4 December 2009

4 December 2009

Today’s Tabbloid PERSONAL NEWS FOR [email protected]

FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE BLOG FEEDS

unemployment rate could jump to 15 percent and total job losses could reach 10 million, but CBO would continue to say, for all intents and purposes, that the results from their Keynesian model are more important than any real-world numbers. This is the fiscal policy version of the Wizard of Oz, and we’re supposed to ignore reality just as Dorothy and friends were supposed to ignore the man behind the curtain.

CBO, the Wizard of Oz, and the Keynesian Fairy Tale [Cato at Liberty] DEC 03, 2009 09:05P.M.

To be fair, there is nothing inherently wrong with CBO’s methodology. Economic analysis frequently requires people to make assumptions about how the world would behave with or without a certain policy. So the real question is whether Keynesian economics makes sense from a theoretical perspective, whether there is any suppporting evidence, and whether there are more compelling alternatives. Click the links and

The Obama Administration said that the so-called stimulus was necessary so that the unemployment rate would not rise above 8 percent. Indeed, the White House warned that the joblessness rate would climb to 9 percent if lawmakers did not approve the $787 billion package. Critics responded by explaining that making government bigger would divert resources from the productive sector of the economy and hurt growth. These skeptics also noted that nations using “Keynesian” policy, such as the United States in the 1930s and Japan in the 1990s, did not generate good results. And since the unemployment rate is now above 10 percent, it certainly seems like opponents were correct.

decide for yourself.

FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE BLOG FEEDS

Cato’s Legal Arguments Worry U.S. Government [Cato at Liberty]

But now the supposedly non-partisan Congressional Budget Office has jumped to the defense of the White House, estimating that the spending bill actually generated beween 600,000 and 1.6 million jobs. How can that be, you may ask, when the number of jobs has fallen by more than 3 million? The CBO neatly sidesteps that real-world concern by moving the goalposts, using a slightly more sophisticated version of Obama’s “jobs created or saved” alchemy. Their jobs-created estimate is compared to a make-believe baseline of how many jobs there would be “without the law.”

DEC 03, 2009 05:03P.M. Last month, Cato (joined by Cato senior fellow Randy Barnett) filed a brief in United States v. Comstock, a case regarding the constitutionality of a law authorizing the federal government to civilly commit anyone in the custody of the Bureau of Prisons whom the attorney general certifies to be “sexually dangerous.” The effect of such an action is to continue the certified person’s confinement after the expiration of his prison term, without proof of a new criminal violation.

CBO estimates that in the third quarter of calendar year 2009, an additional 600,000 to 1.6 million people were employed in the United States, and real (inflation-adjusted) gross domestic product (GDP) was 1.2 percent to 3.2 percent higher, than would have been the case in the absence of ARRA. …CBO’s current estimates differ only slightly from those CBO prepared in March 2009. At that time, CBO projected that in the third quarter of 2009, U.S. employment would be higher by 600,000 to 1.5 million people with ARRA than it would be without the law, and real GDP would be 1.1 percent to 3.0 percent higher. CBO’s new estimates reflect small revisions to earlier projections of the timing and magnitude of changes to spending and revenues under ARRA. …Economic output and employment in the spring and summer of 2009 were lower than CBO had projected at the beginning of the year. But in CBO’s judgment, that outcome reflects greater-than-projected weakness in the underlying economy rather than lower-than-expected effects of ARRA.

As I wrote in a previous blog post, “the use of federal power here is unconstitutional because it is not tied to any of Congress’s limited and enumerated powers.” Moreover, the government’s reliance on the Necessary and Proper Clause (Article I, Section 8), “is misplaced because that clause grants no independent power but merely ‘carries into execution’ the powers enumerated elsewhere in that section.” The commitment of prisoners after their terms end simply cannot fit into one of the enumerated powers. While we of course hope that the Supreme Court pays attention to our brief, we know that Solicitor General Elana Kagan, at least, is concerned enough about our arguments to spend several pages of the government’s reply brief addressing them (see pages 5-9).

Needless to say, this means there is no objective benchmark. The

1

Today’s Tabbloid PERSONAL NEWS FOR [email protected]

For more on Comstock, see its case page on SCOTUSwiki, which now has all the briefs and will around the Jan. 12 argument date be populated with argument previews and reviews, as well as links to media coverage.

4 December 2009

FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE BLOG FEEDS

Is Trade Policy Obsolete? [Cato at Liberty] DEC 03, 2009 03:57P.M.

FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE BLOG FEEDS That is one of the conclusions in my new paper, “Made on Earth: How Global Economic Integration Renders Trade Policy Obsolete.”

Schumer Fouls Out [Cato at Liberty]

For hundreds of years, trade policy has been premised on the assumptions that exports are good, imports are bad, and the interests of domestic producers are tantamount to the “national interest.” Though that mercantilist worldview has never been accurate, its persistence as a pillar of trade policy into the 21st century is especially confounding given the emergence and proliferation of disaggregated production processes, transnational supply chains, and cross-border investment. Those trends have blurred any meaningful distinctions between “our” producers and “their” producers and speak to a long chain of interdependent economic interests between product conception and consumption.

DEC 03, 2009 04:50P.M. Chuck Schumer is perhaps my favorite U.S. Senator because of his endless capacity to make me laugh. He often reminds me of Inspector Clouseau, the earnest but bumbling detective from the Pink Panther movies. Through an excellent post by Scott Lincome today, I learned not only that official NBA jerseys (those worn by the players) are made for Adidas in upstate New York, but that Senator Schumer is attempting to thwart the company’s decision to move production to Thailand.

Still, trade policy places the interests of domestic producers above all else even though the definition of a domestic producer is elusive and even though actions on behalf of producers often harm interests along the product continuum, which include engineers, designers, financiers, processors, assemblers, marketers, shippers, retailers, consumers, and others.

I share Scott’s assessment of the absurdity of Schumer’s efforts, but more importantly, I wanted to share this humorous footage of Schumer’s awkward nativist appeal that basketball is an American-centric game….conducted in front of German-born NBA Star Dirk Nowitski’s jersey.

In 2008, foreign nameplate automobile producers, employing American workers, paying American taxes, and supporting American businesses, communities, and charities, accounted for almost half of all U.S. light vehicle production. The largest “U.S.” steel producer, Arcelor-Mittal, is a majority-Indian-owned company with headquarters in Luxembourg and Hong Kong. The largest “German” producer, Thyssen-Krupp, is completing a $3.7 billion green-field investment in steel production facilities in Alabama, which will create an estimated 2,700 jobs in that state.

Classic!

FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE BLOG FEEDS

New Website Alert! [Americans for Tax Reform] DEC 03, 2009 04:00P.M.

So, who are “we”? And who are “they”?

Today, Property Rights Alliance unveiled a new website and blog. I encourage everyone to head on over to check it out and to keep doing so

Are these foreign-named or –headquartered companies not “our” producers because some of the profits they earn are repatriated or invested in operations outside the United States? If so, then shouldn’t we consider U.S. Steel Corporation, which earned 25 percent of its revenue last year on steel produced in Slovakia and Serbia, and General Motors, which has had success producing and selling cars in China, to be “their” producers? Why should U.S. Steel, General Motors, and the unions that organize workers at those companies dictate the parameters of U.S. trade policy, while Toyota, Thyssen and their non-union workers have no input? Why should trade policy reflect a bias in favor of producers—or worse, particular producers—at all? That bias hurts other interests—both foreign-based and domestic—in the supply chain.

over and over again to stay up to date on the latest ...

Global commerce isn’t a competition between “us” and “them.” It is instead a competition between entities that defy national identification

2

Today’s Tabbloid PERSONAL NEWS FOR [email protected]

4 December 2009

because of cross-border investment or because the final good or service comprises value added from many different countries. This reality demands openness in both directions, which flies in the face of conventional trade policy wisdom, which seeks to maximize access for domestic producers abroad while minimizing access for foreign producers at home.

FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE BLOG FEEDS

It is only for simplicity’s sake that a container full of iPods shipped from China and unloaded in Seattle registers as imports from China. But the fact is that only a few dollars of the $150 cost to produce an iPod is Chinese value-added. The rest is mostly value attributable to Japanese, Korean, Singaporean, Taiwanese, and American components and labor. Then iPods retail for about $300 and most of the mark-up accrues to Apple, which uses the profits to support innovation and higher paying jobs in the United States.

DEC 03, 2009 03:44P.M.

White House Admits to its Own Incompetence [The Club for Growth] With today What a joke.

FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE BLOG FEEDS

Lying and the Federal Government [Cato at Liberty]

From a trade policy perspective, each iPod imported from China adds $150 to our bilateral deficit in “high tech” goods. It is regarded as a problem to solve. The temptation is to restrict.

DEC 03, 2009 03:11P.M.

But from a commercial perspective, each imported iPod supports U.S. economic activity up the value chain. Without access to lower-cost labor abroad—if rudimentary component manufacturing and assembly operations were required to take place in the United States—ideas hatched in American labs would be far less likely to make it beyond the white board. Much higher costs would make it far more difficult to create these ubiquitous devices that have, in turn, spawned new ideas and industries.

Speaking of White House gate-crashers Tareq and Michaele Salahi (as we were trying to think of an excuse to do, to increase blog traffic), Slate says they might be guilty of a federal crime. What crime? Well, possibly trespassing on federal property. Or maybe the “broad prohibition on lying to the federal government.” Title 18, section 1001 of the U.S. Code can be used to prosecute anyone who “knowingly and willfully … falsifies, conceals, or covers up by any trick, scheme, or device a material fact” or “makes any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or representation” to the government. That could include lying about your arrest record on a government job application, claiming a fake deduction on your taxes, or telling someone you’re on the White House invite list when you’re not.

Essentially, the factory floor has broken through its walls and today spans borders and oceans, making Chinese and American labor complementary in this and many other industries. Yet, despite all of this integration, despite the reliance of producers in the United States and abroad on imported raw materials, components, and capital equipment, trade policy still pretends that access to the domestic market is a favor to grant or a privilege to revoke. Trade policy is officially ignorant of commercial reality.

I can’t help wondering, is there any equally broad prohibition on lying by the federal government? If the federal government, or a federal agency, or a federal official “knowingly and willfully … falsifies, conceals, or covers up” information or “makes any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or representation” — about the costs of a new entitlement, or how a candidate for reelection will act in his next term, or case for going to war — is that prohibited? Or are the rules tougher on

Openness to trade in both directions is an imperative in the 21st century. Policies that do not try to channel incentives for the benefit of specific groups but rather provide the greatest opportunities for citizens to participate most effectively in our increasingly integrated global economy are the ones that will maximize economic growth and national welfare. People in other countries should be thought of more as customers, suppliers, and potential collaborators instead of competitive threats.

the ruled than the rulers?

In the 21st century, instead of serving the exclusive interests of domestic producers, trade policy should be about welcoming investment and attracting and cultivating the human capital necessary to make the United States the location of choice for the world’s highest value economic activities.

3

Today’s Tabbloid PERSONAL NEWS FOR [email protected]

FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE BLOG FEEDS

4 December 2009

on the unemployment rolls.

Today’s White House ‘Jobs Summit’ [Cato at Liberty‘Jobs Summit’]

FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE BLOG FEEDS

College Students to Taxpayers: ‘Rent Now, Oppressors!’ [Cato at Liberty‘Rent Now, Oppressors!’]

DEC 03, 2009 01:15P.M. Today’s Politico Arena asks: The WH Jobs Summit: “A little less conversation? A little more action? ( please)”

DEC 03, 2009 12:46P.M. My response: Inside Higher Ed reports today on growing college student acitivism. And what are the young scholars suddenly so active about? Not unjust wars, racism, or anything else so high-minded. No, today the “no justice, no peace!” chants are all about the injustice of students being asked to pay for more of their hugely taxpayer-subsidized educations.

Today’s White House “jobs summit” reflects little more, doubtless, than growing administration panic over the political implications of the unemployment picture. With the 2010 election season looming just ahead, and little prospect that unemployment numbers will soon improve, Democrats feel compelled to “do something” — reflecting their general belief that for nearly every problem there’s a government solution. Thus, this summit is heavily stacked with proponents of government action. This morning’s Wall Street Journal tells us, for example, that “AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka is proposing a plan that would extend jobless benefits, send billions in relief to the states, open up credit to small businesses, pour more into infrastructure projects, and bring throngs of new workers onto the federal payroll — at a cost of between $400 billion and $500 billion.” If Obama falls for that, we’ll be in this recession far beyond the 2010 elections.

There’s a word for this kind of activism, and it’s not “idealism” or anything else so complimentary. It’s “rent seeking.” Or, if you want to put it more bluntly, “freeloading.”

FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE BLOG FEEDS

ATR Will Rate Any and All Votes To Kill the Death Tax [Americans for Tax Reform]

The main reason we’re in this mess, after all, is because government – from the Fed’s easy money to the Community Reinvestment Act and the policies of Freddy and Fannie — encouraged what amounted to a giant Ponzi scheme. So what is the administration’s response to this irresponsible behavior? Why, it’s brainchilds like ”cash for clunkers,” which cost taxpayers $24,000 for each car sold. Comedians can’t make this stuff up. It takes big-government thinkers.

DEC 03, 2009 12:29P.M. This afternoon, the House will be voting on a bill to permanently create a death tax with a 45 percent rate and a $3.5 million exemption. This bill has many challenges, and will not be supported...

Americans will start to find jobs not when government pays them to sweep streets or caulk their own homes but when small businesses get back on their feet. Yet that won’t happen as long as the kinds of taxes and national indebtedness that are inherent in such schemes as ObamaCare hang over our heads. Milton Friedman put it well: “No one spends someone else’s money as carefully as he spends his own.” Yet the very definition of Obamanomics is spending other people’s money. If he’s truly worried about the looming 2010 elections (and beyond), Mr. Obama should look to the editorial page of this morning’s Wall Street Journal, where he’ll read that in both Westchester and Nassau Counties in New York — New York! — Democratic county executives have just been thrown out of office, and the dominant reason is taxes. Two more

4

Today’s Tabbloid PERSONAL NEWS FOR [email protected]

FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE BLOG FEEDS

4 December 2009

Surely the steadily depreciating dollar and the surging gold price are bad omens for the future economy. In fact, inflation rates have been edging higher in recent months and will likely continue upward in the months ahead. Import prices channeled through the weak dollar have been rising. So while many of us hoped the Fed chair would be forced to address the gold question, he never did.

Thursday Links [Cato at Liberty] DEC 03, 2009 11:37A.M. • A few questions for Ben Bernanke: “Perhaps the most important question Bernanke should answer is: how will he re-build and maintain an independent Fed?”

Bernanke did respond to questions on the declining dollar exchange rate, but as he always does, he insisted that it doesn’t matter as long as inflation is low. Huh? If you print more dollars than the rest of the world requires, surely this means too much money chasing too few goods. And as Art Laffer has pointed out, the exchange-rate mechanism is itself a transmitter of higher domestic prices.

• Before considering Bernanke’s role in containing the financial crisis, Congress should investigate the role of Fed policy in allowing the housing bubble to grow.

Time and again Bernanke argued that the Fed was not to blame for the ultra-easy money that created the housing and commodity bubble which got us into this soup in the first place. He insisted that bankers were to blame for their “risky” lending policies, and he acknowledged that the Fed should have been tougher as a bank regulator.

• Prepare to pay more: Today, an average insurance policy can cost about $2,985 for an individual or $6,328 for a family. Under the Senate bill, those premiums will increase to $5,800 for an individual worker and $15,200 for a family plan by 2016. • Why the White House “jobs summit” is unnecessary.

But the point that escapes Bernanke is that negative real interest rates and excess money-creation trigger a chain of consequences throughout the financial system. Mistakes were made left and right that might never have been made had the dollar been sound and the inflationary bubble never appeared.

• Made on Earth: How global economic integration renders trade policy obsolete. • Podcast: “ObamaCare the Budget Buster.” More, here.

In effect, you get what you pay for. The Fed paid for easy money, and we all got the recessionary credit-crunching consequences of the Fed’s mistake. FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE BLOG FEEDS

DEC 03, 2009 11:35A.M.

By failing to heed the message of financial and commodity prices, future Fed decisions are likely to be just as flawed as past ones. It isn’t that Bernanke lacks the brains. It’s that he’s employing the wrong monetary model. Targeting the unemployment rate means always erring on the side of ease. On the other hand, targeting market-price signals would get us back to the financial and economic stability of most of the 1980s and 1990s.

Fed head Ben Bernanke got hammered today during his reconfirmation hearing in front of the Senate Banking Committee. Jim Bunning was Bernanke’s toughest critic, followed by Richard Shelby, Jim DeMint, and yes, Chris Dodd, the beleaguered committee chair who in all likelihood will be defeated in Connecticut next year.

The economy is improving, however slowly. And market-price indicators are telling the Fed to curb its balance sheet and let its target rate float upward. Regrettably, until the dollar and gold vigilantes punish the central bank even more, Bernanke will continue to stubbornly resist this message.

But unfortunately no one directly asked Bernanke why the current gold price has surged to over $1,200, and what that might mean for future inflation and the U.S. economy.

Heck, even Tiger Woods fessed up and came clean. Now it’s time for the

No Solid Gold Performance from Bernanke [Larry Kudlow’s Money Politic$]

Fed chief to do likewise.

The Wall Street Journal editorialized this morning that “the country needs a new Fed chief.” The editors went on to say that while the Fed chair knows how to ease money, there’s no evidence during his tenure as Fed chief (or formerly as Alan Greenspan’s copilot) that he knows how to make money sufficiently scarce in order to protect the dollar and prevent inflation.

5

Today’s Tabbloid PERSONAL NEWS FOR [email protected]

4 December 2009

FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE BLOG FEEDS *Robert Reich, Fmr. Labor Secretary; Author, “Supercapitalism”; CNBC Contributor; Univ. of CA., Berkeley, Prof. of Public Policy *Steve Moore, Sr Economics Writer for the Wall Street Journal Editorial Board; “The End of Prosperity” Co-Author

Thursday’s Daily News [The Club for Growth] DEC 03, 2009 11:20A.M.

TIGER TROUBLES The price of being in the public eye

National Review has an online symposium on Obama new poll shows Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D-AR) losing to all Republican challengers.

Daily Beast Chief Investigative Reporter Gerald Posner will join us. Please join us. The Kudlow Report. 7pm ET. CNBC. FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE BLOG FEEDS

On CNBC’s Kudlow Report Tonight [Larry Kudlow’s Money Politic$]

FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE BLOG FEEDS

Another 1,000+Page Bill [The Club for Growth]

DEC 03, 2009 10:29A.M.

DEC 03, 2009 10:26A.M. House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank (D-MA) By comparison, the ugly Medicare drug bill of 2003 proposed by the bigspending Republicans was 747 pages.

FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE BLOG FEEDS

Three Keys to Surveillance Success: Location, Location, Location [Cato at Liberty]

This evening at 7pm ET: A 2ND TERM? BERNANKE IN THE HOT SEAT CNBC’s Hampton Pearson reports. *Sen. Richard Shelby (R-AL) Banking Cmte. Ranking Member will be aboard.

DEC 03, 2009 10:14A.M. The invaluable Chris Soghoian has posted some illuminating—and sobering—information on the scope of surveillance being carried out with the assistance of telecommunications providers. The entire panel discussion from this year’s ISS World surveillance conference is well worth listening to in full, but surely the most striking item is a direct quotation from Sprint’s head of electronic surveillance:

BERNANKE: SHOULD HE STAY OR SHOULD HE GO? Panel: *Peter Navarro, “The Coming China Wars” Author; University Of California - Irvine Business Professor *Andy Busch, BMO Capital Markets; CNBC Contributor *Lyle Gramley, Former Federal Reserve Governor; Stanford Washington Research Group Senior Economic Advisor

[M]y major concern is the volume of requests. We have a lot of things that are automated but that’s just scratching the surface. One of the things, like with our GPS tool. We turned it on the web interface for law enforcement about one year ago last month, and we just passed 8 million requests. So there is no way on earth my team could have handled 8 million requests from law enforcement, just for GPS alone. So the tool has just really caught on fire with law enforcement. They also love that it is extremely inexpensive to operate and easy, so, just the sheer volume of requests they anticipate us automating

OBAMA’S JOBS SUMMIT NBC’s Steve Handelsman reports. *Rep. John Boehner will join us with his perspective. DEBATE: WHAT’S THE RIGHT WAY TO GET AMERICA BACK TO WORK?

6

Today’s Tabbloid PERSONAL NEWS FOR [email protected]

other features, and I just don’t know how we’ll handle the millions and millions of requests that are going to come in.

4 December 2009

information sought was more extensive than what could be obtained using a National Security Letter, which requires no judicial approval. That makes it quite likely that it’s become legally easier to transform a cell phone into a tracking device even as providers are making it pointand-click simple to log into their servers and submit automated location queries. So it’s become much more urgent that the Justice Department start living up to its obligation to start telling us how often they’re using these souped-up pen/traps, and how many people are affected. In congressional debates, pen/trap orders are invariably mischaracterized as minimally intrusive, providing little more than the list of times and phone numbers they produced 30 years ago. If they’re turning into a plug-and-play solution for lojacking the population, Americans ought to know about it.

To be clear, that doesn’t mean they are giving law enforcement geolocation data on 8 million people. He’s talking about the wonderful automated backend Sprint runs for law enforcement, LSite, which allows investigators to rapidly retrieve information directly, without the burden of having to get a human being to respond to every specific request for data. Rather, says Sprint, each of those 8 million requests represents a time when an FBI computer or agent pulled up a target’s location data using their portal or API. (I don’t think you can Tweet subpoenas yet.) For an investigation whose targets are under ongoing realtime surveillance over a period of weeks or months, that could very well add up to hundreds or thousands of requests for a few individuals. So those 8 million data requests, according to a Sprint representative in the comments, actually “only” represent “several thousand” discrete cases.

If you’re interested enough in this stuff to have made it through that discussion, incidentally, come check out our debate at Cato this afternoon, either in the flesh or via webcast. There will be a simultaneous

As Kevin Bankston argues, that’s not entirely comforting. The Justice Department, Soghoian points out, is badly delinquent in reporting on its use of pen/trap orders, which are generally used to track communications routing information like phone numbers and IP addresses, but are likely to be increasingly used for location tracking. And recent changes in the law may have made it easier for intelligence agencies to turn cell phones into tracking devices. In the criminal context, the legal process for getting geolocation information depends on a variety of things—different districts have come up with different standards, and it matters whether investigators want historical records about a subject or ongoing access to location info in real time. Some courts have ruled that a full-blown warrant is required in some circumstances, in other cases a “hybrid” order consisting of a pen/trap order and a 2703(d) order. But a passage from an Inspector General’s report suggests that the 2005 PATRIOT reauthorization may have made it easier to obtain location data:

“tweetchat” hosted by the folks at Get FISA Right.

FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE BLOG FEEDS

Club Statement on White House Jobs Summit [The Club for Growth] DEC 03, 2009 10:01A.M. v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} .shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);} Normal 0 false false false false EN-US XNONE X-NONE /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-

After passage of the Reauthorization Act on March 9, 2006, combination orders became unnecessary for subscriber information and [REDACTED PHRASE]. Section 128 of the Reauthorization Act amended the FISA statute to authorize subscriber information to be provided in response to a pen register/trap and trace order. Therefore, combination orders for subscriber information were no longer necessary. In addition, OIPR determined that substantive amendments to the statute undermined the legal basis for which OIPR had received authorization [REDACTED PHRASE] from the FISA Court. Therefore, OIPR decided not to request [REDACTED PHRASE] pursuant to Section 215 until it re-briefed the issue for the FISA Court. As a result, in 2006 combination orders were submitted to the FISA Court only from January 1, 2006, through March 8, 2006.

style-name: ###

The new statutory language permits FISA pen/traps to get more information than is allowed under a traditional criminal pen/trap, with a lower standard of review, including “any temporarily assigned network address or associated routing or transmission information.” Bear in mind that it would have made sense to rely on a 215 order only if the

7

Today’s Tabbloid PERSONAL NEWS FOR [email protected]

FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE BLOG FEEDS

4 December 2009

The other favorite little piece of mine is called “Six Facts about Iraq,” which explains from Tom’s point of view – and Tom has been there a number of times – what’s going on in Iraq and why. It is only a few pages long, but I felt that I got a better sense of Iraq reading this short piece than almost anything else I’ve come across.

Palmer and Cowen on Libertarianism [Cato at Liberty] DEC 03, 2009 09:48A.M. On Tuesday I hosted a Book Forum for Tom Palmer’s new book, Realizing Freedom: Libertarian Theory, History, and Practice. You can see the video here. I thought Tyler Cowen’s comments were very astute, so I reproduce an abridged version here:

I’m not sure exactly what’s the common element between the two I liked best – they both start with a number – but I think the ones I liked best reminded me the most of Tom when he is talking. I had the sense of Tom being locked in a room, and forced to address a question, and not being allowed to leave until he had given his bottom line approach. And I think what he’s very good at through out the book is just getting directly to the point.

The first question is, “What do I, as a reader, see as the essential unity or unities in the book?” And I see really two. The first is I see this as a construction and articulation of a vision of what I call reasonable libertarianism. I think we’re in a world right now that is growing very partisan and very rabid, and a lot of things which are called libertarian in the Libertarian Party, or what you might call the Lew Rockwell / Ron Paul camp, are to my eye not exactly where libertarianism should be, and I think Tom has been a very brave and articulate advocate of a reasonable libertarianism. And if I ask myself, “Does the book succeed in this endeavor?” I would say, “Yes.”

There’s more to Tyler’s comments, and lots more from both of them in response to questions, so check out the video.

FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE BLOG FEEDS

Fact Sheet on the Death Tax [The Club for Growth]

The second unity in the book, I think, has to do with the last thirty years of world history. I know in the United States now there is less liberty. But overall, the world as a whole, over the last thirty years, has seen more movement towards more liberty than perhaps in any other period of human history. And I suspect most of these movements toward liberty will last. So there have been these movements towards liberty, and they have been motivated, in part, by ideas. The question arises, which are the ideas that have been the important ones for this last thirty years? And I view Tom’s book, whether he intended it as such or not, as a kind of guide to which have been the important ideas driving the last thirty years. And a lot of the book goes back into history pretty far – the eighteenth century, the Levellers, debates over natural rights – and I think precisely because it takes this broader perspective it is one of the best guides – maybe the best guide – to what have been the most important ideas driving the last thirty years (as opposed to the misleading ideas or the deadend ideas). So that’s my take on the essential unities.

DEC 03, 2009 09:20A.M. The Heritage Foundation just came out with a great fact sheet on the Death Tax.

FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE BLOG FEEDS

Not So Intelligent Mail [Cato at Liberty] DEC 03, 2009 09:13A.M. In 2003, the U.S. Postal Service initiated the Intelligent Mail program, which would integrate thirty different barcode systems used by commercial mailers into a single system. Ideally, the new barcode system would improve efficiency, reduce costs, and improve timeliness of delivery. However, a new report from the Government Accountability Office details numerous problems with the program’s implementation that are all-too-common in government:

Another question you might ask about a collection of essays is, “Which of them did I like best?” I thought about this for a while, and I have two nominations. The first one is “Twenty Myths about Markets,” which is the essay on economics. I don’t know any piece by an economist that does such a good job of poking holes in a lot of economic fallacies and just laying out what you hear so often. You would think an economist would have written this long ago, but to the best of my knowledge, not.

• Delays. The entire program was supposed to have been deployed by January 2009. Now it’s being done in phases, with the second phase completed by the end of November. Key components of the program have been “deferred,” including performance measurement capabilities required by law. Greater automation of the business mail verification process, which was one of the key justifications for the program, has also been left out.

8

Today’s Tabbloid PERSONAL NEWS FOR [email protected]

• Cost Overruns. To incorporate all the components as originally planned, the USPS will need to spend more money on a third phase. However, the GAO says that program managers aren’t sure money will be made available given the USPS’s poor financial condition. The GAO also found that program managers didn’t include all the costs associated with the program, and they therefore “lack an accurate total cost estimate.” • Poor Performance. The first phase is already being plagued by operational problems. As of June 2009, 73 issues had been identified by mailers and the USPS. • Mismanagement. The GAO sensibly recommended that the USPS define the program’s core requirements and use them as a basis for developing reliable cost estimates. But in a prime example of bureaucratic chutzpah, the USPS responded: “Any attempt to define the ‘entire program’ and the cost associated is a waste of funding and resources.” • Fraud. There is no evidence of fraud yet, but the GAO notes that “a conflict of interest exists because the prime contractor for the development of the program also manages program management office activities.” Let’s rid ourselves of these problems and open mail delivery to competition and eventually privatize the USPS. As President Obama himself said in August, “UPS and FedEx are doing just fine…It’s the Post Office that’s always having problems.”

FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE BLOG FEEDS

Intelligence Squared Debate: America, Mexico, and the Drug War [Cato at Liberty] DEC 03, 2009 09:03A.M. Kudos to Jeff Miron, Andres Martinez and Fareed Zakaria for their decisive win in the Intelligence Squared Debate, Is America to Blame for Mexico’s Drug War? For related Cato work, go here and here.

9

4 December 2009