Brian Beutler reports:

“The third rail is not the third rail anymore,” Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI), the incoming House Budget chairman, told reporters at a Christian Science Monitor breakfast roundtable with reporters yesterday. “The political weaponization of entitlement reform is no longer as potent as it used to be, and the best evidence is this last election.”

Ryan and several other influential Republicans have found new confidence in the idea that the public would support entitlement cuts. Several candidates, Ryan said, won elections in tough districts on policy platforms modeled after his controversial — and conservative — Roadmap for America’s Future would would privatize social security and turn Medicare into a voucher system.

Here’s the Senate GOP caucus complaining that Democrats want to spend too little on Medicare:

I’m not sure which election Ryan was watching.

I’ve often wondered why escalators are so often broken in the DC Metro system. Unsuck DC Metro has a fascinating post indicating that the “pick” system used to allocate mechanics deserves a share of the blame:

The source said it’s very common for someone with seniority to bid on escalators they know to be well maintained so they can slide and and not do anything for the six months it’s under their “care.”

“They can coast for a while,” the source said. “Then when problems start, they can move on,” leaving an ailing escalator under the supervision of someone with less experience.

This way of doing things, the source said, “destroys the incentive” of the younger workers who know that if they do a good job, their escalators will be taken away by someone with more seniority.

It seems like the solution here would be to not let people switch on a fixed schedule. You stick with a given escalator until you retire or quit or get fired. Then when a slot opens up, people could be given the opportunity to switch to it with preference according to seniority.

Incidentally, stories like this are why I’m unimpressed by both the pro and con studies about whether or not public sector workers are “overpaid.” WMATA-area taxpayers are getting inadequate value for our escalator-related tax dollar. But the solution here isn’t to pay the people less and establish a new equilibrium where the job’s done badly, but at least it’s done cheaply. The issue is that the job needs to be done properly. The absolute worst thing about the American public sector is the prevalence of non-cash compensation in the form of quality-sapping work rules. The money is incidental.

Hot new sex research that I’ll link to if only for the SEO benefits:

In a first of its kind study, a team of investigators led by Justin Garcia, a SUNY Doctoral Diversity Fellow in the laboratory of evolutionary anthropology and health at Binghamton University, State University of New York, has taken a broad look at sexual behavior, matching choices with genes and has come up with a new theory on what makes humans ‘tick’ when it comes to sexual activity. The biggest culprit seems to be the dopamine receptor D4 polymorphism, or DRD4 gene. Already linked to sensation-seeking behavior such as alcohol use and gambling, DRD4 is known to influence the brain’s chemistry and subsequently, an individual’s behavior. [...]

“What we found was that individuals with a certain variant of the DRD4 gene were more likely to have a history of uncommitted sex, including one-night stands and acts of infidelity,” said Garcia. “The motivation seems to stem from a system of pleasure and reward, which is where the release of dopamine comes in. In cases of uncommitted sex, the risks are high, the rewards substantial and the motivation variable — all elements that ensure a dopamine ‘rush.’”

This kind of research is in its infancy, life is complicated, etc., so I wouldn’t take this particular finding to the bank. But clearly our knowledge of the genetic correlates of behavior is increasing and will only continue to increase in the future. The implications of this for public policy and society seem to me like they’ll be pretty profound.

People sometimes seem to think that you could forestall a Gattaca-esque scenario of genetic transparency through privacy laws. But it seems to me that you’d actually need to go stronger, and not only guarantee the right to not have your genetic information disclosed. To prevent the emergence of a near-universal disclosure equilibrium in a world of cheap genetic profiling over the long run, you’d need to ban voluntary disclosure. The mere fact that you don’t want a potential partner to know your DRD4 profile will tell her all she needs to know about you.

I think almost all political polls are overrated in terms of their relevance, but Gallup’s efforts to gauge the popularity of different occupational groups are underrated:

The very high ratings given to military officers is hugely important in understanding the politics of the war in Afghanistan. And the very high ratings given to health care providers is hugely important in understanding the politics of health care costs. Any given cut in spending might be a trimming of fat, or else it might lead to a major reduction in the availability of useful health care services. And in a standoff between a member of congress and a doctor or nurse over which it is, people are highly inclined to believe the member of congress is lying.