ThinkProgress Logo

Yglesias

The Apostasy of Bruce Bartlett

By Matthew Yglesias on May 17, 2009 at 11:28 am

newamericaneconom

I never totally understood why Bruce Bartlett caught so much flack from his fellow conservatives for writing Imposter: How George W. Bush Bankrupted America and Betrayed the Reagan Legacy. It’s true that the book was harshly critical of George W. Bush and his policies, but it was critical from a very orthodox conservative point of view.

This new book, though, seems like the real deal in terms of apostasy. Instead of a subtitle complaining that modern conservatives have betrayed the Reagan Legacy, it’s got a subtitle suggesting that abandoning the Reagan Legacy would be a smart idea: The New American Economy: The Failure of Reaganomics and a New Way Forward Here’s a summary:

As a domestic policy advisor to Ronald Reagan, Bruce Bartlett was one of the originators of Reaganomics, the supply-side economic theory that conservatives have clung to for decades. In The Next Economics, Bartlett goes back to the economic roots that made Impostor a bestseller and abandons the conservative dogma in favor of a policy strongly based on what’s worked in the past. Marshalling compelling history and economics, he explains how economic theories that may be perfectly valid at one moment in time under one set of circumstances tend to lose validity over time because they are misapplied under different circumstances. Bartlett makes a compelling, historically-based case for large tax increases, once anathema to him and his economic allies. In The Next Economics, Bartlett seeks to clarify a compelling and way forward for the American economy.

Sounds interesting. I’m looking forward to it.

Politics

Obama: ‘One of the biggest mistakes…is this notion you have to dumb things down for the public.’

By Faiz Shakir on May 17, 2009 at 11:07 am

slah-horizontal_optIn a 30-minute interview with Newsweek this past week, President Obama answers a wide array of questions dealing with the challenges he’s had to confront in office. The president points to his decision to send 17,000 more troops to Afghanistan as the hardest thing he’s had to do so far. Obama also argues that Americans appreciate a president who is willing to candidly discuss difficult and complex problems:

But one of the things I’ve actually been encouraged by—and I learned during the campaign—was the American people, I think, not only have a toleration but also a hunger for explanation and complexity, and a willingness to acknowledge hard problems. I think one of the biggest mistakes that is made in Washington is this notion you have to dumb things down for the public.

Also during the interview, Obama defended his efforts to reach out to Iran. “I think that there is the ability of an Islamic Republic of Iran to maintain its Islamic character while, at the same time, being a member in good standing of the international community and not a threat to its neighbors. … If it doesn’t work, the fact that we have tried will strengthen our position in mobilizing the international community, and Iran will have isolated itself, as opposed to a perception that it seeks to advance that somehow it’s being victimized by a U.S. government that doesn’t respect Iran’s sovereignty.”

Yglesias

The Lives of Others

By Matthew Yglesias on May 17, 2009 at 10:01 am

I’ve previously expressed some surprise that conservatives, who are strong believers in unrestrained state surveillance power here at home, seem to have greatly admired The Lives of Others, a film about the evils of unrestrained state surveillance in East Germany. What I’d forgotten until rewatching the film yesterday is that in the opening scene they show the Stasi using sleep deprivation and stress positions during an interrogation:

Admittedly, relative to Bush-era techniques this is pretty mild stuff. Being made to sit on your hands for an extended period of time would be uncomfortable and nobody would want to be subjected to continuous interrogation for this long. But compared to accomplishing this stuff by shackling people’s arms to the ceiling for days on end, the East Germans were being downright humane.

Politics

Under Rumsfeld, Pentagon published Bible verses on top-secret intel reports.

By Ali Frick on May 17, 2009 at 9:56 am

In a lengthy article on Donald Rumsfeld’s rocky tenure as Defense Secretary, GQ published never-before-seen cover sheets from top-secret intelligence briefings produced by Rumsfeld’s Pentagon. Starting in the days surrounding the U.S. invasion of Iraq, the cover sheets featured inspirational Bible verses printed over military images, “and were delivered by Rumsfeld himself to the White House” to the president, “who referred to America’s war on terror as a ‘crusade,’” GQ writes. Below are some examples of the Bible quotes (view the images here):

“Therefore put on the full armor of God, so that when the day of evil comes, you may be able to stand your ground, and after you have done everything, to stand.” [The quote appears over an image of a tank at sunrise]

“Commit to the LORD whatever you do, and your plans will succeed.” [The quote appears over an image of a soldier in Baghdad]

“It is God’s will that by doing good you should silence the ignorant talk of foolish men.” [The quote appears over an image of Saddam Hussein]

“Open the gates that the righteous nation may enter, The nation that keeps faith.” [The quote appears over an image of tanks entering an Iraqi city]

GQ’s Robert Draper writes that when colleagues complained to the Pentagon official who came up with the cover sheets, he replied, “‘my seniors’ — JCS chairman Richard Myers, Rumsfeld, and the commander in chief himself – appreciated the cover pages.”

Climate Progress

Contempt of Congress: House GOP reveals disdain for clean energy, livable climate with 450 planned amendments to Waxman-Markey and a more-of-the-same rehash of Cheney energy plan

By Joe Romm on May 17, 2009 at 9:25 am

Memo to House GOP:  We get it.  You don’t believe in clean, safe sources of energy that never run out or in protecting our children and grandchildren from catastrophic global warming or in competing with China, Japan, and Europe for the jobs and industries of the future or in making polluters pay (see House GOP pledge to fight all action on climate).

But your list of 450 planned amendments to Waxman-Markey during the markup next week — [insomniacs can download the list here] — goes beyond principled opposition to petty politics.

Two dozens amendments removing the tax benefits for each and every corporate member of the US Climate Action Partnership (which served as the basis of Waxman-Markey)?  How proud the founding fathers would be to see you try to use the tools of governance for meaningless attempts at retribution.

And 50 separate amendments to let each individual state opt out?  [Plus a DC-opt-out amendment! It's nice to know you thought of us, too, even though you won't let us have any representation in our government, but, thank you, no, we want clean energy jobs and a livable climate.]

I am interested to see details of the “American Hero Exemption and Credit,” but since it follows the “Defense Department Exemption,” I’m guessing it would be an amendment to exempt veterans from the bill.  Of course, if America keeps following your all of the above more-of-the-same energy policy, then we’ll end up with lots more veterans as it would mean our dependence on oil from unstable regions would keep rising and rising.

And what is the point of more than 100 amendments of the form:

  • Suspends the Act should more than 1,000 jobs in Wyoming be lost due to implementation of this Act
  • Suspends the Act should 2,000 jobs in Texas be lost due to implementation of this Act
  • Suspends the Act should more than 5,000 jobs in Utah be lost due to implementation of this Act?

What can one say but, Joe ‘get shade’ Barton and House GOP plan to fiddle furiously while planet burns.

And speaking of letting the planet burn, the House GOP has introduced its alternative bill (summary here).  You can’t really call it an alternative climate bill, since it doesn’t stop US greenhouse gas emissions from rising and the words “climate change” and “global warming” hardly appear in it at all — except to strip any authority from the EPA to address the problem.  The bill doesn’t define the GOP position so much as redefine it or rather undefine it — the bill would undefine the word “pollutant” so that it doesn’t include greenhouse gases, and undefine renewable energy so that it does include nuclear power.

Indeed, the plan is almost indistinguishable from the infamous Cheney energy plan.  You’ll remember that at the beginning of the Bush administration Cheney developed a “comprehensive” energy plan after consulting with a vast array of stakeholders — from “Exxon to “Mobil” as one pundit quipped.  Well, the House GOP remove the staples and replaced the cover.

Frank O’Donnell, president of Clean Air Watch, has an excellent critique first published by Wonk Room, which I reprint below:

Read more

Yglesias

Social Spending and Inequality

By Matthew Yglesias on May 17, 2009 at 8:31 am

This is material I’ve covered before in a somewhat different form, but let it be said again—you can reduce inequality by having your government spend more on social services:

socialspending-1

I think the links between taxation, spending, and inequality are the most plausible explanation of the fact that the highest-taxed countries are the happiest. It can’t be that paying taxes makes Danes happy. But plausibly, living in a relatively egalitarian society makes people happy.

Newer

Switch to Mobile
ThinkProgress Signup Overlay Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress

Sign Up