blatant lie. Wondering how a presidential candidate made a giant decision (his choice of a VP) is a totally legitimate line of questioning. Even if you support McCain and Palin, you might wonder “did he really know everything? Did he rush into that pick?” To claim that it’s a “faux media scandal” is ridiculous. That is what journalists are supposed to do: ask tough questions.

 

Example two: this clip from CNN, which has gotten a fair amount of buzz. In it, CNN’s Campbell Brown asks McCain spokesman Tucker Bounds some simple and legitimate questions about Sarah Palin. He ducks and weaves, refusing to answer the questions, and then attacks the journalist for “belittling” Palin. Avoiding questions and sliming people makes the average voter completely tune out these spinmeisters.

 

2 Comments

Posted in Politics

Tagged , , ,

More On Income Inequality

Posted on September 3, 2008 | Leave a comment

Princeton economist Alan Blinder wrote an op-ed in the NY Times recently describing a new study that showed income inquality increasing during Republican administrations and decreasing during Democratic adminstrations. This pattern goes back for the last 60 years. The study also notes that the economy has grown faster under Democrats during the same 60 year period.

Although Blinder has worked in Democratic administrations, he is a big deal economist. His textbook Economics: Principles and Policy, written with William Baumol, is a classic, which I used as an economics major in college.

Leave a comment

Posted in Business, Politics, Trends

Tagged , , ,

Thoughts on Sarah Palin

Posted on September 2, 2008 | 4 comments

Everyone else has commented on Sarah Palin, the surprise VP pick of John McCain, so I might as well throw down my thoughts.

In several ways, she is a very clever tactical pick for him:

  • The Republican base loves her
  • Picking a woman reestablishes McCain’s maverick reputation
  • And makes a blatant play for the disaffected Hillary Clinton supporters
  • She is a fresh new face, a Washington outsider, so McCain can play the change card

On the other hand, her selection completely eviscerates the McCain argument against Obama that seemed to be working best: that he is too inexperienced to be president. Palin’s dearth of experience makes Obama seem like a wizened old man. Mayor of Wasilla, Alaska, population 8,471, leading to a couple of years as governor of a state with population: grizzly bears. Seriously, Alaska has a population of 670,000, which is smaller than San Francisco, where I live, and nobody is suggesting that our mayor Gavin Newsom is qualified to be president (and that’s not just because he is a marginally competent pretty-boy tool).

Republican supporters are talking up Palin’s “executive experience,” but that is as moronic as Fox News’ claim that she has international experience because Alaska is near Russia. Does anybody really think that being an “executive” is that much different than running a Senate office? That’s like saying your marketing VP isn’t qualified to be CEO because she hasn’t run a whole company even though VPs of marketing make great CEOs all the time.

Most Hillary Clinton supporters I have seen interviewed have been insulted by the concept that they will get behind Palin just because she is a woman. However, the hard core PUMAs, who I have queried before, seem mixed. Which is moderately crazy, given that Palin supports none of the causes that Hillary does, and is especially conservative on the traditionally feminist causes.

Finally, I reckon I should comment on the new controversy, about whether Palin will have time to be VP and to be a good mother, and whether it’s sexist to even bring it up. She is the one who positioned herself as a “family values” candidate, so I feel like her family values are fair game. I should also note that having five kids, one an infant with Down’s syndrome, is a lot of work, for both the mother and the father. As I told my friend Catalina, when feminists say “nobody questions whether Obama can manage being president and being a father,” I have to reply that Obama has only two children, both healthy. That being said, there is no question that our society has higher expectations of mothers than of fathers, and it’s entirely likely that if Todd Palin were the VP candidate, nobody would be questioning his ability to manage.

4 Comments

Posted in Politics

Tagged , , , ,

Presidential Campaign or 3rd Grade?

Posted on August 28, 2008 | 2 comments

Yesterday’s Wall Street Journal had an article about the Republican war room set up during the Democratic convention. This war room was meant to spin the Democratic speeches, massage the news cycle, publicize Democratic mistakes, all that process stuff that consultants love to do.

This article describes the reaction in the war room when Barack Obama says on his video feed that he is in a living room in St. Louis when in fact he was in Kansas City:

…the Republican operatives who had been tasked with undercutting the Democratic message here in Denver were electrified. “Woo-hoo!” one shouted, pumping his fist in the air. “Boo-yah!” another yelled.

Within minutes, an email went out to more than 600 reporters with the title: “Obama Gaffe Machine Rolls into DNCC.”

Really? You are running for President of the United States, the most powerful job in the world, and that is how you operate? You jump on a slip of the tongue and then taunt the other guy? I’m not just calling out the Republicans here….the Dems will do the exact same thing during the GOP convention. But we have two substantive candidates running at a tremendously important time. Our country is at war and our economy is going down the toilet. Don’t you think the campaigns could stop acting like third graders on the schoolyard?

2 Comments

Posted in Politics, Trends

Tagged , , , ,

What Do Clinton Supporters Want?

Posted on August 21, 2008 | 4 comments

A new poll is out that shows McCain in a dead heat with Obama, closing the several point lead that Obama had been holding. The same poll shows that fully half of those who voted for Hillary Clinton are not supporting Obama. And I am wondering why. It seems to me that if you support Clinton’s policies, there is no way that you can vote for McCain; he is fiscally and socially conservative and staunchly against reproductive rights. So why are so many Clinton voters against Obama? Here are some possibilities:

  • They believe that experience really is paramount, and that Clinton had it while Obama doesn’t
  • They are more conservative than their support of Clinton would indicate
  • They think Obama is arrogant and elitist
  • They won’t vote for a black
  • They are still angry about perceived sexism in the primary and are taking their anger out on Obama (by the way, I still haven’t seen a concrete example of this sexism)
  • They are still angry that Clinton lost and are taking their anger out on Obama

I’m sure that there are other reasons too. And while I could deconstruct all of the above rationales, right now I am curious which ones are driving the Clinton supporters. So if you have any ideas, or if you are a Clinton supporter, please comment and let me know. Because I am genuinely curious.

4 Comments

Posted in Politics, Trends

Tagged , , , ,

Modern Corruption: Deny Until the Cell Door Closes

Posted on August 8, 2008 | 2 comments

Kwame Kilpatrick, the mayor of Detroit, is caught up in a maelstrom of legal troubles. Accused of firing several police officers because they wouldn’t help cover up his affair with a one of his employees, he denied the affair until text messages revealed his deceit. He has been charged by the Wayne County prosecutor with several felonies, but he refuses to step down. He was just jailed for violating the terms of his bond, and today is being charged with two felony counts of assaulting a police officer. Still he denies all wrongdoing and refuses to resign. It’s hard to imagine that the city is being well run while its mayor is in and out of jail, but Kilpatrick is clearly more interested in his name than in the city he was elected to lead. Does Mayor Kilpatrick have no sense of decency?

But really, Kilpatrick is just an example of a growing trend among corrupt politicians: pretend it isn’t happening, totally reject all claims, and continue your denials until the day you’re in prison.

Senator Larry Craig, so amusingly charged with soliciting gay sex in an airport bathroom, has categorically denied that was his intent, and his famous “wide stance” excuse became the butt (I couldn’t resist) of much humor on the late night shows.

The FBI found $90,000 in marked bills in the refrigerator of Congressman William Jefferson, but he denies all wrongdoing and refuses to resign. Senator Ted Stevens was just indicted for failing to disclose oil company gifts. He claims complete innocence and is planning his reelection campaign. Congressman John Doolittle (what a great name for a modern congressman) was implicated in the Jack Abramoff scandal and admits paying his wife a 15% commission on all campaign contributions, but he denies any mendacity and refused to resign, choosing instead to retire at the end of his term.

Gavin Newsom, the mayor here in San Francisco, had an affair with his best friend’s wife, at a time when both the friend and the wife were on Gavin’s payroll. Mayor Newsom at least admitted the affair, but did so using the popular new excuse of addiction, and immediately went into treatment. There was no talk of him resigning, and in fact Mayor Newsom is gearing up a run for Governor.

The common theme in all these examples is the refusal to resign for the good of the office and its constituency. These politicians declined to admit or take responsibility for their actions and the impact those actions could have. They were all elected to serve, but ultimately they put their own need (to claim innocence) above the need (for effective representation) of the people who elected them. Whatever happened to admitting wrongdoing? It’s not like these guys are going to get away with it; if the accusations are true, they will be convicted and go to jail. But honestly, I don’t care if they keep denying – just get out of office so that somebody effective can come in and serve the public.

Implications? These politicians are really part of a broader evasion of responsibility, which I will have to write about later. But for now, the main beneficiaries of this trend are media companies. If Mayor Kilpatrick and Senator Craig would do the right thing and resign, then media companies (and blogs!) wouldn’t be able to milk the stories for weeks on end.

2 Comments

Posted in Politics, Trends

Tagged , , , , , ,

Is the Public Turning Against Pork?

Posted on July 30, 2008 | 4 comments

Pat Toomey of the Club for Growth wrote an op-ed recently in which he described a nationwide poll that the Club recently commissioned. This poll showed that 54% of people would prefer a congressman who cuts overall federal spending, including spending in their district, while only 29% would prefer a candidate who increases federal spending but keep some of that spending coming home in pork barrel projects.

I’m no expert on polls and polling, nor have I seen the details of this poll, so I can’t comment on how they phrased the question or whether they skewed the data. Certainly the Club for Growth would want this poll to show exactly what they are saying it did, since the Club hates earmarks more than I hate flip-flops. But let’s assume that this was a well-executed poll. Are Americans really ready to let go of pork barrel spending in their district? I hope so.

This is an exceedingly rare occurrence, Halley’s Comet (also see) rare, when I want the same thing as the Club for Growth. In general, I think of the Club as representing greedy, mean-spirited, upper-middle-class older white men. But I really do hope this poll is right, because pork barrel politics are awful. Earmarks make for bad policy and they waste precious resources. In addition, they encourage irresponsible behavior in voters, who get trained to support any crappy project, as long as it brings federal dollars to their community.

But maybe, just maybe, that attitude is changing, and the Club for Growth poll is capturing this change. Press coverage of pork has been building over the past few years, and the Jack Abramoff scandal blew the whole lobbyist-earmark connection way into the mainstream. It’s possible that people, at least 54% of people, have realized that the overall cost of pork is greater than the benefit it brings to their district. It’s possible that they would rather their representatives focus on fixing problems than creating busy work in the district.

News of Ted Stevens’ indictment is coming out as I write this. He was an apologetic king of pork, with his reign culminating in the famous $320 million Bridge to Nowhere. Maybe that bridge served as pork’s crowning feast, so egregious that it finally made Americans realize how corrosive earmarks truly are.

4 Comments

Posted in Business, Politics

Tagged , , , ,

Why Are Taxpayers Helping Tomato Growers?

Posted on July 25, 2008 | Leave a comment

There was an article in today’s Wall Street Journal about how the tomato industry is asking for $100 million cash to make up for lost revenue during the recent salmonella scare, and Congressman Tim Mahoney, a Democrat from Florida, where many tomato growers are based, is introducing legislation to make it happen.

This is today’s example of privatizing profits while socializing losses. This is a topic I will return to many times since it features several of my pet peeves:

  1. Greed in the private sector
  2. Venal politicians
  3. A system which benefits the powerful and well-connected at the expense of the average taxpayer

To be honest, this is not the best example ever. A legitimate case could be made that since government shut down the tomato industry to protect the health of all Americans, all Americans should pay for the damages. I reject that case because the food industry has long rejected government efforts to improve safety. I further reject it because if the government had done something that temporarily increased tomato industry profits (eg. FDA announces that tomatoes cure obesity, and then takes it back) you can be certain that the industry would not return its windfall profits to the taxpayers.

With that case summarily dismissed, like so many Lotharios in so many bars, let’s turn to why this tomato cause vexes me so. Tomato farmers and packers are in business to make money, so their incentive to recover losses is understandable, especially since it appears that their product was not the salmonella vector. But on the other hand, theirs is a risky business. Produce is susceptible to weather, to bugs, to the whims of the market – should the taxpayers pay whenever something goes wrong? The food industry in the US has had ample opportunity to clean up its act, but has chosen instead to save money. And now, because the food industry caused disease, they expect us to pay. My view: this is the cost of doing business.

As for Congressman Mahoney, representing the tomato district of Florida, in the 2007-2008 election cycle he has received nearly $95,000 in campaign contributions from agricultural concerns, making them his fifth largest donor base. He has a national debt clock on the front page of his web site, showing $32,525 in debt per citizen as I write this, but that isn’t preventing him from giving $100 million of taxpayer money away to a few connected tomato producers who provide campaign contributions which allow him to remain in power. That’s what I call venal.

Part of the problem – beyond greedy people and venal politicians – is that the system encourages this behavior. The greedy people with significant capital at stake have heavy incentives to apply their resources toward a leverage point. The venal politician who wants campaign contributions is that leverage point. And the average taxpayer has no say in the matter. Until there is some stronger system of campaign finance reform, or an organization with major dollars to deploy on behalf of the common citizen, we are going to have to rely on corporations not being greedy or politicians not being venal and power hungry. Good luck with that.

Leave a comment

Posted in Business, Politics

Tagged , , , ,

Adminstration Denials per Column Inch

Posted on July 21, 2008 | Leave a comment

Today’s Wall Street Journal had a page 2 article on the role of Vice President Cheney’s office in quashing any EPA action on greenhouse gases. The article was based on a report produced by a House committee chaired by Congressman Ed Markey (D-Mass).

The report (which to be fair, almost certainly has some political bias against Mr. Cheney) covers the same ground as other publications have, namely that the EPA was moving toward using the Clean Air Act to regulate greenhouse gases until Cheney’s office reached out and touched the EPA.

For me, the remarkable thing is not that Cheney did this – we all know about his meddling ways – but how blatantly the administration denies it. In fact, in the course of this single WSJ article (2 half page columns, 615 words according to my word processor), there are three blanket denials of something that has been reported repeatedly:

White House spokesman Tony Fratto: “Chairman Markey’s report is inaccurate to the point of being laughable.”

Cheney spokeswoman Megan Mitchell: “I don’t accept their premise.”

Energy Department spokeswoman Angela Hill: Energy Secretary Bodman “has not reversed course.”

That’s one denial every 205 words. Who takes these jobs as spokesmen and spokeswomen?

Leave a comment

Posted in Politics

Tagged ,