Since this blog is linked to GW's policy journal Policy Perspectives, I thought it might be useful for people interested in working for the journal to know just what it is we do. So here's a day of my work as this year's Managing Editor.
11:15
Meet with Micah at the office for our weekly catch-up. We discuss where we're at--three of our four articles are in layout and all five book reviews have been laid out--and figure out what we need to do to keep the team on-track. He e-mails the three article teams a reminder to have their layout edits done by tomorrow so I can incorporate them. I tell him I still need to point the hideous old website to the glorious new address. We also talk about the submissions we got for next year's EIC and Managing Editor and how/when we'll do the hand-off.
12:00
Micah and I meet with librarian/associate editor Caroline in the library. We go over the work we still need to do to get the journal's archives online by mid-May: finish tagging metadata (article subjects and keywords for online searches), use her XML procedure to upload all the PDFs, check the site to make sure the links work and everything's how we want, e-mail past authors to inform them what we're doing, write a press release announcing the new site and the digital archives.
1:30
Lunch
1:45
Call the ISS Help Desk to get password for old GW website access. Talk with Glenn, who is amazingly helpful, and resets the password in ten minutes.
2:00
Respond to e-mails from book reviewers and editors about metadata assignment, the layout QC, and due dates. Route old website to new one. Discuss web access citation standards with Micah: we agree to set the style at full access date (i.e., month day, year). I update the style guide.
2:15
Start blog post.
2:30
E-mail Caroline master metadata spreadsheet. Sift through inbox, answering additional assorted questions.
3:15
Lay out editor biographies; incorporate final book review edits into journal layout.
4:00
Download and start reading applications for Editor-in-Chief and Managing Editor.
4:30
Run into Lauren, one of our authors. We talk about proper citation, the timeline to publication, and her final edits.
4:45
E-mail Teresa, another of our authors, about data for some of the figures in her piece. Format one of her graphs in Illustrator and lay it out in the journal.
5:15
Receive Linnea's final edits to the layout of Amanda's article (i.e., the QC). Put them in backpack to incorporate later.
5:30
Finish up blog post and start packing up for class.
6:10
Class!
Thursday, April 2, 2009
Monday, March 23, 2009
Favorite Courses Thread
I thought we could start a discussion about favorite classes offered in the Trachtenberg School of Public Policy and Public Administration. I kinda don't have the best exposure to the program's offerings—as a joint degree student, I don't really get any electives. But that doesn't mean I haven't had some great classes! Here's my favorite...
I enjoyed ECON 222 Cost-Benefit Analysis. I think Professor Cellini is the reason I liked the course so much. I'm not an economics person by any means, and Professor Cellini was very responsive to the different level of needs among different students. She often had after hours class sessions for those of us who needed further explanation of concepts or help navagating Microsoft Excel. And her office hours were always helpful. The main project for the semester, a cost-benefit analysis (go figure), was a beast. But I credit the project with helping me to really, REALLY understand many of the economic concepts I learned in the class and previous courses.
What's yours?
I enjoyed ECON 222 Cost-Benefit Analysis. I think Professor Cellini is the reason I liked the course so much. I'm not an economics person by any means, and Professor Cellini was very responsive to the different level of needs among different students. She often had after hours class sessions for those of us who needed further explanation of concepts or help navagating Microsoft Excel. And her office hours were always helpful. The main project for the semester, a cost-benefit analysis (go figure), was a beast. But I credit the project with helping me to really, REALLY understand many of the economic concepts I learned in the class and previous courses.
What's yours?
Friday, March 20, 2009
Guerrilla Government at the Environmental Film Festival
For Capstone, I recently finished reading Rosemary O'Leary's fascinating The Ethics of Dissent: Managing Guerrilla Government (also reviewed by Eric Boyer in the journal last year). Imagine my surprise when I saw similar stories of bureaucrats fighting the bureaucracy from the inside during this week's showing of The National Parks: America's Best Idea and The World According to Monsanto as part of the Environmental Film Festival. The former told how George Melendez Wright and Adolph Murie, two Park scientists, fought against Park policies regarding wildlife management by writing copiously researched scientific reports (yes, thousands of sample of wolf poop were dissected for science), limply implemented hated policies, and using personal contacts to spark dissent from outside the system. The latter interviewed both political appointees on Monsanto's payroll and rank-and-file employees who both went along with and stood up to the FDA's GMO food policy.
These stories make me proud to call myself a bureaucrat. Although O'Leary rightly points out that guerrilla activism in government agencies isn't always for the greater good, it is important to keep in mind that government policy is not created in a vacuum by political appointees, but is often crucially shaped by career experts who are passionate about what they do. (Monsanto shows how shamefully civil servants can give in to private interests.) This is important to remember, because even perfectly intelligent people like George Packer tend to paint government as "sluggish and indifferent" with only rare examples of employees worthy of being singled out for even two (rather than three) cheers.
I won't hold back. I say, three cheers for the bureaucrats!
These stories make me proud to call myself a bureaucrat. Although O'Leary rightly points out that guerrilla activism in government agencies isn't always for the greater good, it is important to keep in mind that government policy is not created in a vacuum by political appointees, but is often crucially shaped by career experts who are passionate about what they do. (Monsanto shows how shamefully civil servants can give in to private interests.) This is important to remember, because even perfectly intelligent people like George Packer tend to paint government as "sluggish and indifferent" with only rare examples of employees worthy of being singled out for even two (rather than three) cheers.
I won't hold back. I say, three cheers for the bureaucrats!
Thursday, March 12, 2009
MPA's Wall of Shame
I don't like hearing Hannity & Colmes or Chris Matthews on my way to class. I don't like being bombarded with car and oil company commercials while waiting for the elevator. I especially take offense to the notion that cable news networks could possibly fall under the aegis of "journalism."
We MPAs at the Trachtenberg School tend to think that the MPA building, which houses TSPPPA faculty and staff offices (as well as Policy Perspectives), was named for our degree. It's easy to forget that between class on the 3rd floor and offices on the 6th and there are two floors dedicated to the Media and Public Affairs program that really gave the building its name, as well as the wall of shame in the lobby.
American media have a long and proud tradition, assorted gems of which are encased in glass outside the Jack Morton auditorium. These artifacts are important for future journalists to remember what they're aspiring to accomplish; less useful is the wall of televisions constantly blaring the completely useless 24-hour news networks: CNN, MSNBC, Fox News. True, GW's television station and C-SPAN are also broadcast, but without sound, forcing everyone who has to wait for the elevator to listen to the offensive, partisan, but worse--uninformed--opinions and commentary that form the core programming at the big three. Are the TVs there to show our journalism students what news is supposed to be? Does the school really think anything of value comes out of cable news programming, and not realize how it's contributing to the nation's
intransigently partisan news-junkiness?
For an MPA like me, the wall of shame is a constant reminder of how difficult it is to implement good public policies when the level of discourse is so pathetic. Why not save some energy by unplugging the TVs and replacing them with newspaper front pages? Or broadcast classic news segments alongside the current drivel? Anything would beat having to see Wolf Blitzer ever again.
We MPAs at the Trachtenberg School tend to think that the MPA building, which houses TSPPPA faculty and staff offices (as well as Policy Perspectives), was named for our degree. It's easy to forget that between class on the 3rd floor and offices on the 6th and there are two floors dedicated to the Media and Public Affairs program that really gave the building its name, as well as the wall of shame in the lobby.
American media have a long and proud tradition, assorted gems of which are encased in glass outside the Jack Morton auditorium. These artifacts are important for future journalists to remember what they're aspiring to accomplish; less useful is the wall of televisions constantly blaring the completely useless 24-hour news networks: CNN, MSNBC, Fox News. True, GW's television station and C-SPAN are also broadcast, but without sound, forcing everyone who has to wait for the elevator to listen to the offensive, partisan, but worse--uninformed--opinions and commentary that form the core programming at the big three. Are the TVs there to show our journalism students what news is supposed to be? Does the school really think anything of value comes out of cable news programming, and not realize how it's contributing to the nation's
intransigently partisan news-junkiness?
For an MPA like me, the wall of shame is a constant reminder of how difficult it is to implement good public policies when the level of discourse is so pathetic. Why not save some energy by unplugging the TVs and replacing them with newspaper front pages? Or broadcast classic news segments alongside the current drivel? Anything would beat having to see Wolf Blitzer ever again.
Sunday, March 8, 2009
This is your intelligence community on potato vodka...
Moscow is all gaga over Russian professor, former KGB analyst and foreign policy "expert" Igor Panarin. But elsewhere, he is not generating headlines of the flattering variety by any means. His claim to fame: predicting the U.S.A. will cease to exist as of next year. Apparently, demographic and social trends will lead to civil war as wealthier states secede from the union. Then, the country will split along ethnic lines and foreign powers will move in to claim the smoldering remains. Here's how the process shakes out in this starry-eyed Kremlin fantasy:
Let's recap:
1) South Carolina, Tennessee and Kentucky join the EU, under the same central government as Vermont.
2) Kansas and Missouri (not to mention Colorado Springs) become part of Canada, but Washington does not.
3) Texans voluntarily submit to the will of Mexico City bureaucrats.
4) Utah and Arizona are annexed by China.
Not to mention Alaska and all its oil goes to Russia, who can't even handle the territory it already has. But wasn't this the purpose of the Kremlin's exercise in silly geopolitical daydreaming to begin with?
Now the punchlines virtually write themselves, but I'll make a couple more serious observations under the assumption that this theory is anything but laughable and let you all add the jokes.
First, there are certainly demographic divides within the US, but they are more than canceled out by the economic benefits of a strong central government and nearly nonexistent interstate economic barriers. Meaning unity hasn't been a serious problem for the country for some time now.
Second, any political collapse in the United States would undoubtedly be accompanied by economic collapse. This would cause an alarming rise in instability in all of the countries mentioned as potential colonizers, including and especially the already unstable Russia.
Third, any of the colonial alliances portrayed in that colorful map above would present serious strategic problems for Russia. Most notably, the American east would immediately be the largest nation in the EU and would certainly push the consortium towards a more hawkish stance on Russia's bullyish extortion of Europe regarding natural gas. Also, about the last thing Russia needs right now is a stronger China to threaten its hold on Siberia.
If you've read this far, please feel free to add your jokes in the comments.
Let's recap:1) South Carolina, Tennessee and Kentucky join the EU, under the same central government as Vermont.
2) Kansas and Missouri (not to mention Colorado Springs) become part of Canada, but Washington does not.
3) Texans voluntarily submit to the will of Mexico City bureaucrats.
4) Utah and Arizona are annexed by China.
Not to mention Alaska and all its oil goes to Russia, who can't even handle the territory it already has. But wasn't this the purpose of the Kremlin's exercise in silly geopolitical daydreaming to begin with?
Now the punchlines virtually write themselves, but I'll make a couple more serious observations under the assumption that this theory is anything but laughable and let you all add the jokes.
First, there are certainly demographic divides within the US, but they are more than canceled out by the economic benefits of a strong central government and nearly nonexistent interstate economic barriers. Meaning unity hasn't been a serious problem for the country for some time now.
Second, any political collapse in the United States would undoubtedly be accompanied by economic collapse. This would cause an alarming rise in instability in all of the countries mentioned as potential colonizers, including and especially the already unstable Russia.
Third, any of the colonial alliances portrayed in that colorful map above would present serious strategic problems for Russia. Most notably, the American east would immediately be the largest nation in the EU and would certainly push the consortium towards a more hawkish stance on Russia's bullyish extortion of Europe regarding natural gas. Also, about the last thing Russia needs right now is a stronger China to threaten its hold on Siberia.
If you've read this far, please feel free to add your jokes in the comments.
Friday, March 6, 2009
Arabesque: Arts of the Arab World
There's an amazing exhibit going on at the Kennedy Center. Arabesque: Arts of the Arab World offers a glimpse into the unique culture of the Arab world. The exhibit features the works of many artists, from the ancient to the modern, from the abstract to the concrete. In addition to the displayed art, patrons can see performances of music and dancing. I'm kicking myself for missing the Whirling Dervishes.
The exhibit continues through March 15. Don't miss it!
The exhibit continues through March 15. Don't miss it!
Sunday, March 1, 2009
Ode to the Style Sheet
Something I've insisted on in the editorial process at Policy Perspectives is that each team work with a style sheet. So I thought I'd take a moment to explain what a style sheet is, why it's so useful in the editing process, and how to create and use one.
First, a style sheet is a summary of the author's preferences for anything that could be up for debate (is "childcare" one word, should you spell out "percent," and do you hyphenate "African-American"?). It is used by copyeditors to ensure consistency in a manuscript, and can also help with fact-checking in scholarly work, as an editor can quickly check all cited authors' names and works against the style sheet for correctness.
It's easy to create one. Just grab a blank sheet of paper, create a Word doc, or, if you're editing with a team, a Google doc, and start marking anything that crops up. I tend to be nit-picky about hyphens, so I'll include all words that are or could be hyphenated: trade-off, decisionmaker, 4-star center. I also put in bills and authors that are referenced, especially if they have tricky names, as well as terms that are capitalized (or not) in a way that seems unusual to me.
I'm a convert, and I hope everyone at the journal will become masters of the style sheet, so we can make Volume 16 the best yet!
First, a style sheet is a summary of the author's preferences for anything that could be up for debate (is "childcare" one word, should you spell out "percent," and do you hyphenate "African-American"?). It is used by copyeditors to ensure consistency in a manuscript, and can also help with fact-checking in scholarly work, as an editor can quickly check all cited authors' names and works against the style sheet for correctness.
It's easy to create one. Just grab a blank sheet of paper, create a Word doc, or, if you're editing with a team, a Google doc, and start marking anything that crops up. I tend to be nit-picky about hyphens, so I'll include all words that are or could be hyphenated: trade-off, decisionmaker, 4-star center. I also put in bills and authors that are referenced, especially if they have tricky names, as well as terms that are capitalized (or not) in a way that seems unusual to me.
I'm a convert, and I hope everyone at the journal will become masters of the style sheet, so we can make Volume 16 the best yet!
Saturday, February 28, 2009
President Obama unleashes the fightin' words
For a while, I was worried Obama was too conciliatory to accomplish the true progressive change America needs. That's why I didn't openly support him for most of 2007. And he certainly seemed to be excessively committed to bipartisanship at the expense of effectiveness in the earliest days of his administration.
But that seems to have changed dramatically in recent weeks. Check out the Weekly Address released today (using the Daily Kos version, which is in a more reliable format):
The key quote in my opinion:
But that seems to have changed dramatically in recent weeks. Check out the Weekly Address released today (using the Daily Kos version, which is in a more reliable format):
The key quote in my opinion:
"I realize that passing this budget won’t be easy. Because it represents real and dramatic change, it also represents a threat to the status quo in Washington....I know these steps won’t sit well with the special interests and lobbyists who are invested in the old way of doing business, and I know they’re gearing up for a fight as we speak. My message to them is this:You can read the full speech text at the White House blog.
"So am I."
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
Upcoming Event: Global Glimpses at the National Geographic Building
The National Geographic Live! Museum in D.C. hosts great events throughout the year. This weekend, the museum will show the five films nominated for the 2008 Foreign Language Film Award as part of the Global Glimpses series. Each film promises to be pretty dang amazing.
Friday, February 13, 7:00 PM: The Baader Meinhof Complex
Saturday, February 14, 5:00 PM: The Class
Saturday, February 14, 8:00 PM: Departures
Sunday, February 15, 2:00 PM: Revanche
Sunday, February 15, 6:30 PM: Waltz With Bashir
Tickets are only 8 bucks (a steal for a movie in D.C.) and include a complementary reception.
See you there!
Friday, February 13, 7:00 PM: The Baader Meinhof Complex
Saturday, February 14, 5:00 PM: The Class
Saturday, February 14, 8:00 PM: Departures
Sunday, February 15, 2:00 PM: Revanche
Sunday, February 15, 6:30 PM: Waltz With Bashir
Tickets are only 8 bucks (a steal for a movie in D.C.) and include a complementary reception.
See you there!
Sunday, February 8, 2009
Take a Hike!
With the weather turning pleasant, I've been hit with the urge to go hiking. As I don't have a car, I can't head down to my favorite weekend hike, the McAfee Knob-Dragon's Tooth-Home Place trifecta along the Appalachian Trail in central Virginia. For those who share my plight, or just want to get out for the day, here are some great hikes within DC.
- C & O Canal Towpath: Starts in Georgetown and runs the length of the C & O Canal (almost 200 miles) to end in Cumberland, Pennsylvania. More popular as a bike path because it's so flat and smooth, but there are campsites along the way. Bonus: You can hike a mile or two in Georgetown and pop out at the movie theater or Snap, an amazing crepe/bubble tea place.
- Capital Crescent Trail: Another trail popular with cyclists, this 12-mile trail goes from Silver Spring to Georgetown.
- Rock Creek Park Trail: Kind of a mixed bag, this trail cuts a North-South path straight through the city along Rock Creek. Inside the park are lots of grassy areas and picnic benches, but parts of the trail hug the Rock Creek Parkway, which offers more traffic than scenery.
Happy hiking!
Thursday, February 5, 2009
Why Judd Gregg? A Wacky Idea...
As half policy wonk and half progressive strategist, I have found it absolutely fascinating to try and figure out why the hell Barack Obama does half of the stuff he does. Like a master chess player, he seems to be consistently thinking a few steps ahead of the conventional wisdom, so some of his decisions make little sense unless you try to understand his ultimate goal.
The Judd Gregg pick as the new Commerce secretary is one such head-scratching move. Of course, there is the obvious play of trying to look bipartisan. Sure, we know Obama's made a concerted effort to do that, but Gregg is far from a natural choice when reaching across the aisle. He actually has quite a partisan record and is a renowned government-shrinking budget hawk. Like his former NH-Sen colleague John Sununu, Gregg has remained a relatively reliable Republican vote while his state has lurched hard to the left since 2004. For cryin' out loud, a few years ago Gregg even voted to eliminate the very Commerce Department he is now set to lead! A much better choice for this purpose would be Olympia Snowe or former Sen. Lincoln Chafee. So that probably isn't President Obama's ultimate motive.
Another obvious option is that Democrats want to pick up that all-important 60th senate seat. New Hampshire has a (at least nominally) Democratic governor who gets to appoint Gregg's successor, so it seems like a smart move, right? Well, not so fast. As you all know by now, Gregg made clear that unless Gov. Lynch picks another Republican to replace him, he will not take the cabinet position. So the pick turns out to be placeholder moderate Republican J. Bonnie Newman, who has never held public office. So much for picking up that extra seat (although it will create an open seat in 2010 that looks good for progressive Rep. Paul Hodes). While there is some modest benefit to Obama's political fortunes here, it's not a viable explanation for adding an anti-government Republican to his cabinet.
So here's my theory, which for the record I haven't heard anywhere else. Notice that Gregg voted in 1995 to eliminate the Commerce Department. Notice that the Obama Administration recently announced that the 2010 Census, traditionally under the jurisdiction of Commerce, will instead be reporting directly to the White House. Notice that President Obama has consistently talked about streamlining government and cutting out the waste. So with all this in mind, I believe that Obama picked Judd Gregg because he would be the best guy to dismantle the Commerce Department.
I mean, what does Commerce really do that couldn't be done in any other way?
The Judd Gregg pick as the new Commerce secretary is one such head-scratching move. Of course, there is the obvious play of trying to look bipartisan. Sure, we know Obama's made a concerted effort to do that, but Gregg is far from a natural choice when reaching across the aisle. He actually has quite a partisan record and is a renowned government-shrinking budget hawk. Like his former NH-Sen colleague John Sununu, Gregg has remained a relatively reliable Republican vote while his state has lurched hard to the left since 2004. For cryin' out loud, a few years ago Gregg even voted to eliminate the very Commerce Department he is now set to lead! A much better choice for this purpose would be Olympia Snowe or former Sen. Lincoln Chafee. So that probably isn't President Obama's ultimate motive.
Another obvious option is that Democrats want to pick up that all-important 60th senate seat. New Hampshire has a (at least nominally) Democratic governor who gets to appoint Gregg's successor, so it seems like a smart move, right? Well, not so fast. As you all know by now, Gregg made clear that unless Gov. Lynch picks another Republican to replace him, he will not take the cabinet position. So the pick turns out to be placeholder moderate Republican J. Bonnie Newman, who has never held public office. So much for picking up that extra seat (although it will create an open seat in 2010 that looks good for progressive Rep. Paul Hodes). While there is some modest benefit to Obama's political fortunes here, it's not a viable explanation for adding an anti-government Republican to his cabinet.
So here's my theory, which for the record I haven't heard anywhere else. Notice that Gregg voted in 1995 to eliminate the Commerce Department. Notice that the Obama Administration recently announced that the 2010 Census, traditionally under the jurisdiction of Commerce, will instead be reporting directly to the White House. Notice that President Obama has consistently talked about streamlining government and cutting out the waste. So with all this in mind, I believe that Obama picked Judd Gregg because he would be the best guy to dismantle the Commerce Department.
I mean, what does Commerce really do that couldn't be done in any other way?
- Bureau of Industry and Security - move to Dept. of Homeland Security
- Bureau of Economic Analysis - spin off into independent agency like BLS, or incorporate into Treasury
- Economic Development Administration & Minority Business Development Agency - move to HUD
- Int'l Trade Administration - move to Dept. of State
- Nat'l Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration - move to Interior or a new Dept. of Science & Technology
- Nat'l Telecom & Information Administration - spin off into independent agency, move to Dept. of Interior or to a new Dept. of Science & Technology
- Patent & Trademark Office - spin off into independent agency
- Nat'l Institute of Standards & Technology - move into Dept. of Education or move to new Dept. of Science & Technology
- National Technical Information Service - spin off into independent agency or move to new Dept. of Science & Technology
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
Where's That Forest Again? I Can't See Through All These Trees...
From today's Roll Call($):
Sometimes, the purveyors of Beltway conventional wisdom drive me to wonder if they even try to make logical sense.
President Barack Obama drove to Capitol Hill on Tuesday for meetings with House and Senate Republicans, but his bipartisan outreach appeared to hit a speed bump. Still, the reason may have more to do with philosophical differences than partisan politics or “the old ways of Washington.”Well gee, perhaps philosophical differences directly cause partisan politics?! But...but...that Darrell Issa is so nice to my Roll Call reporter friends at the cocktail parties. He couldn't possibly really believe all the bat$#!+ crazy stuff he says on the House floor!
Sometimes, the purveyors of Beltway conventional wisdom drive me to wonder if they even try to make logical sense.
Monday, January 26, 2009
The Wonders of Technology
If you're bored at work or something, here's a great way to kill the time. Check out this amazing panoramic photo of the inauguration making its way around the intertubes.
If you zoom in right behind President Obama, you'll see that Justice Clarence Thomas is fast asleep. Classic....and so symbolic!
If you zoom in right behind President Obama, you'll see that Justice Clarence Thomas is fast asleep. Classic....and so symbolic!
Thursday, January 22, 2009
Inauguration stories?
Did anyone get stuck in the Purple Gate Tunnel of Doom? Meet any cool people? Go to any of the balls? Or just wander around the mall area and soak in all the magic of a historic day?
Comments are open, and the more pics the better!
Comments are open, and the more pics the better!
Wednesday, January 21, 2009
Another Example of Change
What a day yesterday was in Washington! I hope all of you were able to fully appreciate the mayhem and exhilaration that enveloped the city and the nation on this historic day.
I just moseyed on over to the new WhiteHouse.gov, and the changes from the Bush Admin could not be starker. For example, you can download the official White House blog feed for your RSS reader.
While I'm here, I'll also post the Obama's first proclamation:
I just moseyed on over to the new WhiteHouse.gov, and the changes from the Bush Admin could not be starker. For example, you can download the official White House blog feed for your RSS reader.
While I'm here, I'll also post the Obama's first proclamation:
NATIONAL DAY OF RENEWAL AND RECONCILIATION, 2009
- - - - - - -
BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
A PROCLAMATION
As I take the sacred oath of the highest office in the land, I am humbled by the responsibility placed upon my shoulders, renewed by the courage and decency of the American people, and fortified by my faith in an awesome God.
We are in the midst of a season of trial. Our Nation is being tested, and our people know great uncertainty. Yet the story of America is one of renewal in the face of adversity, reconciliation in a time of discord, and we know that there is a purpose for everything under heaven.
On this Inauguration Day, we are reminded that we are heirs to over two centuries of American democracy, and that this legacy is not simply a birthright -- it is a glorious burden. Now it falls to us to come together as a people to carry it forward once more.
So in the words of President Abraham Lincoln, let us remember that: "The mystic chords of memory, stretching from every battlefield and patriot grave to every living heart and hearthstone all over this broad land, will yet swell the chorus of the Union, when again touched, as surely they will be, by the better angels of our nature."
NOW, THEREFORE, I, BARACK OBAMA, President of the United States of America, by the authority vested in me by the Constitution and laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim January 20, 2009, a National Day of Renewal and Reconciliation, and call upon all of our citizens to serve one another and the common purpose of remaking this Nation for our new century.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this twentieth day of January, in the year of our Lord two thousand nine, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and thirty-third.
Sunday, January 18, 2009
Be Careful What You Wish For...
In my previous post a few weeks ago, I made the case that Republicans seeking to redeem their public image and act in an important minority oversight role should be trying to challenge the nomination of Treasury designate Tim Geithner rather than Attorney General designate Eric Holder. I'm quite happy to see that despite Arlen Specter's hypocritical bluster (probably meant more to help stave off a 2010 primary challenge than out of any higher principles), Holder is virtually guaranteed to be confirmed. Yet I didn't imagine that Geithner might indeed end up being the controversial and embattled high-profile cabinet appointment.
Now I'm still not thrilled with Geithner, and his intimate ties to the failed leadership of Wall Street in the era of excess and subsequent bailouts are troublesome. I would've much rather seen a Paul Krugman, Joseph Stiglitz or even a Jason Furman type in the post. But you really can't credibly argue he's not qualified for the job in a strict resume sense. And I can't say with any great confidence that Geithner isn't the best guy to restore confidence in financial markets, because he certainly knows what he's doing.
So I'm quite ambivalent over the developing controversies that may, but probably will not derail Mr. Geithner's nomination. If we are to trust President Obama (I'm preemptively dropping the "elect" a day in advance), we should want his Treasury pick to be confirmed since he has placed a lot of faith in the man. Unfortunately for me, I'm a skeptical New Yorker - not so quick to trust a favored authority figure. While I honestly couldn't care less about the undocumented immigrant housekeeper (in NYC it's actually hard to find a non-undocumented immigrant housekeeper), I think Geithner's tax troubles are a very serious concern considering the scandal encompass an area directly within Treasury's jurisdiction. If the man in charge of the IRS is seen as a miserly tax cheat who works on behalf of elite Wall Street interests and is staunchly supported by Mr. Obama, it will be that much harder for #44 to make a convincing case that we need to pay more taxes in the name of the common good.
I really hope I'm wrong.
Now I'm still not thrilled with Geithner, and his intimate ties to the failed leadership of Wall Street in the era of excess and subsequent bailouts are troublesome. I would've much rather seen a Paul Krugman, Joseph Stiglitz or even a Jason Furman type in the post. But you really can't credibly argue he's not qualified for the job in a strict resume sense. And I can't say with any great confidence that Geithner isn't the best guy to restore confidence in financial markets, because he certainly knows what he's doing.
So I'm quite ambivalent over the developing controversies that may, but probably will not derail Mr. Geithner's nomination. If we are to trust President Obama (I'm preemptively dropping the "elect" a day in advance), we should want his Treasury pick to be confirmed since he has placed a lot of faith in the man. Unfortunately for me, I'm a skeptical New Yorker - not so quick to trust a favored authority figure. While I honestly couldn't care less about the undocumented immigrant housekeeper (in NYC it's actually hard to find a non-undocumented immigrant housekeeper), I think Geithner's tax troubles are a very serious concern considering the scandal encompass an area directly within Treasury's jurisdiction. If the man in charge of the IRS is seen as a miserly tax cheat who works on behalf of elite Wall Street interests and is staunchly supported by Mr. Obama, it will be that much harder for #44 to make a convincing case that we need to pay more taxes in the name of the common good.
I really hope I'm wrong.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
