Sei sulla pagina 1di 11

16 September 2009

Today’s Tabbloid
PERSONAL NEWS FOR lgn@limitedgovernmentnetwork.com

FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE BLOG FEEDS health problems and all were having acute episodes at the
time of admission. Of the six, five were senior citizens, and
Govt Bureaucrats Already one was having problems with a pregnancy. In each case a
“panel of experts” determined that, based on the medical
Interfere in Medical Decisions evidence, the hospital’s admitting doctor was unjustified.

[Cato at Liberty] Setting aside the medical issues, which in each case were
SEP 15, 2009 10:39P.M. significant, you and I both know that a large factor in the
admitting doctor’s decision is the potential liability for the
Among the many whoppers President Obama packed into his recent hospital. I am sure in each case the doctor considered just
address to Congress, he declared that once he creates “a publicly- what would happen if he sent the patient home they died.
sponsored insurance option, administered by the government just like Even if liability would not ultimately attach to the hospital,
Medicaid or Medicare…I will make sure that no government bureaucrat the cost of fighting such a lawsuit would be considerable. Of
or insurance company bureaucrat gets between you and the care that you course, the so-called panel of experts does not have to worry
need.” about medical malpractice, so that issue does not figure into
their consideration.
Just like Medicaid and Medicare? Medicaid and Medicare don’t get in
between patients and the care that they need? Really?? It is extremely rare for the patient to be held financially liable
in such cases. So, one could argue that they got the treatment
That was too much for a correspondent of mine, a government they needed and didn’t even have to pay for it. But, how long
bureaucrat who oversees other government bureaucrats who come in will it be before hospitals become so “gun-shy” that they
between patients and the care that they need. He writes: refuse to admit patients for care, fearing that they will not be
reimbursed by Medicare?
I am government bureaucrat…and I just happen to be
reviewing cases, albeit involving Medicare and Medicaid, By the way, [that] contract was just a trial run. CMS has
where the government has inserted itself between the patient contracted with a number of audit firms to conduct a similar
and the care prescribed by the physician. and on-going program review nationwide. So we will be
seeing these “20-20 hindsight” reviews of doctor’s decisions
Some time ago the Center for Medicare and Medicaid for a long time.
Services contracted with a consulting firm…to audit Medicare
and Medicaid providers. Pursuant to this contract, [the firm] Of course, the president’s IMAC proposal would make those powers
audited certain hospital records. In the cases I am reviewing, much more explicit and sweeping.
[the firm] would perform a computer analysis looking for
situations where a hospital admitted a patient only to If the president thinks it’s a good idea to give the federal government
discharge the patient the next day. (This is just one of the more power to ration medical care, he should say so. It’s a defensible
many things they audited for; e.g., the use of intense care position.
rehabilitation in joint replacement cases).
But to claim that’s not what he’s proposing, or that the government
[The firm] then reviewed the hospital’s justification for the doesn’t do that already, is a . . . oh, what’s the word . . . ?
admission and, when [it] “determined” that the admission
was not appropriate, the hospital would be required to repay
the money it had already been paid – the audit dated back to
2003. The cases proceed through a reconsideration process
and if it’s still determined that the hospital admission was
improper, the case ends up on my desk for adjudication.

I happen to have six of those cases now, from three different


hospitals. In all six cases the patients had significant chronic

1
Today’s Tabbloid PERSONAL NEWS FOR lgn@limitedgovernmentnetwork.com 16 September 2009

FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE BLOG FEEDS those same politicians (authors, by the way, of the auto bailout and cash-
for-clunkers) will be as indignant about subsidized companies if/when
Tire Tariff = Deadweight Loss Boeing’s subsidies, currently being examined in a counter-challenge at
the WTO, are ruled illegal. And how about all those illegal cotton
[The Club for Growth] subsidies that the United States doles out? Should taxpayers be footing
SEP 15, 2009 06:06P.M. the bill for storing cotton (scroll down, under “Commodity Certificates”)?

Here is a simple economic explanation by economist Mark Perry for why In any case, while I feel sorry for the taxpayers who pay for them, foreign
Obama’s tire tariff is a dumb idea. Credible economists of all political subsidies are a gift to the U.S. consumer. The bill that American
persuasions do not refute this explanation. They may bicker about how taxpayers are being “forced to foot” is smaller than it otherwise would be
efficient the redistribution of the tariff revenue will be or the size and because of the corporate welfare flowing to Airbus. (Note to the
effect of any and all externalities, but the underlying economics of the libertarian purity police: I’m not advocating for corporate welfare here,
tariff is sound. Protectionism is a bad, bad idea. just noting the other side of the economic ledger).

FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE BLOG FEEDS FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE BLOG FEEDS

Florida’s Budget and its NEA Dues and ACORN [Cato at


Medicaid Issue [Americans for Liberty]
SEP 15, 2009 04:14P.M.
Tax Reform]
SEP 15, 2009 05:05P.M. Sabrina Schaeffer (yes, related) over at IWF’s Inkwell wonders when the
NEA is going to sever its ties to ACORN, given recent revelations that its
Earlier this month, the Office of Economic and Demographic Research employees are willing to help set up a brothel with child prostitutes.
(EDR) for the State of Florida released their long term-budget Good question. I’m sure a lot of union members would be none too
outlook. To say the picture is bleak would be an understatement.... pleased with where their dues money ends up.

From the Examiner:

FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE BLOG FEEDS Teachers unions have contributed over $1.3 million to
ACORN and its affiliates, since 2005, according to U.S. Labor
Tuesday Afternoon Hypocrisy Department financial disclosure forms.

[Cato at Liberty] Many education reformers would call the NEA criminal in their
SEP 15, 2009 04:15P.M. resistance to effective policy change. But that’s a figure of speech. They
do, however, need to be more careful with their money.
An article today in Congress Daily [$] made me laugh out loud. In a
“Geez, these people have some nerve” kind of way. The NEA, really any activist group on the Left with a shred of dignity,
should publicly end their relationship with this corrupt and criminal
A bunch of politicians have written to Obama, saying that Airbus should organization immediately.
be disqualified from the current bidding process for the Air Force
refueling tanker contract on the grounds that the World Trade
Organization has reportedly (the final ruling is not yet out) ruled EU
subsidies to Airbus illegal. Here’s part of their letter:

Buying Airbus tankers would reward European governments


with Department of Defense dollars at the same time that the
U.S. Trade Representative is trying to punish European
governments for flouting international laws… American
taxpayers must not be forced to foot the bill for
products which benefited from illegal subsidies.

As I wrote to my colleagues when the news came over email, I wonder if

2
Today’s Tabbloid PERSONAL NEWS FOR lgn@limitedgovernmentnetwork.com 16 September 2009

FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE BLOG FEEDS for example, that most orphan works holders would be made better off
by the settlement, since the deal would generate extra income that would
Look To Switzerland For Sound be escrowed for them should they subsequently surface.

Corporate Tax Policy The problem is that I don’t really know how the various class members
might be affected by the settlement. And more importantly, I don’t think
[Americans for Tax Reform] the judge does either. The settlement is extremely complex, and it will
SEP 15, 2009 03:52P.M. have too many effects on too many parties for anyone to fully evaluate all
of them. In the last month, we’ve seen literally dozens of parties file
As the Obama Administration continues its attack on employers in the comments with the courts in support or opposition to the settlement.
U.S. through its refulsal to reduce the job-destroying corporate tax rate - Indeed, the volume of the comment is so large that I suspect the judge is
the highest average corporate tax rate in the world a... beginning to feel overwhelmed. And there are doubtless many other
parties that would object to the settlement but lack the knowledge or
legal savvy to submit comments.

FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE BLOG FEEDS The judicial process works well precisely because it typically makes
decisions on a case-by-case basis, fitting the circumstances of each case
Google Book Search, Class to an evolving body of precedent. This incremental approach tends to
produce a body of law that adapts well to changing circumstances while
Actions and the Separation of giving all affected parties the opportunity to have their interests
represented. Because different cases are heard by different judges, the
Powers [Cato at Liberty] mistakes of any one judge won’t unduly influence the direction of the
SEP 15, 2009 03:24P.M. law’s evolution. The class mechanism tends to undermine these
beneficial properties of our legal system. Rather than many cases being
In response to yesterday’s post making the case against the Google Book decided by many judges over a period of years, a class action lawsuit asks
Search Deal, I had spirited conversation with Google policy analyst a single judge to render justice for thousands of plaintiffs whose
Derek Slater, who helped me understand Google’s perspective on the individual interests can’t possibly all be represented by the attorneys
case and some of the issues I discussed. presenting arguments to the judge. Especially when the proposed class is
as large and heterogenous as the plaintiffs in the Google Book Search
He raised a reasonable objection to my claim that “the settlement would case, the class action mechanism demands that the judge to balance the
give Google carte blanche to use these orphan works without making a competing interests of thousands of different parties, many of whom
serious effort to contact their owners.” He points out that the settlement have divergent interests. No single person could possibly weigh all the
stipulates that the Book Rights Registry will make an effort to locate competing arguments in a systematic fashion.
orphan works holders and hold funds in escrow for five years to be paid
to any orphan work holders who surface. Describing this as “carte Fortunately, we have an institution with the infrastructure and
blanche” was probably too strong. I think my basic point—that Google accountability to deal with precisely this kind of situation: the legislative
won’t be required to conduct the kind of “diligent search” for branch. I think many people find the Google Book Search settlement
rightsholders before using a work—is still valid, but I could have made appealing precisely because it provides an opportunity to bypass the
this point more carefully. stalemate on Capitol Hill and achieve some de facto changes in the
copyright regime that lots of people (including me) regard as desirable.
He also quibbled with my contention that the settlement would confer But this perspective misunderstands why the legislative process is so
permanent competitive advantages on Google. I think I’m on firmer slow and cumbersome. The problem isn’t that Congress is taking a
ground here; although the settlement does extend to Google’s simple problem and making it more complicated than it needs to be. The
competitors some of the advantages Google itself enjoys, the fact remains problem is that orphan works reform is a genuinely difficult problem
that Google would receive broad immunity from copyright lawsuits that that will affect the rights of many different people. Achieving consensus
would not be extended to Google’s competitors. is genuinely difficult, we want a slow, sprawling, messy process to make
sure everyone gets a fair hearing. The Google Book Search deal wouldn’t
Much of our conversation focused on how various parties would be really resolve the complex trade-offs Congress is wrestling with, it would
helped or harmed by the settlement. Derek explained that approving the simply put the judiciary’s thumb on the scales in favor of those who
settlement would have some worthwhile consequences: the orphan happen to have the judges ear thanks to the peculiar structure of this
works problem would be mitigated, libraries and universities would get lawsuit. This is undoubtedly a faster way to deal with the orphan works
access to a vast database of books online, and consumers would continue problem, but I don’t think it’s a better one.
to enjoy access the great product that is Google Book Search. He pointed
to various provisions that give third parties access to some of the same
licensing opportunities available to Google itself. And he may be right,

3
Today’s Tabbloid PERSONAL NEWS FOR lgn@limitedgovernmentnetwork.com 16 September 2009

FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE BLOG FEEDS FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE BLOG FEEDS

Return of the Trade Rep. Flake’s Wise Counsel on


Enforcement Canard [Cato at the Tire Tariff [Cato at Liberty]
SEP 15, 2009 03:20P.M.
Liberty]
SEP 15, 2009 03:21P.M. Earlier today, Congressman Jeff Flake, Arizona Republican, sent a letter
to President Obama urging him to reconsider his decision to impose a 35
In defending its tire tariff decision, the White House has glommed on to percent tariff on tires imported from China.
the “logic” that free trade first requires enforcement of trade agreements.
Scott Lincicome exposes the absurdity of that defense here. But with that Rep. Flake makes all the right points in his letter, reminding the
fallacy serving to undergird what sounds like a pre-justification for more president that:
trade cases and more trade restrictions, let me remind the reader that we
already have 299 active antidumping and countervailing duty measures Your decision to impose duties on Chinese tires is likely to
in the United States, resticting or prohibiting imports from 43 different encourage other domestic industries to file their own
countries. We have all sorts of restrictions on imported textiles, clothing, petitions for relief under Section 421. The potential for an
footwear, food products, agricultural commodities, lumber, steel, pickup endless cycle of U.S. restrictions and subsequent retaliation
trucks, tobacco, and many, many more products, including tires. But from China is the last thing our economic recovery needs.
despite all of this enforcement–of rules that are hard to justify, as
they penalize most members of society for the benefit of a connected I wish there were more members of Congress like Rep. Flake. Our Trade
few–we still don’t have free trade in the United States. In other words, Vote Records feature on our web site offers a searchable data base of all
we’ve had the enforcement, where’s the free trade? major trade votes going back to the mid-1990s. Our data base confirms
that Rep. Flake is the most consistent supporter in all of Congress in
And if the holier-than-thou U.S. government is going to focus opposing both subsidies and barriers to trade.
on enforcement of rules, then by all means do unto others. The United
States remains baldly and defiantly in violation of its NAFTA The president should heed Rep. Flake’s wise letter.
commitments to open U.S. roads to Mexican trucks by the year 2000.
The United States remains defiantly in protest of WTO Dispute
Settlement Body decisions impugning U.S. cotton subsidies, U.S.
prohibitions on gambling services offered by providers in Antigua, the FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE BLOG FEEDS
antidumping calculation methodology known as “zeroing,” and the Byrd
Amendment. Trade partners in some of these cases are either retaliating Tuesday Links [Cato at Liberty]
or have been authorized to do so. SEP 15, 2009 03:19P.M.

The argument that more rigid enforcement leads to freer trade will • After last weekend’s 9/12 March, you’d have to be deaf not to
be tested. But don’t let the inevitable slew of new 421 cases and related recognize that small-government conservatism remains a vital part
restictions in the name of enforcement fool you. After the restrictions, of the national conversation. That, or you watch too much MSNBC.
the retaliation, and the adoption of similar measures in other countries,
free trade will be right around the corner. The next corner. Keep • Nothing is simple when dealing with the so-called Democratic
looking… People’s Republic of Korea. But here are a few ways the U.S. can
engage the nuclear armed nation.

• Questions that must be answered before we proceed deeper into


Afghanistan.

• Why it’s time to abolish the Department of Transportation, and


devolve federal transportation programs to the states.

• Podcast: New police suit records every move an officer makes while
on the job. Radley Balko weighs in.

4
Today’s Tabbloid PERSONAL NEWS FOR lgn@limitedgovernmentnetwork.com 16 September 2009

FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE BLOG FEEDS FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE BLOG FEEDS

What’s Wrong With New Jersey The Senate’s ACORN Seven


and How to Fix It [Americans [The Club for Growth]
SEP 15, 2009 01:41P.M.
for Tax Reform]
SEP 15, 2009 03:03P.M. Here’s a great report by the Wall Street Journal‘s John Fund from the
paper’s Political Diary ($). I added links to the specified vote tallies.
It goes without saying that New Jersey has its fair share of fiscal and
economic problems. The Garden State suffers from high-taxation, over- The U.S. Senate voted 83 to 7 yesterday to declare the
spending, over-regulation, and heavy borrowing which hav... controversial union-backed group ACORN no longer eligible
for its seat on the federal gravy train. Apparently, the recent
revelations that ACORN offices in three cities abetted a
fraudulent mortgage and sex-trafficking scheme didn’t sit
FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE BLOG FEEDS well with the solons.

ATR Sends Letter to Senators Back in March, the U.S. Senate voted 53 to 43 to reject
Senator David Vitter’s amendment to shut off federal funding
Baucus, Grassley [Americans for of ACORN, already the focus of more than a dozen
investigations into fraud in its voter registration activities last
Tax Reform] year. At that time, only two Democrats, Ben Nelson of
SEP 15, 2009 02:22P.M. Nebraska and Robert Byrd of West Virginia, sided with the
Louisiana Republican.
The Health Care Freedom Coalition—including Americans for Tax
Reform and its affiliates—have signed a letter to Senators Baucus and How times have changed. Last night, the Senate took up an
Grassley, of the Senate Finance committee, explaining our position... amendment by GOP Senator Mike Johanns of Nebraska to
cut off funds to ACORN in pending housing and
transportation appropriations bills. It passed with little
debate and only seven lonely Democrats opposing it. The
FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE BLOG FEEDS move came three days after the U.S. Census Bureau severed
ties to the group, which had expected to be a key partner in
The Empirical Evidence Against conducting the nation’s head count next year. If a picture is
worth a thousand words, hidden camera videos that popped
Big Government [The Club for up on BigGovernment.com last week were worth about forty
Senate votes. Taken by two independent filmmakers, the
Growth] videos showed ACORN employees giving advice on how to
SEP 15, 2009 02:03P.M. defraud the government to a couple posing as a pimp and a
prostitute who said they wanted help opening a brothel to
HT: William Eilberg employ underage El Salvadoran girls.

Scott Levenson, a spokesman for ACORN, told WCBS-TV in


New York that he believes the tapes — which have been
extensively aired on Fox News — are doctored and a fraud.
He says voices of the filmmakers were dubbed over to alter
the conversation and make the statements of ACORN
employees appear even more outrageous. Hmmm . . . if that’s
the case, why did ACORN fire four employees pictured in the
tapes? BigGovernment.com has posted the full video and
transcripts on its Web site, inviting viewers to make their
own judgment.

Of the small band of Senators that voted to keep taxpayer


dollars flowing to the discredited group, all but one doesn’t
have to face the voters in 2010. The sole exception is Senator

5
Today’s Tabbloid PERSONAL NEWS FOR lgn@limitedgovernmentnetwork.com 16 September 2009

Kirsten Gillibrand of New York, who was appointed to fill the FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE BLOG FEEDS
vacancy created by Hillary Clinton’s elevation to the Cabinet.
Matt Canter, a spokesman for Ms. Gillibrand, claims his Gasp! No More Free Bikes [Cato
boss’s vote was rooted in compassion: “While Senator
Gillibrand finds the actions of certain ACORN employees to at Liberty]
be reprehensible and will ask ACORN leaders for a full SEP 15, 2009 01:30P.M.
investigation and plan to prevent any further abuse, the truth
remains that thousands of New York families who are facing
foreclosure depend on charitable organizations like ACORN
for assistance.” There is a more political explanation for her
vote. Ms. Gillibrand, who is clearly moving to the left to
appease her party’s base, desperately needs the endorsement
of the Working Families Party, a radical splinter group that
holds a key ballot line in New York and has extensive ties to
ACORN.

For the record, other members of the ACORN 7 include


Democrats Sheldon Whitehouse, Roland Burris, Dick Durbin,
Patrick Leahy and Bob Casey. Bernie Sanders, a Vermont
independent, also voted to preserve the group’s funding.
In New York City, the public schools are really feeling the pain of
recession. I mean, things have gotten so bad according to the New York
Times that schools have even had to stop giving away free bicycles:
FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE BLOG FEEDS
At the start of school, Ms. Avery gathered her staff to tell
Dumb Regulations on Male them it would be one of the most difficult years they would
face. This year, the school will have 29 students to a class,
Grooming [The Club for instead of 21, four fewer teachers and fewer incentives for
students, such as free bicycles.
Growth]
SEP 15, 2009 01:35P.M. Wait. Free bicycles!? Sheesh! When I was a kid, the incentives were gold
stars and “success cards.” These days — well, I guess, yesterday — the
From the Austin Statesman in Texas: kids get free bicycles! No wonder, as I’ve shown before, public schools
have been getting fatter and fatter for decades; the inflation rate for
Joe Grondin has been a barber for more than 30 years. But incentives alone has been astronomical! Too bad student achievement
there are some questions that, until very recently, he had hasn’t risen at the nearly the same incredible rate — or at all.
never really pondered.

For example: “At what point on a man’s sideburn does hair


end and the beard begin?”

Or: “When does a trim become a shave?”

“It’s crazy to be thinking about this,” he admitted.

It might even be splitting hairs. But to Texas’ 13,000 or so


barbers, matters of shaving are worth fighting over. While
state law permits both cosmetologists and barbers to groom
hair, state regulators have consistently ruled that only
barbers may scrape a man’s cheeks.

Read the whole thing. It gets worse. Mind-numbingly worse.

6
Today’s Tabbloid PERSONAL NEWS FOR lgn@limitedgovernmentnetwork.com 16 September 2009

FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE BLOG FEEDS FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE BLOG FEEDS

How High Taxes Broke Up The No Child Left A Dime


Beatles [Americans for Tax [Americans for Tax Reform]
SEP 15, 2009 12:07P.M.
Reform]
SEP 15, 2009 12:32P.M. Yesterday, the Cato Institute’s Chris Edwards has posted this horrifying
chart, sourced from the Congressional Budget Office, on what will
Here at Americans for Tax Reform we have worked tirelessly to educate happen if we don’t rapidly start cutting government spending:...
the public about the dangers of excessive taxation: job losses, businesses
closing, economic stagnation - effectivly misery all ...

FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE BLOG FEEDS

FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE BLOG FEEDS Don’t Tread on Me: Obama Tire


Correct Answer: None of the Tax Hits American Drivers
Above [Cato at Liberty] [Americans for Tax Reform]
SEP 15, 2009 12:17P.M. SEP 15, 2009 12:04P.M.

The New York Times has an interesting “Op-Art” piece suggesting Late Friday night, President Barack Obama once again broke his central
alternatives to the color-coded terror alert system the government campaign promise not to raise “any form” of taxes on Americans making
adopted shortly after 9/11. They’re all interesting, and commentator Kurt less than $250,000 per year. Bowing to pre...
Anderson gives them serious consideration.

But a fundamental premise of this project (and the color-coded system)


is wrong: The government can not tell the people how to feel about FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE BLOG FEEDS
threats, and it should not try to. Rather, the government should share
the information it has (warts and all), allowing the public to digest it and Tuesday’s Daily News [The Club
synthesize it.
for Growth]
The public is fully capable of handling threat information. Giving them SEP 15, 2009 11:28A.M.
more information will put them in a position to protect themselves and
the country in thousands of ways that experts could never prescribe. THE DAILY NEWS Club For Growth PAC Backs Two House Hopefuls
Withholding information while agitating people with emotional dictates - CQPolitics.com ACORN = RICO - Ken Blackwell and Ken Klukowski,
is condescension and error. BigGovernment.com A Protectionist President - Wall Street Journal
Editorial America’s Tired Protectionism - IBD Editorial Obama Move on
The color-coded system should be elminated, and it should not be China Tires Could Spur More Requests - D. Palmer, Reuters Obama
replaced. Resorts to Protectionism - David Nicklaus, St. Louis Dispatch Threat of
Trade War With China Sparks Worries in U.S. - Washington Post Health
Reform Should Begin with Ending Fraud - Coburn and Frogue, RCP
Baucus to Release Bill on Wednesday - Jeffrey Young, The Hill Over One
Million in Attendance at 9/12 March - The Humble Libertarian Cubs 2,
Brewers 0 - Associated Press

7
Today’s Tabbloid PERSONAL NEWS FOR lgn@limitedgovernmentnetwork.com 16 September 2009

FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE BLOG FEEDS campaign. It similarly appears that in the months
since his election he has devoted much more
How the Government Broke up attention to how to wage the war than to whether we
need to wage it.
the Beatles [Cato at Liberty]
SEP 15, 2009 11:27A.M. The claim that this is a “necessary war” invokes two main
claims and one subsidiary one. The strongest argument is
Forget the effect on production incentives and GDP growth—Matt Lewis that we have to fight them there so that we don’t have to fight
at Politics Daily points to an article in the Times of London arguing that them here. The fact that Bush said this about Iraq does not
confiscatory tax rates broke up the Beatles, which may be the most make it wrong, and as in Iraq, it matters what we mean by
heinous crime of government since the liquidation of the kulaks. “them.”…

[...]

FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE BLOG FEEDS The second part of the question is exactly what withdrawal
means. What would we keep in the region? What could we
Jervis on Afghanistan [Cato at achieve by airpower? How much intelligence would we lose,
and are there ways to minimize this loss? It is often said that
Liberty] we withdrew before 9/11 and it didn’t work. True, but the
SEP 15, 2009 11:21A.M. circumstances have changed so much that I don’t find this
history dispositive. While al Qaeda resurgence is a real
Columbia University IR guru Robert Jervis has a smart post at Foreign danger, I am struck by the thinness of the argument that in
Policy’s “Af-Pak” blog. For those who couldn’t get enough at yesterday’s order to combat it we have to fight the Taliban and try to
Cato forum on Afghanistan, Jervis’ post is well worth a look: bring peace if not democracy to Afghanistan.

A second argument, made most recently by Frederick Kagan


in the September 5-6 Wall Street Journal, is that, to quote
from its headline, “A stable Pakistan needs a stable
Afghanistan.” But does it really? Are there reasonable
prospects for a stable Afghanistan over the next decade no
matter what we do? Isn’t there a good argument that part of
the problem in Pakistan stems from our continued presence
in Afghanistan?

[...]

A third but subsidiary argument is that withdrawal would


undermine American credibility around the world. Again, the
fact that this is an echo of Vietnam does not make it wrong,
but it does seem to me much less plausible than the other
arguments. Who exactly is going to lose faith in us, and what
Prof. Robert Jervis are they going to do differently? Much could depend on the
course of events in other countries, especially Iraq, which
Most discussion about Afghanistan has concentrated on could yet descend into civil war. But if it does, would
whether and how we can defeat the Taliban. Less attention American appear more resolute — and wiser — for fighting in
has been paid to the probable consequences of a withdrawal Afghanistan? Of course if we withdraw and then we or our
without winning, an option toward which I incline. What is allies suffer a major terrorist attack many people will blame
most striking is not that what I take to be the majority view is Obama, and this is a political argument that must weigh more
wrong, but that it has not been adequately defended. This is heavily with the White House than it does with policy
especially important because the U.S. has embarked analysts…
on a war that will require great effort with prospects
that are uncertain at best. Furthermore, it appears that As I hope my ellipses make clear, Jervis’ post is well worth a read.
Obama’s commitment to Afghanistan was less the product of
careful analysis than of the political need to find a “tough”
pair to his attacks on the war in Iraq during the presidential

8
Today’s Tabbloid PERSONAL NEWS FOR lgn@limitedgovernmentnetwork.com 16 September 2009

FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE BLOG FEEDS Afghanistan and other troubled lands today cry out
for the sort of enlightened foreign administration
Pervasive Illiteracy in the once provided by self-confident Englishmen in
jodhpurs and pith helmets…This was supposed to be ‘for
Afghan National Army [Cato at the good of the natives,’ a phrase that once made progressives
snort in derision, but may be taken more seriously after the
Liberty] left’s conversion (or, rather, reversion) in the 1990s to the
SEP 15, 2009 10:52A.M. cause of ‘humanitarian’ interventions. [emphasis mine]

But as I highlighted yesterday at the Cato event “Should the United


States Withdraw from Afghanistan?” (which you can view in its entirety
here), policymakers must start narrowing their objectives in
Afghanistan, a point Yglesias stresses above. Heck, as I argued yesterday,
rational people in the United States are having difficulty convincing
delusional types here in America that Barack Obama is their legitimate
president. I am baffled by people who think that we have the power to
increase the legitimacy of the Afghan government. It’s also ironic that
many conservatives (possibly brainwashed by neo-con ideology) who
oppose government intervention at home believe the U.S. government
can bring about liberty and peace worldwide. These self-identified
“conservatives” essentially have a faith in government planning–which is
socialism.

Yet these conservatives share a view common among the political and
Matt Yglesias has a lot of smart things to say about the pervasive military elite, which is that if America pours enough time and
illiteracy plaguing the Afghan National Army. Upwards of 75 to 90 resources—possibly hundreds of thousands of troops for another 12 to 14
percent (according to varying estimates) of the ANA is illiterate. years—Washington could really turn Afghanistan around.

As Ted Galen Carpenter and I argue in our recent Cato white paper However, there is a reason why the war in Afghanistan ranks at or near
Escaping the Graveyard of Empires: A Strategy to Exit Afghanistan, the bottom of polls tracking issues important to the American public,
this lack of basic education prevents many officers from filling out arrest and why most Americans who do have an opinion about the war oppose
reports, equipment and supply requests, and arguing before a judge or it (57 percent in the latest CNN poll released on Sept. 1) and oppose
prosecutor. And as Marine 1st Lt. Justin Greico argues, “Paperwork, sending more combat troops (56 percent in the McClatchy-Ipsos survey,
evidence, processing—they don’t know how to do it…You can’t get a also released on Sept. 1). It’s because Americans understand intuitively
policeman to take a statement if he can’t read and write.” that the question about Afghanistan is not about whether it is winnable,
but whether it constitutes a vital national security interest. An essential
Yglesias notes: national debate about whether we really want to double down in
Afghanistan has yet take place. America still does not have a clearly
This strikes me as an object lesson in the importance articulated goal. This is why the conventional wisdom surrounding the
of realistic goal-setting. The Afghan National Army is war—about whether we can build key institutions and create a legitimate
largely illiterate because Afghanistan is largely illiterate…we political system—is not so much misguided as it is misplaced.
just need an ANA that’s not likely to be overrun by its
adversaries. But if we have the more ambitious goal of The issue is not about whether we can rebuild Afghanistan but whether
created [sic] an effectively administered centralized state, we should. On both accounts the mission looks troubling, but this
then the lack of literacy becomes a huge problem. And a distinction is often times overlooked.
problem without an obvious solution on a realistic time frame
[emphasis mine].

Such high levels of illiteracy serves to highlight the absurd idea that the
United States has the resources (and the legitimacy) to “change entire
societies,” in the words of retired U.S. Army lieutenant colonel John
Nagl. Eight years ago, Max Boot, fellow for National Security Studies at
the Council on Foreign Relations, likened the Afghan mission to British
colonial rule:

9
Today’s Tabbloid PERSONAL NEWS FOR lgn@limitedgovernmentnetwork.com 16 September 2009

FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE BLOG FEEDS “learning styles” for generations, social scientists and education
historians been doing the same for school systems. What these latter
Obama the Protectionist [The groups find is that it is perfectly normal for public school districts to be
unaware of or even indifferent to relevant research and to make major
Club for Growth] pedagogical errors as a result. Furthermore, there is no evidence that
SEP 15, 2009 09:16A.M. large districts are any better at avoiding these pitfalls than smaller
ones. If anything, the reverse is true.
Now that President Obama has explicitly established himself as a
protectionist, it looks like NHL hockey isn’t even immune to trade Not only are such errors to be expected of public school systems, we can
barriers. actually say why that is the case with a good degree of confidence: public
schooling lacks the freedoms and incentives that, in other fields, both
allow and encourage institutions to acquire and effectively exploit expert
knowledge.
FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE BLOG FEEDS
Districts such as Washington DC can persist year after year with abysmal
New Video Reviews Evidence test scores, abysmal graduation rates, and astronomical costs. That is
because they have a monopoly on a vast trove of government k-12
against Big Government [Cato spending. In the free enterprise system, behavior like that usually results
in the failure of a business and its disappearance from the marketplace.
at Liberty] So, in the free enterprise sector, it is indeed rare to see large institutions
SEP 15, 2009 08:41A.M. behaving in such a dysfunctional manner, because it would be difficult if
not impossible for them to grow that big in the first place. Long before
The burden of government spending has skyrocketed during the Bush- they could scale up on that level, they would lose their customers to more
Obama years. Many politicians claim that all this new spending efficient, higher quality competitors.
represents necessary “investments” to boost economic growth. But as
this new video explains, both cross-country comparisons and empirical So if we want to see the adoption and effective implementation of the
analysis suggest government is far too big — not only in Europe, but also best research become the norm in education, we have to organize
in America. schooling the same way we organize other fields: as a parent-driven
competitive marketplace.
This is the second of a two-part series. The first installment, which
focuses on eight theoretical reasons why excessive government
undermines growth, can be viewed here.
FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE BLOG FEEDS

Don’t Leave Room for Desert


FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE BLOG FEEDS
[Cato at Liberty]
Actually, Big Mistakes Are to Be SEP 15, 2009 08:36A.M.

Expected… [Cato at Liberty…] Duncan “Atrios” Black sums up and amplifies on a much longer post by
SEP 15, 2009 08:39A.M. Salon’s Glenn Greenwald as follows:

Cognitive scientist Dan Willingham has a helpful column on the WaPo’s Just adding on to Glenn’s post, much opposition to the
“Answer Sheet” blog. In it, he notes that DC Public Schools advises its government actually doing anything decent for people comes
employees to teach to students’ ”diverse learning styles” (e.g. “auditory from the idea that the government is going to take my tax
learners,” “visual learners,” etc.) despite the fact that research shows money and give it to people who don’t deserve it. The
these categories are pedagogically meaningless. problem is that for decades the Dems have tried to get around
this by making sure policies and programs were relatively
But what really grabbed my attention was this comment: “a small and incremental, everything targeted and means tested.
misunderstanding of a pretty basic issue of cognition is a mistake that But doing that effectively confirmed the critics’ point. The big
one does not expect from a major school system. It indicates that the (giant) government programs which are most popular are the
people running the show at DCPS are getting bad advice about the ones which are universal – Social Security and Medicare –
science on which to base policy.” and other less controversial government programs, like
highway spending, are also perceived to benefit people across
As cognitive scientists have been collecting and analyzing evidence on the board.

10
Today’s Tabbloid PERSONAL NEWS FOR lgn@limitedgovernmentnetwork.com 16 September 2009

There’s a couple of interesting things going on here that seem worth superfluous—superstructure of universal social insurance. My colleague
unpacking. The first is actually a legitimate point about how valid Will Wilkinson has pressed this point cogently in the context of Social
arguments against various kinds of redistribution tend, with unsettling Security. The rationale for the program is ultimately that we hope it will
ease, to shade into unsavory demonization of the folks on the receiving prevent people from being mired in poverty in old age. There is no sane
end of the transfer. Suppose someone suggests that the government reason, on this rationale, for cutting Bill Gates a check when he reaches
should, either by regulation or direct subsidy, ensure that the indigent the age of eligibility—but we do it this way because progressives believe,
are provided with health care or that insolvent homeowners are perhaps correctly, that a means-tested aid program for the indigent
protected from foreclosure. Now, there are a few types of objections elderly would be more politically vulnerable to cuts. Which, I think,
people might raise. There’s an argument from efficiency and incentives: underscores the perverse effect of thinking in terms of the desert of the
To the extent that the risks associated with individual financial or recipients, since there’s no actually-valid argument on which a universal
lifestyle choices are borne by the public, there’s a familiar problem of need-blind benefit makes more sense than a narrow means-tested one.
“moral hazard” reducing incentives for prudence. And there’s an So one more reason to eschew desert-centered political discourse: It
argument from property and autonomy, to the effect that even if people gives rise to policy that’s less intelligent whether your underlying
ought to help others in need, each person is entitled to decide whether commitments are progressive or libertarian.
and how to do so without compulsion. Neither of these implies any
blanket judgment about the folks who find themselves in need of aid. The
first argument does suggest that redistributive policy will make it
rational for people to take more risks at the margin, but it does not
follow from either that people who are having trouble meeting their
mortgage payments, or people who get sick and cannot afford care, are
bad or foolish or irresponsible or otherwise deserving of their fate. And it
is a good thing for these arguments that no such conclusion follows,
because it’s clearly not true.

Yet in popular political rhetoric, it’s disturbingly easy to find just such a
leap being made. Think of Rick Santelli’s jeremiad against “losers” under
foreclosure getting bailed out by government. Is it just that people are
inherently spiteful or unkind? In fact, the tendency to assume that
people who are badly off must deserve it may be a result of what social
psychologists call the Just World Hypothesis. In brief, faced with
evidence that the world is often arbitrary and unfair, and that bad things
often happen to good people, many of us prefer to preserve our faith in a
basically fair and benevolent universe by assuming that the badly off
must somehow deserve their fates—which is a stronger and (I think)
rather morally uglier proposition than the more plausible notion that
people are often significantly responsible for their fates.

There are at least three reasons to take some care to avoid this
implication, given how easily human beings fall into it. The first is just
that it’s an ugly and callous attitude to have toward people who will often
deserve our compassion whether or not they ought to receive
government aid. The second is that people will readily—and sometimes
intentionally—misconstrue an argument about incentives as an
argument about the moral worthiness or personal virtue of the proposed
recipients, which does not make for a particularly fruitful conversation.
Finally, there’s a paradoxically quite authoritarian implicit premise
lurking behind this sort of argument—to wit, that it’s the job of the
government to determine who is or is not morally deserving of its
largess, and that the central question is whether this or that particular
class of prospective recipients qualifies. That’s a frame people across the
spectrum ought to be uncomfortable with.

As Atrios points out, strategic response to this on the part of progressives


has been to embed what are essentially welfare programs within an
elaborate—and functionally, if not politically,

11

Potrebbero piacerti anche