Wednesday, December 31, 2008
It should be noted that these water-muddying tricks down't work. Al Franken is no idiot; if he wins by 49 votes, he knows he's going to need to reach out to Coleman or Barkley voters in some fashion in order to win reelection. Gregoire did just that with her "business climate" initatives. Rather than blindly cut taxes or deregulate, the now has a number of staff members whose job it is to help small businesses wade through regulatory barriers, especially during the business's startup period. She won the rematch with Rossi by more than 6%, proving "we wuz robbed" is not a winning campaign platform.
Tuesday, December 30, 2008
- Find some tiny provision of the bill that is modestly objectionable.
- Hold endless press conferences about how this particular provision, if passed, will show that Democrats want to take away your foot massager, destroy the American economy, and lead to the destruction of the institution of marriage.
- Force Democrats to remove the provision, potentially having cascading effects elsewhere in the bill.
- Return to step (1) and repeat.
- 57% of the country did not vote for Bill Clinton; while the evidence suggests that Clinton would have won a two-way race, many more voters had little or no attachment to Clinton as a President.
- While the headline unemployment figure is not terrible by historical standards, it's pretty clearly on a trajectory to get worse, which was not the case in
- McConnell just doesn't have plausible case to filibuster anything that's remotely popular.
Today, however, even the most conservative Senate Democrats are unlikely to feel political pressure to show independence from the White House. Meanwhile, Arlen Specter and George Voinovich face reelection in 2010 in states that went for Obama by non-trivial margins, one of which (Pennsylvania) is now a fairly safe state for Democrats, while the other (Ohio) will be one of those hardest hit by the slowdown in the auto industry. Throw in Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins, and if the moderates decide that their electoral fate lies in playing nice with Barack Obama, these are just empty threats. Reid should just put money in the stimulus package for SUPERTRAINS and dare Specter to vote against the needs of his suburban Philadelphia constituents.
In any event, I'm willing to run on the assumption that Klobuchar herself isn't personally a fan of these retrograde cultural sentiments and will rescind the earmark when she figures out what these people are up to. If anybody lives in Minnesota or knows Klobuchar's people, please do your part to make this happen.
- Katon Dawson (was in a white-only country club for 11 years, until the media found out)
- Chip Saltsman (mailed everyone "Barack the Magic Negro")
- Michael Steele (lost the Maryland Senate race)
- Ken Blackwell (lost the Ohio Governor race)
- Mike Duncan
- Saul Anuzis
Monday, December 29, 2008
If I had to think of a proportional response, it'd probably be dropping a bunch of bombs on some relatively uninhabited part of Palestine where there aren't any people. This, of course, would be annoying and bad, just as the Hamas decision to shoot rockets at Israel that don't kill anyone is annoying and bad. But it wouldn't be as bad as killing hundreds of people.
Thinking you can destroy Hamas by bombing hundreds of people is like thinking you can destroy the Democratic Party by killing a bunch of Democrats. The political institution will live on, and attract popular sympathy because of its members' martyrdom.
My tentative plan for the time of my life associated with diamond-ring-giving is to make some kind of big splashy charitable contribution out in the Third World that I can put my wife's name on -- maybe a village school named after her, or a scholarship for poor farm kids. (A US dollar goes really far in places like India.) I'll give her a pretty ring with some far less valuable stone that I can somehow connect to the charitable act, perhaps with the name of the school inscribed on the inside or something like that. Then I'll obnoxiously go around telling all my single friends what I did, with hopes that people will show me up by making a bigger charitable contribution than me when it's their time. That, after all, is how you change social customs for the benefit of mankind.
For all this to work out, I'd have to find myself a woman awesome enough to appreciate this sort of thing. But that's part of the plan anyway.
Sunday, December 28, 2008
But if you are a Republican and wanted to win elections without changing your platform, Newt's your man. The easiest way to do maintain the party's policy status quo would be to win the Presidential nomination and then say to the country "I'm not as racist as those mean ol' Democrats say I am" and then maybe put together a 2000-era Bush tax cut where you have mammoth tax cuts for the rich, "but I'll get my $300". If you can find a few African-American Republicans and give them prominent roles in your campaign and convention it might work. For the Republican donor class and conservative apparatchiks who are still heavily invested in Bushism, that's a much more palatable path to victory the embracing a Grand New Party/Christian Democrat approach or a Teddy Roosevelt-esque small-but-effective tack. Fear Newtism, for it is perhaps the only way Republicans can end up in power while still leaving in place the ideas and people who have wrecked the country over the last decade-plus.
A general practitioner who develops an effective method of nudging people toward quitting smoking or exercising more during his brief post-checkup chats would save many more lives at dramatically lower cost than would all of Dr House’s heroics.I only took up flossing a couple years ago, after withering under the disapproving glares of oral hygenists who had been prodding my gums with that pokey thing. It's kept me free of dental issues for as long as I've been doing it. (I've actually come to enjoy it, because the minty floss is kind of yummy.) Anyway, I hope that whatever fixes we design for the health care system result in the doctor's glare hitting more people who need it. There are lots of reasons why poor people are often overweight, including the high calorie density of cheap foods, but I'd imagine that their inability to buy time with doctors who will put pressure on them to adopt more healthy habits is part of the story.
Saturday, December 27, 2008
Thread topic: The experiences of Atlanta and Tennessee this year have put an end to the "mobile quarterback" era; Defend or refute.
Friday, December 26, 2008
Thursday, December 25, 2008
We're actually going through a new moon during the time I'm there, so there's no risk that I'll suddenly turn into that guy over on the right.
I find it somewhat astonishing how much Christmas music speaks with familiarity of Yuletide practices that hardly anybody alive remembers. Shopping a few days ago, I heard lots of songs in which sleigh bells and sleigh rides figured significantly. Some of them were new enough that I hadn't heard them before. People are writing new songs about how wonderful it is to use a transportation technology from the era of horses. Small carbon footprint, I guess, and for all I know raw oats are not subject to the environmental criticisms dogging ethanol and other biofuels. But I don't think we're going to see Ray LaHood pushing for sleighs as the environmentally responsible conservative's approach to mass transit anytime soon.
It was especially weird when I heard this music in Singapore, which (1) is only 15% Christian, (2) has about the most advanced transit system I've seen in a city, and (3) never had snow for sleighing, since it's barely above the equator and the temperature never gets below 65 degrees. I guess I shouldn't underestimate the ability of Singaporeans to absorb a foreign holiday that involves people buying stuff.
My favorite Christmas music is of two kinds. On one hand, there's the old minor-key standards that are meant to be played on an organ -- Carol of the Bells and the like. We Three Kings is my favorite, because I like the themes of ethnic and possibly even religious inclusion. The other kind I like is energetic peppy music with a female vocalist who seems eager to unwrap me on Christmas morning.
Wednesday, December 24, 2008
Never say we didn't bring you the important stuff.
Tuesday, December 23, 2008
Participation may be mandatory, meanwhile, but having children isn't--and Social Security is actually worse than the typical Ponzi scheme in that its structure discourages the generation of new participants; studies suggest that the crushing tax burden it puts on workers suppresses the number of children they have.If you're worried about Social Security running short on new participants, there's an easy fix -- import some from other countries! There are tons of bright young people around the world who would be overjoyed to come here in their twenties and pay into Social Security for forty years, keeping the system afloat. We can choose among the best and brightest as we please -- in addition to paying Social Security taxes, we can get doctors to cure our sick, computer programmers to keep our machines going, and scientists (like my father, who was born on a tiny Indian village and came here in the 1970s) to do all the things scientists do.
(If you're okay with saving the system in an entirely illegitimate way, illegal immigrants are even better. Since payroll taxes are deducted from their wages but they have no way of claiming benefits, they're basically free money for the Social Security system. Their presence in the country is worth a 30 basis point increase in the payroll tax rate, or $13 billion per year. Of course, this is wildly regressive since they're some of the poorest people in the country.)
This is one of the nice things that can happen when you defeat a reasonably competent and intelligent Northeastern Republican -- you liberate him from his miserable role as a pawn to John Boehner and free him up to advance the national interest somewhere else. It's too bad Tom Allen couldn't help Susan Collins find a position better suited to her talents this year.
Monday, December 22, 2008
The benchmark ought to be whether or not the Obama Administrations's proposals and personnel land him in the center of Congressional Democrats. DW-NOMINATE shows that for the 109th Congress, Barack Obama was just to the left of the median Senate Democrat, and thus was probably roughly in line with the median House Democrat. Hillary Clinton was just to the right of the Senate Median. Salazar was clearly in the rightmost third. Tom Daschle was just to the right of the Senate Median in the 107th. Rahm Emanuel was to the right of the House median, but not by much. It's harder to gauge the leanings of the DLCers who weren't in Congress, but other than Richardson's balanced budget fetish and pro-gun stance he campaigned as a standard issue Democrat. Compared to Bill Clinton's cabinet it is much further to the left.
Sidenote: you may have noticed that links are now bold. It's not Jennifer Palmieri's doing; they were just too hard to see earlier. Sidebar links may go back to non-bold at some point if the prove to be too distracting.
if freedom of religion means, most fundamentally, the freedom to be a heretic, it equally means the freedom to declare that the other guy is a heretic. In a very real sense, a social environment that is hostile to religious intolerance must necessarily be hostile to religious freedom. So, ironically, the modern transformation of Hanukkah from a festival of intolerance to a festival of religious freedom is no transformation at all!If we understand "declaring that the other guy is a heretic" to mean "thinking and saying that the other guy's beliefs about God are untrue", that isn't intolerence. That's just disagreement. People disagree about lots of stuff. Jon Henke and I disagree on how effective government intervention in the economy can be, but it'd be weird to say that we're being intolerant of each other. We can perfectly well be tolerant (that is, avoid using coercive power against people just because their beliefs and practices differ from ours) while preserving religious freedom (that is, the freedom to believe and practice a religion without coercion). In fact, the two things go together, contra Millman's attempts to serve up the big counterintuitive conclusion.
Now, if we understand "declaring that the other guy is a heretic" to mean "using the coercive power of the state to have him tied to a pole and set on fire", that would be intolerant. But religious freedom plainly doesn't involve the freedom to declare the other guy a heretic in that sense. Really, I think the multiple meanings of 'heretic' were making Millman's point look more plausible than it was.
On the plus side, the government makes some money off the pay-or-play system, which might be enough to pay for insurance for more than another half-million individuals. Call it an even million. That's just over 2% of the uninsured. It's progress, sure, but when you frame it that way it feels like hyper-incrementalist bullshit. Hopefully whatever health care reform we end up passing will have a larger impact than any of the individual proposals the CBO is looking at here.
Sunday, December 21, 2008
There are two things I don't understand about DC. One is the degree to which one is expected to "defend" all sorts of nominal allies, regardless of what the allies have done on the merits. The other is the fact that these are all grown-ups, many of whom have been involved in fairly rough political campaigns, but yet it's somehow inappropriate to use blunt language to make your point. Isn't one of Rumsfeld's rules (the good Rumsfeld, when he was Chief of Staff and SecDef for Ford) not to get hung up on personalities and grudges, since it's a small town and we all have business to attend to tomorrow. Sheesh.
[Update from Neil]: So, here's Third Way's management team. Third Way's President and two VPs were previously involved with an organization called "Americans for Gun Safety", but apparently they didn't learn how to avoid shooting themselves in the foot.
Update: He'd like to amend the Civil Rights Act so that people can't be fired merely for being union members. That sounds pretty awesome.
So far, we've been seeing relatively bad symbolism and good indications of substance from the Obama administration, which fits into a good strategy for getting big progressive proposals through. Gain centrist cred by symbolically annoying progressives, use it to make your policy look centrist. Is this actually Obama's strategy? Time will tell.
Saturday, December 20, 2008
But anyway. Eric Shinseki is a bit of an unusual figure as Asian-Americans go --most of us didn't achieve prominence by rising through the military, though I suppose it fits our stereotype that his greatest moment involved doing the math and sticking to the right numbers when everybody else around him was being a macho idiot. Steven Chu, however, is much more of the type that Asian parents are going to be telling their kids to emulate. His role as Energy Secretary makes me feel unusually represented.
Friday, December 19, 2008
The Crypt reports that Waxman continues to be awesome by making nice with Dingell and putting him in charge of something where he's unambiguously on the right side -- health care reform:
By granting Dingell a role as "the lead sponsor" of whatever national health care legislation the committee considers, Waxman is giving the Dean of the House the chance to cap his historic career by realizing his father's goal of universal health care coverage - Dingell's father, a former House member, first introduced legislation creating national health insurance in 1943.Now, I don't know how big a role the Energy and Commerce Committee has on health care, and the real action is in the Senate anyway. But this is a sweet way for things to go. Update: the committee has jurisdiction over national health insurance.
This shift could have any number of effects. One possibility is that actors, set designers, and writers who feel frustrated by the lack of innovation could move into a new medium, especially if someone figures out how to make money selling content on the Internets. Another is that Hollywood can learn some lessons from Joss Whedon, and figure out how to shoot action films with fewer shooting days and smaller CGI budgets. A third is that we direct some of the coming stimulus package towards funding the Arts, though that's highly unlikely in today's political climate. A fourth is that something completely different happens. Either way, enjoy this year's Oscar Bait ... there may not be this much effort put into movies for quite some time.
Thursday, December 18, 2008
I appear to have been wrong. Norm Coleman is just getting creamed on challenges. Even if the current pace slows down by 50%, it's likely that he will be behind once the challenged ballots are counted. Crazy stuff.
why is so much content locked up in pricey journals? Much of this research is being conducted on the public dime, but is utterly inaccessible to the public. The journals might have made sense when you needed some sort of archiving and distribution model to store, categorize, and spread research, but with the advent of the internet, their existence serves to foil those efficient dissemination of relevant research. Do they simply survive because the prestige they confer as gatekeepers plays an important role in rankings and advancement? Or is there some crucial purpose I'm missing entirely?Here's my understanding of the story: All these journals were originally things more or less like magazines. In fact, they still are. The library at your university (because of course you're an academic at a university, or you wouldn't be interested in this stuff) pays a subscription fee and gets mailed a booky-looking object four times a year with the latest research. Journals are pricey and have copyrighting because that's the business model that works for low-circulation high-interest publications being sold to rich institutional libraries.
But now, there's the internet! Instead of the expensive printing, binding, and mailing of booky-looking objects, you can transmit information for free through the magic tubes. Since the editors and reviewers are professors who do this without getting paid by the journal (they regard this as part of the job the university pays them for) the entire process could be done for free. There's sometimes a grad student making a little money as an editorial assistant, but that's about it. We academics would be happy enough to just put our content on the web for free. In fact, a cool new journal in my discipline, Philosophers' Imprint, does that.
But Philosophers' Imprint is a very new journal. The existing journals aren't doing this. The trouble is that a lot of these journals are now owned by big publishing companies that don't make any profit by giving away their stuff for free. So they're clinging to the magazine business model.
I'd love it if the government could buy the journals out of the publishers' hands and open them to the public. I hear that some of that has happened in the sciences. The money taxpayers pay out in doing that would soon be recouped, at least in part, by public university academic libraries not having to pay subscription fees. Bonus: Ezra and other ordinary folk get to read my stuff without paying.
But I'm going to keep sending most of my papers to old-line journals that Ezra can't read and hoping they get accepted. After I got a paper accepted in Philosophical Review two months ago (it's perhaps the top journal in the discipline), one of my colleagues told me that at some places, people can get tenure just for that! I'd love to have more people read my stuff, but if I just put it on the web for free hardly anybody would even know it was there, or that it was worth reading. Get it into Philosophical Review, and I'm assured that my colleagues will see it, my adversaries will respond to it, and people hiring or promoting me will be impressed. But Ezra won't be able to read it. Save us, Government! Set the journals free!
But the realist in me (98% of me by volume) is impressed by her fundraising chops. Apparently she went out and raised $50 million for the NY public schools. And she strikes me as the sort of person who would be able to go and wring millions of dollars out of rich people that could then be transferred to Democratic Senate candidates who really need it. If the system requires our Senators to spend several hours a day dialing for dollars, why not have some of our safe-seat Democrats from cash-cow states just be fundraisers? She can leave the policy design to other people and just be a human ATM and sometimes a pretty face to go on TV.
Wednesday, December 17, 2008
there isn’t really any way to force Republicans to speak to sustain a filibuster. The Senate can only proceed to a vote on a bill either by unanimous consent, or by getting 60 votes to invoke cloture. As long as one Republican is on the floor, all s/he has to do is object to any request for unanimous consent, and the Democrats have to get 60 votes. The threshold required for cloture is a percentage of sitting senators, not senators voting, so the Republicans wouldn’t even need to be there to vote against cloture; they just need to refrain from voting for it. The Democrats, on the other hand, would need to keep at least 50 members on hand at all times to respond to a quorum call, or else the Republican in the chamber would suggest the absence of a quorum and the Senate would adjourn. So Democrats would be bearing the brunt of whatever physical toll this would take, and Republicans would be the ones getting a good night’s sleep, and would have no incentive to cave. After all, Republicans are happy for the Senate to do nothing over the next two years; with Democrats in the majority, a long stalemate like this would be taking time away from work and votes on Democratic priorities, not Republican ones. The Republicans tried keeping the Senate in session continuously a few years ago to try to pressure Democrats to abandon some filibusters of judicial nominees, and it didn’t work. A similar effort in 2009 would encounter the same problems.
The only time a read-the-phone-book, wet-your-pants filibuster like in a Jimmy Stewart movie would take place would be when Democrats had the 60 votes to invoke cloture and Republicans could only stop them by refusing to relinquish the floor so that a vote could be called. Then McConnell really would have to keep talking. But this sort of filibuster never really happens, because it has no chance of working. After all, unless you’re actually in a Jimmy Stewart movie, the 60 person majority can keep being 60 people longer than any one person can stand and talk, so unless some Senator wants to get headlines for him or herself in a losing cause there isn’t any reason to do it.
I asked him why we have the interesting historical filibusters we do, like the one where Huey Long spent hours reading out his favorite recipes and how to make pot liquor, and he explained:
These are generally theatrical, rather than actual efforts to change the outcome. At best, the filibustering senator could hope to raise the profile of the issue, but he had no real hope of winning the vote. Long’s filibuster failed to stop the New Deal bill he was opposing, or to force the changes he wanted. Strom Thurmond’s record-setting filibuster similarly failed to stop the Civil Rights Act of 1957 (which had already been gutted by Richard Russell, anyway). The record he broke belonged to Wayne Morse, who also failed to stop the bill he was protesting against. All three were pretty assiduously self-promoting, even for senators, and they were hoping both to make their point in a dramatic way and to advance their own careers by doing so. And a lot more people remember them and their filibusters than the bills they were fighting, so I suppose it worked.
In general, I don't think there's a limited supply of right-wing (or left-wing) attention to issues, such that distracting it with one issue leaves less for other things. There's always some danger that introducing a new issue will mobilize a new set of political opponents, who then join an opposing coalition and over time absorb that coalition's views on all sorts of other issues. But I don't know who will get mobilized by this Fairness Doctrine stuff other than people who were into politics in the first place. And every Kristol or Krauthammer column that's devoted to the Fairness Doctrine isn't devoted to global warming denialism or distorting Democratic health care proposals.
We don’t know the extent of the investigation into Blagojevich’s allegedly corrupt dealings. Have witnesses been brought before a grand jury? We don’t know. If so, who are they? We don’t know. What witnesses have been interviewed by FBI agents working for Fitzgerald? We don’t know. Do Fitzgerald and his investigators have any doubts about the truthfulness of those who have talked? We don’t know.Back in the old days when people in the conservative movement didn't have any evidence that a Democratic President had done anything wrong, they'd accuse the First Lady of murder. These days, they come out and acknowledge that they don't have any evidence around which to base their articles. Maybe if I eat healthy foods and exercise regularly, I'll live long enough to see them make a useful contribution to the public discourse.
But we do know that something big is going on.
Tuesday, December 16, 2008
elsewhere, Gallup's polling shows the American people are not idiots and despite Blagojevich related hyperventilating, most people think Barack Obama didn't do anything wrong when it comes to Hot Rod.
It's going to be a long four or eight years ...
if you want to be a parent, you're better off being a gay male penguin in China than a gay male human in Arkansas.
The TED Spread, historically below 0.5%, hit 4.5%. Then we bailed out the banks, and it went straight down. Now it's below 2%. In one notable case, it took Barack Obama shaking his jaw at Bank of America and an idiot door and window company, but in general people got their money. Without any government intervention, goodness knows where we end up. Maybe Harry and Nancy didn't get the best imaginable deal on the bailout, but they averted disaster and people got paid.
Orton would like to enter politics after he finishes with football, and I'm happy to have sports stars on the Democratic bench, especially if they're the sort who go around to Chicago schools to tell the kids about environmentalism and compact fluorescent light bulbs. Unfortunately, his hometown of Altoona, Iowa is already in a good Democratic Congressional district, so he may not give us maximal advantage. Maybe he could run in Indiana where he went to college.
Orton said that his beliefs and work ethic came from his father, who he said showed through work like enforcing child labor laws and minimum wage requirements that everyone deserves a voice.
''The biggest influence he had on my beliefs is that there are people working hard every single day that don't necessarily make a lot of money doing it,'' Orton said. ''There should be more people working for them.'
Monday, December 15, 2008
Sir Charles lays into Bob Corker, and deservedly so, but seems to be focusing too much on the abstraction that is Corker's shameless attempt to destroy the American economy. What we really need is something that gets people at the gut level. You see, what people really need to understand is that Bob Corker wants to make sure you can never buy another Chevy Silverado, and he wants the guy who makes your Chevy Silverado to make less money, to the point where he might as well go make Toyota Tacoma's. That's a campaign message we can believe in. I know Phil Bredesen is a member in good standing of the Wanker Caucus, but maybe we can convince Tim McGraw to run for Senate in a few years.
(Photo by Flickr user Jacob El Charro used under the Creative Commons license)
Most of the work in Ross' first post is done by Charlotte Allen's line that "The 3 percent pie slice in the 2005-06 financial report, representing 264,943 abortion customers served, can only be described as deliberately misleading." Why misleading? Well, because that doesn't include the cost of pregnancy tests, pelvic exams, STD tests, and a free bag of condoms that they throw in with the abortion. Allen writes:
"An abortion is invariably preceded by a pregnancy test--a separate service in Planned Parenthood's reckoning--and is almost always followed at the organization's clinics by a "going home" packet of contraceptives, which counts as another separate service. Throw in a pelvic exam and a lab test for STDs--you get the picture."I get the picture! I'm just trying to figure out how it's any sort of argument against the Planned Parenthood numbers. Looking back at the chart, Planned Parenthood expenditures look like this: 38% for contraception, 29% for STD treatment, 19% for cancer screening and treatment, 11% for 'Other', and 3% for abortion. If you're working with those categories, it seems like you should put the cost of the STD test in 'STD treatment' and the contraceptives in 'contraception'. Pregnancy tests cost like $1 if you buy in bulk, and I haven't heard that they're complicated to administer. So if the Planned Parenthood numbers are misleading, that better be one hell of a pelvic exam.
My hunch is that this discrepancy may have to do with what our current President might refer to as "conditions on the ground". There are only two abortion providers in all of Mississippi, leaving 91% of women in living in counties without a provider, while Massachusetts has the most widespread abortion access in the nation (source, though I believe since 2005 one of the two providers in Mississippi has closed). Arkansas and South Dakota also rank very low on this metric, and while Utah and Alabama fare better, they're not in the top half. Likewise, states where social conservatism is closer to the front of the political issue mix are more likely to adopt measures restricting or deterring access such as "conscience clauses" for pharmacists, "informed consent" rules, and so forth.
But stepping back from the specific question, yes, as Ross points out, if the whole thing is a debate about the rights of the unborn, then there's an impasse. But the challenge for pro-choicers isn't necessarily to accomodate those who think abortion is about the rights of the unborn. Public opinion on abortion is incredibly muddled. The public doesn't want to see Roe v. Wade overturned. But they support most restrictions on abortion that you can come up with. A number of people say that they personally would not choose to have an abortion, but that it should still remain legal. In general, as Atrios likes to say, there are a large number of people who think that abortion should be legal but "think it's icky" and thus our laws should somehow reflect the fact that they think it's icky, and the challenge is to peel those voters away from the GOP, rather than tangle in a debate about at what point a fetus becomes a "person" in the legal sense. If you come out with a policy platform that keeps abortion legal but enacts measures that encourage alternatives or prevent unanticipated pregnancies, it won't win over the Ross Douthats of the world, but there are other quasi-pro-life voters that it might impress.
Sunday, December 14, 2008
Very Positive:27 Somewhat Positive:26 Neutral:20 Somewhat Negative:14 Very Negative:12
CNN, December 1-3
The NBC/WSJ poll goes back to 1997, and these are her lowest "Very Negative" numbers in the poll since three days after Bill Clinton admitted his affair in 1998. The CNN poll goes back to 2006, and these are by far her best numbers ever.
We don't have any post-election, pre-SoS readings for her, so it's a bit hard to tell whether post-election love for Democrats is playing a bigger role, or whether it's the attachment to a popular president. Both are probably factors.
Enviros unhappy with the Clinton administration environmental record -- and that's quite a few of them -- may blanche at this, which taps into the ongoing argument over whether Obama's a real liberal, and what he meant by promising change... My take is, when Obama promised change, he wasn't talking about plucking amateurs from outside government. He was talking about a change from incompetence and stagnation to competence and progress.If anyone got behind Obama because they liked change in the abstract without having any more concrete sense of what they wanted, they are silly people with silly goals. The nice thing about the 'change' sloganeering of the Obama campaign was that it promised all sorts of concrete things to different people. You don't like the Iraq War? Obama will change our policy so we leave. You don't like Corporate America owning Washington? Obama will change that. You don't like having our government staffed by Regent University incompetents? Obama will change that. Even if 'change' meant something different to you than it did to the next Obama supporter, it stood a good chance of being true either way.
At this point, the campaign is over, and the mass communication benefits of talking in terms of change are gone. Universal health care, climate policy, closing Guantanamo -- let's talk of concrete things like these.
There's no reason for the Yankees to spend $82.5 million on whatever's left of A.J. Burnett's arm. In the absolute best case scenario, Burnett turns out to be Jason Schmidt, who had five-and-a-half fairly healthy years of high-quality pitching after several injury-plagued years. In that case he probably more than earns his money. But the median scenario is much, much worse; Burnett will probably only pitch effectively for three of those years, his contract will make him impossible to unload if he flounders, and five years is just an awfully long time for a pitcher with anything but a stellar health record. The fact that the Yankees are able to outbid every other team in baseball by a factor of 1.5, coupled with their willingness to accept lower profit margins due to higher labor costs, is causing sever market distortions.
Now the Braves are going to be left praying that Kenshin Kawakami makes the transition effectively. And that's their best hope.
Saturday, December 13, 2008
As you can see, New York bears only a passing resemblance to a handful of pre-automobile cities on this list, and no resemblance to most cities in the country. What's that you say? "It's not fair to use cities; different cities have annexed suburbs at different rates". Well, let's use metro areas then:
Here, the distance between the New York City metro area are and the rest of the country is even larger. This gap is insurmountable in any reasonable amount of time; you would have to increase the density of the tenth-most dense metro area, Minneapolis-St Paul, by fifteen-fold in order to get close to the density of New York. No policy change could accomplish that in even a half-century. Heck, it would probably require Herculean efforts to get density to double within fifteeen years.
In addition to the tremendous gap in density, New York is the financial capital of the world, something that the rest of the country cannot hope to duplicate. The state also has the highest union density in the country (presumably led by NYC), making business in the state into a different beast. Thus while Donavan and Carrion may be competent public servants, they operate in an environment that looks nothing like the rest of the country, which makes me very uneasy about their ability to make the transition.
Glenn Thrush at Politico talked with Shaun Donovan in 2004:
To my surprise, Donovan brushed aside my questions about the city's initiatives and began talking at length about the coming "flood" of foreclosures he anticipated among highly leveraged apartment buildings purchased by recent immigrants -- and a looming subprime crisis for one- and two-family homeowners in up-and-coming neighborhoods in southeast Queens and central Brooklyn.
Now we just need a cleric and maybe another fighter, and Obama's party will be set.
One needs to remember that the bulk of the criminal complaint against Blagojevich consists of somewhat delusional, masturbatory and half-baked schemes1 discussed between Blagojevich and his advisers. On the other hand, there are relatively few conversations between Blagojevich and representatives of any of the various Senate candidates, and when such conversations do occur, Blagojevich proceeds at least somewhat more cautiously.Which is what you'd expect. Trying to shake down multiple candidates for the appointment isn't a workable strategy. If you try to extort money from someone, they turn you down, and you end up giving the appointment to somebody else who pays up, the person you denied the appointment is going to (1) be unhappy that they didn't get the job and (2) have some serious dirt on you.
I liked this comment from emailer and commenter Rousseau:
I actually find this whole affair pretty supportive of our democracy. Blago is governor of a large state and willing to sell it to the highest bidder... and he can do so little. He's reduced to fantasizing with his advisors about selling one federal position for another, and makes pretty much 0 progress there. The news coverage so far has completely underplayed how resistant every single federal politician was to his ideas.Possibly excepting Jesse Jackson Jr., that's right. This isn't because our politicians are wonderful people, but because the anti-corruption norms embedded in the system are strong enough that you just can't go around trying to sell offices. People won't stand for it, partly because they know other people won't stand for it. And so we don't turn into rural India, where my cousin applied for a job where one of the requirements turned out to be "marry the boss' weird-looking daughter." (My cousin didn't marry the daughter and didn't get the job.)
1 Describing Blagojevich's plans to get big money and politically advance himself by selling the Senate Seat as "delusional, masturbatory, and half-baked" reminds me too much of a certain scene in American Pie.
Friday, December 12, 2008
Today's useless fact: the story that there is no Nobel Prize in mathematics because Alfred Nobel's wife had an affair with a mathematician is a hoax.
Thursday, December 11, 2008
Once again, the overwhelming majority of Planned Parenthood's budget is devoted to things other than abortion services. The idea low-cost contraception should be on the chopping block in an era of tight budgets is just crazy. Now that pro-choice politicians control the House, Senate, and White House, it's all but guaranteed that The Movement will spend a lot of time and energy working the county commissions and city councils of America to chip away at contraception and abortion access.
Wednesday, December 10, 2008
If you live in either of those areas and would like to hang out with me between now and then, send an email. I'm neiladri at gmail dot com.
I leave you with a photo I took tonight at Mustafa Center, the 24-hour shopping area in Little India. The legend of Horny Goat Weed is more or less what the name suggests -- it, like one third of substances discovered by humans, is "alleged to have aphrodisiac qualities. According to legend, this property was discovered by a Chinese goat herder who noticed sexual activity in his flock after they ate the weed." Sadly, I must leave Singapore without testing the powers of Horny Goat Weed. But maybe when I return, I will partake of the substance and wake up in the morning next to a very confused she-goat.
Other Democrats in Washington edged away from calls for a special election to fill Obama’s place in the Senate, hoping that Lt. Gov. Pat Quinn would soon become governor and fill the vacancy on his own. That would assure the party of holding the seat, and on a far faster timetable than any balloting would allow.Harry Reid is telling Blagojevich to resign and not try to appoint anybody. He and other Democrats are threatening not to seat anybody who gets appointed by the corrupt governor. However, he doesn't say anything about choking the person, which, as Ezra mentions, differs from how he did it in his younger days.
As I've mentioned before, I'm hoping that Quinn ally Jan Schakowsky ends up in the Senate. Really, the possibility of this is my big reason for wanting Quinn to do the appointing. No guarantee that he'll pick her, but I have to imagine that the chances aren't bad. Says wikipedia:
Schakowsky is one of the most (by some accounts, the most) liberal members of the current US Congress. She is a member of the Congressional Progressive Caucus. She frequently gains ratings of between 90 and 100 from liberal and progressive interest groups and lower ratings from conservative groups.So: Solid liberal, good fundraiser, Pelosi ally, feminist, Iraq War opponent, and 'truest heir to Paul Wellstone'. And as far as we can tell, she's untainted by the current scandal. Gimme some o' that.
Schakowsky has been known for her support of women's issues while in Congress, and is a close friend of Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D, CA). She reportedly phoned every female partner of a law firm in Chicago during her first run for office in 1998, and has gained national acclaim for her fundraising prowess.
The Nation endorsed her for vice president in the United States presidential election, 2004, stating that she is 'the truest heir to Paul Wellstone in the current Congress.' She was, however, not selected as John Kerry's running mate.
Schakowsky has been outspoken in her opposition to the Iraq War.
The academic world contains multitudes of well-trained historians who can produce material that is authoritative, novel, and deeply analytical, and who can relate current events to a history that they've rigorously studied for their entire professional lives. These are the people who should be getting senior fellowships in economic history at the CFR, not authors of ideologically charged popular books.
Academia is full of very smart researchers who have spent decades of their lives doing meticulous research on every topic under the sun. It's a shame that so much of our expertise in fields like history and sociology just sits where it is, churning out papers for other academics to read, instead of being used to help people understand issues that matter.
Tuesday, December 9, 2008
If you believe that the President's numbers generally track the right track/wrong track number, recall that prior to the election we were in the single digits on the right track. It appears that almost everyone who thinks the country is on the "wrong track", regardless of what they think the "right track" looks like, belives Barack Obama will take use there.
That, or no one wants to say The Black Guy isn't doing a good job.
I have no idea who Quinn would pick to fill the seat, if he should become Governor.
Update: "He’s from the progressive wing of the state Democratic party, and is very close with Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.)" Can I have a hooray for that? Schakowsky would be awesome.
To quote the relevant bits of "A Message to Obama's Progressive Critics":
This is not a time for the left wing of our Party to draw conclusions about the Cabinet and White House appointments that President-Elect Obama is making...This is an outrage! With chocolate sauce and a cherry on top. I will bite into it. Viciously, I tell you, viciously.
As a liberal member of our Party, I hope and expect our new president to address those issues that will benefit the vast majority of Americans first and foremost. That's his job. Over time, there will be many, many issues that come before him. But first let's get our economy moving, bring our troops home safely, fix health care, end climate change and restore our place in the world.
Sunday, December 7, 2008
A year ago, Gates caused a ruckus by halting the F-22 program at its current level of 187 planes, half as many as the Air Force wanted. He should stick to that decision. He may get the support of his new Air Force chief of staff, Gen. Norton Schwartz, whose background isn't in fighter planes but in airlift: i.e., in planes that transport ground troops and their weapons to the battlefield.The F-22 was designed to keep us one step ahead of the next generation of Soviet fighters. Then the Soviet Union fell, but defense contractors weren't about to let that keep them from selling something really pricey to America. Gates' general agenda, according to the article, is to shift focus away from expensive Cold War superweapons to cheaper stuff that actually helps with today's conflicts. It's also good to hear that the new Air Force chief of staff does airlift, because that's much more of a useful skill in these Army-centric times than fighter jockery.
I got this article from right-wing blogger Tigerhawk, who also approves of Gates' views. If keeping a figure with Gates' bipartisan credibility in Defense will keep conservatives content about net reductions in defense spending, it's a thing well done.
That's 15 of the 19 GOP Senators up for re-election in 2010. Mel Martinez and Sam Brownback are retiring, bob-bennett.com is taken and he's from Utah so a serious challenge is unlikely, and everything McCain related has been taken off the market already. (Jeb Bush is a likely Florida candidate, but everything remotely interesting on him seemed to be taken.)
At present, my plan is to do these things up more or less like my Saxby Chambliss site. I only got that going in October, so there wasn't enough time to do good search engine optimization and drive it to the top of the Google results. This time I'll be able to start early, hopefully getting my sites even higher than the Republicans' own campaign webpages or their Senate pages. I imagine I'll be able to use some of the same material on all these sites, so having one person do all this is actually a fairly efficient process.
Chris Bowers and a bunch of people at Open Left were buying Google ads against Republicans this time around, and I imagine we'll have even more people doing stuff like that in 2010. It helps you get better ad placement for the search phrase "Jim Bunning" if your ad links to a site that has "Jim Bunning" in the URL. Part of my goal will be to create an excellent target page for our team's Google ads.
I've also played a little defense:
I'd like to give these away to the senators or the Democratic Party, hopefully with the message that they need to be a bit more aggressive about domain name defense. I mean, Chris, you were running for president, and you didn't buy up chris-dodd.com! Sam Brownback (or somebody) bought up sam-brownback.com, and he's from the 13th century.
Back to the Republicans. I'm probably going to get the real sites on them up in 2010 after the next year has happened. What should I put up there for the time being? Any ideas?
Saturday, December 6, 2008
Sadly, there's no common candidate between the Humane Society and the foodie lobby. They should be able to get along, as neither side likes factory farming and the foodies did mention humane treatment of animals in their recommendations.
Thursday, December 4, 2008
A dude who comes at agricultural policy from a family farmer / global trade perspective could be an excellent Secretary of Agriculture. I have no idea what his chances are of getting the position, though the fact that he's in the middle of a nasty recount where the Republicans have been making elaborate preparations to whine about a losing outcome probably doesn't help.
From 1986 until 2006, he served as the president of the Minneapolis-based Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy, a non-profit organization working with businesses, churches, farm organizations, and other civic groups to foster long-term sustainability for Minnesota’s rural communities. Among other issues, it looked into how global trade rules in fact impact family farmers and rural communities. Ritchie also founded the League of Rural Voters.
In 1994, Ritchie was a co-founder of the Global Environment & Trade Study, located at Yale University, which conducted research on the linkages and potential synergies between international trade and the environment. Also that year, Ritchie organized a conference to commemorate the 50th anniversary of the Bretton Woods conference. The 1994 conference, held at the Mt. Washington Hotel, featured a return of many of the "old timers" who had attended the 1944 conference or other founding conferences for the postwar economic system.
Wednesday, December 3, 2008
In addition, as Steve notes, the BCS is just a terrible way to pick a national champion. Each year seems to bring a new way in which the third-place team is screwed; this year, we have the Big 12 tiebreaker freezing out Texas, despite the fact that they beat Oklahoma in a head-to-head matchup. I like the irreverent Texas Tech coach's suggestion: use the football team's graduation rate to break the tie. Mid-Majors are effectively barred from winning the national title (query if this ever happened prior to the BCS). The system stinks, and given how many people care an awful lot about college football, it would have broad impact on a lot of Americans if we moved to a sensible playoff.
It didn't have to be this way. The natural thing to do after November 2006, if you're a party being dragged down by an unpopular president, is to run away from the president and have your House and Senate leaders cut deals with Democrats to get stuff passed and take your worst issues of the table. Compromise on S-CHIP. Agree on a plan to get out of Iraq. Let vulnerable Congresspeople assert their independence by talking against the president on cable shows and straying from unpopular positions on party-line votes. If it makes the Democrats look good too, don't sweat it -- you've got 22 Senate incumbents up for election and the Democrats only have 12, so hatred of Congress hurts you more than it hurts the majority party. While I'm willing to give Mitch McConnell credit for being a devious legislative tactician, he has only himself to blame for the strategic blunders that led to Democrats getting to 58 or 59 Senate seats.
I'm sort of curious about how the GOP leadership comes out of watching Democrats win back both chambers in 2006 and keeps doing what they're doing. Is it just that the key GOP constituencies are too stupid to let you compromise? If I were a health insurance lobbyist, I would've given these guys room to bend on S-CHIP in 2008 so that I wouldn't be broken by universal health care in 2009. Or are the memories of victory in 1994 and 2004 so vivid that you can't even think about doing other things as part of a defensive strategy?