Healthcare and Hayek

Matthew Yglesias enlists no less a figure than Hayek to the cause of government run insurance, citing him as saying that state involvement in a plan to insure some risks is not necessarily a threat to individual freedom. I'll leave it to the Hayek scholars as to whether or not this is an accurate representation of his views.

Yglesias goes on from here and says this:

One interesting issue here regards preventive care. Things like regular checkups, wellness advise, basic screening, etc. don’t meet the definition of “genuinely insurable risks.” At the same time, based on what we actually know about medicine an ounce of prevention really is worth a pound of cure and as long as you’re going to be having the state pick up the tab for illness it seems very practically sound to also have the state invest in prevention. But defining what does and does not count as “prevention” would entail a degree of non-Hayekian planning. My take would be that these medical issues are sufficiently technical to think that Hayek’s general point about the superiority of the market to technocracy in organizing knowledge almost certainly doesn’t hold.[E.A.]

I'm not convinced by this argument at all. While it's no doubt true that the science of medicine has grown quite complex and technical, so has our society's ability to receive, analyze, and share information. This ability puts us in a good position to determine what constitutes effective care.

I think that this would be especially true in the case of preventive care, which is likely to tend toward the basic end of the treatment spectrum. In the case of more advanced treatments, it should still be the case that the non-expert can educate himself about the effectiveness of various treatment options, even if the underlying biological or chemical mechanisms of the treatment are not well understood.

Kagen recognized as a genius.

The Press Gazette reports that Representative Kagen has proposed some a change to the Obama healthcare plan:

WASHINGTON — Rep. Steve Kagen introduced legislation Thursday aimed at fixing what he said was the lone flaw in President Barack Obama's health-care proposal.

Kagen's Transparency in All Health Care Pricing Act would require any business or individual offering health-care-related services or products to openly disclose all their prices, including on the Internet....

Ultimately, Kagen said, the transparency would foster greater competition and lower premium costs. "When was the last time you bought something without knowing the price?" said Kagen, who is a physician.

I'm for price transparency, the problem is that the Obama plan cements in place our current system of employer-based, first-dollar health insurance coverage. While publishing prices will put some downward pressure on them, the fact that employers and not individuals continue to be the ones doing the shopping will tend to counteract this pressure.

While that's a great point, here's a better one by commenter runningphantom on the PG website:

With 2300 pages of healthcare jargon Mr. Kagen can find the "one lone flaw". The man is a genius!!

Successful Blogs Have Links

Summary of 2009 votes by Tom Petri and Steve Kagen.

Hilarious headlines.

Is Ron Paul crazy like a fox, or just crazy? If someone knows for sure, please tell me.

Dylan covers LL Cool J.

Think history books are boring? Try this.

Steyn on Amercian Decline

Mark Steyn has an article in the January edition of National Review (subscription required) arguing that America is at a point where it will have to choose between continuing the role of global superpower and withdrawing from the world and entering a state of decline.

While some might look at Western Europe as a model for decaying gracefully, Steyn argues that's simply not possible for the U.S. since it is our military spending that subsidizes the modern European welfare state:

...the only reason Sweden can be Sweden and Germany Germany and France France is that America is America. Who will cushion America's decline as America cushioned Europe's?

I'm sympathetic to this argument, as well as the one that there simply is no one in the world, not even China, that is able to play this role.

So I'm convinced decline is not the answer, but Steyn's alternative is that we double down on America as empire:

You can understand why the entire Left and an increasing chunk of the Right would rather vote for a quiet life. But that's not an option. The first victims of American retreat will be the many corners of the world that have benefited from an unusually benign hegemon. But the consequences of retreat will come home, too. In a more dangerous world, American decline will be steeper, faster, and more devastating than Britain's-and something far closer to Rome's.

Well if embrace of a Euro-style welfare state is inimical to freedom, I'm willing to wager that a state of permanent global hegemony enabled by enormous military expenditures is no less so.

Is there really no other option? No third way between rolling over and watching a great nation recede, perhaps in dramatic fashion, and a perpetual state of nation destroying/building where we kick in the door of every madrassa and then turn around and drill every village a new well.

WEAC lobbying successful, inefficient

The Wisconsin State Journal (H/T Fox Politics) highlights the recent Government Accountability report on lobbying in 2009. The group that spent the most on lobbying was the Wisconsin Education Association Council, WEAC.

The Wisconsin Education Association Council spent $1.5 million on lobbying last year - nearly twice as much as the second biggest spender, the Wisconsin Insurance Alliance.

Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce, who are often accused of wielding undue influence in government by Wisconsin's progressive bloggers, only spent about one third of WEAC's total.


The result of this effort, according to the State Journal:

...helps explain why the teachers got precisely what they wanted from the Democratic-run Legislature and governor's office in the last state budget: repeal of state limits on teacher compensation.

So the WEAC effort could certainly be described as successful, but there was a curious detail in the report that the State Journal did not highlight. While WEAC topped the list in terms of dollars spent, they did not spend the most hours lobbying. That honor went to Wisconsin Independent Businesses Inc., a lobbying group for small businesses, headed by former Assembly Speaker John Gard.

WEAC spent $1.5 million and lobbied 7,239 hours, or about $207/hour. WIB spent $458, 000 and lobbied for 7,939 hours, which is about $58/hour. So Wisconsin small business owner's were able to lobby the government for about one-fourth of what it cost the teacher's union to lobby on a per hour basis.

If WEAC isn't able to be efficient when they spend their own money lobbying, what chance is there that their lobbying efforts will result in a more efficient use of taxpayer dollars on education?

Is Healthcare Reform Really Dead?

I don't like resorting to questions for post titles, but I simply can't figure out whether we really have come to the end or not.

The latest gambit is that the previously passed Senate bill will be passed by the House and then both House and Senate will use the reconciliation process to revise the bill.

Democratic Senator Kent Conrad (SD) recently said that the Senate won't act on a reconciliation bill until the House passes the Senate bill. The only problem is that reports suggest Speaker Pelosi won't act on the Senate bill until the fixes are in place. When told of this, Conrad is quoted as saying then healthcare is "dead."

This congressional chicken-and-egg story really has left me wondering. Is Conrad making a point about the political reality of passing healthcare reform, or is he making a parliamentary point, and that the Senate is actually prohibited from taking up reconciliation until the House passes the Senate bill? Apparently, my confusion puts me in some good company. Even the Open Congress blog is having trouble deciphering Conrad:

I see three possible ways to interpret what Conrad means.

1) Conrad thinks debating a bill that would amend another bill that is not yet law would lead to a procedural point of order objection that would be sustained by the Parliamentarian of the Senate.

2) The Senate doesn’t have the votes to pass the reconciliation bill unless they are certain that the House will seal the deal by passing it and the underlying Senate bill.

3) David Waldman of Congress Matters speculates that it may be that the CBO would want to score the reconciliation bill in conjunction with the underlying bill so that the budgeting numbers for the reconciliation bill would be insanely high, and that the budget numbers could actually affect what the Democrats can do on a procedural level.

Why he’s so confident about the current strategy not working is unclear. It is totally uncharted legislative territory — never been done before. I share Waldman’s frustration with the lack of detail here.

I don't support the current health reform because I think that by further entrenching the current health insurance model of employer sponsored, first-dollar coverage, it fails to achieve any of the goals that we so desperately need: Reducing the cost of health care for routine and chronic care; mitigating financial suffering due to a catastrophic medical incident; increasing the ability of our work force to adapt to changing conditions; insuring the continuation of innovation in medicine.

None of these issues is going away, so it's clear that the question I started with isn't the correct one. Really all we can ask is whether or not the current healthcare reform effort is dead or not. For that answer, I guess we will just have to wait and see.

Successful Blogs Have Links

Special mid-week edition................

Wisconsin cows are still the best. Take that, California.

The problems with The Mt. Vernomenn Statement.

Big Igloo constructed right here in N.E.W.

I haven't been watching the Olympics so I didn't know about the 'curl girls'.

The advantages of a big family.

if money was sand I couldn't hold one grain
feel like a thief that knows he's been framed
for leaving the watch but stealing the chain

Dead Presidents

The rise in revenue and income caused by inflation is nominal, not real. Printing more monochrome pictures of dead statesmen doesn’t increase the supply of resources for use in repaying debts.

That's Don Bourdeaux to the Wall Street Journal, posted on Cafe Hayek.

I hate to post this on Washington's birthday, even if it is only his birthday according to the Gregorian calendar.

If we really wanted to do something to honor Washington, maybe we could start with some of those foreign entanglements, rather than just reading his farewell address in the Senate.

Mark Neumann Visits the Fox Valley

It's a safe bet that many voters in the Fox Valley look at the Republican gubernatorial race between Scott Walker and Mark Neumann and see a distinction without a difference. For those that attended Neumann's event in Appleton last week, this is no longer the case.

Neumann spoke and took questions for about an hour or so in an informal setting at an event hosted by the Outagamie County Republican Women. The same event that Scott Walker attended a few months ago. The difference in tone and appearance of the two events was stark.

The Walker team seemed to dominate the room. Men in suits typed furiously on their mobile phones. I didn't see anyone talk into their sleeve like the Secret Service, but I half expected it at any minute. The Neumann team, by contrast, consisted almost entirely of the actual Neumann team, Mark and his wife Sue. Before Neumann addressed the group, I heard Sue tell him that they needed some more literature for the information table. After which, he handed her the car keys from his pocket and she went out to the parking lot to get it.

While the Walker stump speech had a tone of urgency, Neumann's tone was serious but calm. He stressed an incremental and systematic approach to changing Wisconsin government. An approach based on his experience in the the House of Representatives. He also highlighted his success in the private sector, an area where there is a clear line of distinction between Walker and Neumann.

The fact that Walker's career has primarily been in public office is a liability given the general anti-politician mood that is present throughout the country. Of course, Neumann served in Congress, a body whose approval rating is quite low. Even here though, Neumann is able to turn his experience in Washington into a positive. He related to the room the story of how as a freshman congressman he challenged the Republican leadership when it came to spending and survived to tell the tale. I think it's fair to say that in the current election cycle, the only thing more popular with Republican primary voters than standing up to Democrats on spending is standing up to Republicans on spending. I suspect this is a story that we will hear more about in the months ahead.

None of this is to say that Neumann will be the nominee, or the next governor. I believe that both Neumann and Walker would be superior to Tom Barrett when it comes to reducing spending in Madison, and the tax burden that goes along with it. Furthermore, Barrett's record on partial birth abortion means that pro-life voters in Wisconsin won't be able to vote for him.

If Walker is the nominee, I'll likely vote for him, but that decision is still months away. It was clear from Neumann's appearance that the notion that he and Walker were without distinction is wrong. Neumann's experience both within and without government may prove to make him uniquely qualified to tackle the challenges Wisconsin is facing.

WI-8 Fundraising Numbers

My previous post on these numbers included a chart from the FEC with the data. Due to the limitations of the FEC website, the chart was hard to read and since I did it in two separate pieces it was out of scale.

Here is a new chart showing the same data, but in a more readable form. This chart was created with data from the FEC using google documents, and shows receipts through, and cash on hand as of 12/31/09. No amounts were reported for Williams, Thomas, or Stern.


As you can see Kagen has a large fundraising advantage, this is due not to his personal wealth, but to his $456,000 in PAC money (more on this soon).

As I said before, the most surprising number has to be that of Marc Trager.

Successful Blogs Have Links

It looks like Alaska wasn't worth the money after all.

Gallery of carnivorous plants. (H/T kottke)

The world of the Lizard People revealed. Finally!

How safe are the skies? Even Kim Kardashian can spot an Air Marshal.

Maybe I should reconsider Mitt Romney, apparently he knows the 'Vulcan Grip'.

A job at the Bank of Ireland just ain't what it used to be................

The C in CPAC

The Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) is happening this week, but from the reports I've heard, I can't help but wonder if the first 'C' should stand for confused, rather than conservative.

First, we have new MA Senator Scott Brown receiving a warm welcome. The only problem is that Brown's not much of a conservative, as Wisconsin's own Lance Burri pointed out a few short weeks ago:

He's pro-choice. He voted for a regional version of Cap-and-Trade. He voted for RomneyCare – an early version of what we now call ObamaCare.

Three big strikes, where conservatives are concerned.

Apparently those aren't strikes with the particular group of conservatives at CPAC.

Next, we have former V.P. Dick Cheney receiving what can only be described as a hero's welcome. What, exactly, has Cheney done that brings him such enthusiasm? Pat Buchanan reminds us:

[Former Senator Alan] Simpson is right in his assertion that anti-tax Republicans went along with George W. Bush’s spending spree — for two wars, prescription drug benefits under Medicare and No Child Left Behind.

Cheney was, of course, the number two man during this spending spree. No doubt he would prefer to be remembered primarily for the two wars, but even still, what conservatives find to applaud in this record is simply lost on me.

Maybe I should wait and reserve judgment until Wisconsin's CPAC insider tells me I'm all wrong, the dream is still alive, and being conservative means something more than adopting whatever stances are most likely to result in electoral success.

For now though confusion reigns and the chances for clarity are anything but certain.

Mark Neumann in Appleton

Republican candidate for governor Mark Neumann will be in Appleton tonight, February 18th at an event hosted by the Outagamie County Republican Women:

Mark Neumann, Candidate for Governor of WI will be here for a meet and greet from 5:30 - 7:30 Mark will be available to answer questions and will address attendees at 6:15.
Open to the public doors will open at 5:30
Free event, cash bar.
Appleton Yacht Club, 1200 S Lutz St, Appleton, WI

questions; contact Jackie Trudell at 920-540-2067.

I saw Scott Walker and several of the 8th CD candidates in this same forum. It is a smaller setting and you really get a chance to see the candidates up close.

If you are at all interested in who the next governor is I encourage you to attend.

Obey Among Top Ten in Earmarks

Open Congress highlights a report from Tax Payers for Common Sense on the top earmark recipients in Congress.

Wisconsin's Dave Obey (D) came in at number five in the House with a total of $55,435,000 from 54 earmarks.

In other news, it looks like the Sean Duffy Moneybomb may reach its goal of $25,000 today. For those of you that didn't know, Duffy is campaigning to replace Obey this fall.

You can see the rest of the House top ten as well as the Senate top ten at Open Congress.

Frozen Tundra 2.0

The Press Gazette reports that Representative Kagen, Governor Doyle, and a representative from the commerce department will announce Thursday that stimulus funds may be used to improve access to broadband internet service in the Green Bay area.

While I do believe that there is a role for government in the development of infrastructure, including the high tech kind, I'm generally skeptical of projects that simply expand access to proven technologies in areas where the market could do the job. I live in the Green Bay area and manage to post to this blog several times a week, so it's not exactly as if this is an internet wasteland. I don't know yet what exactly will be proposed, but it's not going to be Rural Free Delivery. In fact, Wisconsin already ranks 9th in the nation in individual internet use. (H/T Cindy Kilkenny).

These days, though, a specific and limited goal is no longer sufficient for government programs. The report on this announcement included this:

The Recovery Act initiative will “help bridge the technological divide, boost economic development, create jobs and improve education and health care” through the improvement of Internet access, according to the department.

Wow, is there anything stimulus can't do? Don't get too excited though, here was the next line of the report:

No other details were provided.

Huh, I wonder why?

Scary Sentences

What would a Europeanized United States look like? Imagine higher taxes, vastly expanded public-sector employment, infantilized upper-middle-class men and women who live with their parents until their late thirties because their jobs don't pay them enough to buy a house of their own, illegitimacy rising toward 50 percent and a growing social services bureaucracy that steps in to pick up the slack, plunging birthrates as rearing children grows ever more expensive, and an ever-larger stream of immigrants being imported to fill the breach. For many of America's elites, this scenario might not sound so uncongenial. But a victory for this vision of the American future would be a defeat for everything that has been distinctive about American life.

That is from Grand New Party: How Republicans Can Win the Working Class and Save the American Dream by Ross Douthat & Reihan Salam.

Anything but the facts ma'am

Via Slate:

Added to the list of reasons why journalists now lose their jobs: a belief in "objective reality." Atlanta Progressive News senior reporter Jonathan Springston was let go last week after he failed to live up to the paper's standards, namely, by reporting on events based on facts. In a statement issued to the Fresh Loaf blog, the APN explained that "[Springston] held on to the notion that there was an objective reality that could be reported objectively, despite the fact that that was not our editorial policy at Atlanta Progressive News."

I try exceptionally hard on this blog not to engage in name-calling, but it's hard to describe this as anything other than moronic.

Potential Consolidation of Mall Ownership in N.E.W.

The Press Gazette reports:

LOS ANGELES — Simon Property Group, the nation's largest shopping mall owner and owner of Bay Park Square mall in Ashwaubenon, has made a $10 billion hostile bid Tuesday to acquire ailing rival General Growth Properties.

The acquisition would allow General Growth, the No. 2 owner of shopping centers, to emerge from Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection. General Growth filed for bankruptcy last year after buckling under the weight of billions in debt it racked up during a massive expansion effort fueled by cheap credit.

General Growth owns the Fox River Mall in the town of Grand Chute.

The public radio program Marketplace had details on the possible merger on tonight's program:

BRETT NEELY: Simon and General Growth are like the Coke and Pepsi of the mall business. They own lots of high-end malls that skew towards Nordstrom rather than Sears. That's why Simon has wanted to buy General Growth since it declared bankruptcy last spring says Ivan Friedman, who runs RCS Real Estate Advisors.

IVAN FRIEDMAN: What this means is Simon is eliminating its largest competitor.

Maddow Proves She Can Pander Too

Much of the liberal blogosphere is currently engaged in trashing Evan Bayh (D-IN) for his retirement announcement, but prior to that there was at least a small amount of gloating over an exchange between MSNBC's Rachel Maddow and Congressman Aaron Schock (R-IL) on Meet The Press.

I would have went with, "Maddow Leaves Schock In Awe," but The Huffington Post instead just had, "Maddow Stuns Rep. Aaron Schock." Maddow's point centered on the fact that Schock attended the ribbon-cutting of a project in his district that was funded by a bill he voted against.

Regarding Schock's appearance at the green technology education program ribbon-cutting ceremony, the bill providing funds for that program was an omnibus-spending bill that Congress took up last spring....

"If you vote against the omnibus bill," [Maddow] said at the end of the exchange, "if you complain about the omnibus bill, if you tout your vote against the omnibus bill, it is hypocrisy to then go to your district and go to a ribbon cutting ceremony for something that is funded by the omnibus bill that you voted against."

Only problem is, there is absolutely nothing wrong with this. Elections, and votes in Congress, have consequences. Once they are over effective leaders recognize the changed landscape and adapt.

It wasn't hypocrisy when the Obama administration changed course on the closing of Guantanamo, or a New York City trial for KSM. It wasn't hypocrisy when Democratic Senator Jim Webb called for Democrats to slow down on health reform in the wake of Scott Brown's victory. If it was, why isn't Maddow outraged by these instances as well?

Maddow has a reputation as an intelligent analyst of politics and policy and a tough interviewer. She and her fans form a mutual admiration society centered on the idea that they are much smarter than your average Tea Party attending Fox viewer, whom they deride as being duped by every utterance of Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck.

That's what makes Maddow's rush to the bottom in this instance so damning. Her simplistic take on Schock's actions couldn't have been any more Palin-esque if she had written it on the palm of her hand. Who says they don't like red meat in blue states?

Once a spending bill becomes law, refusing a reasonable amount of money for home district projects would be more akin to cutting off your nose to spite your face, an act that many voters might find even more distasteful than any apparent bout of hypocrisy. Something I think the serious Maddow would agree with. It's too bad the Maddow we saw in this exchange was anything but serious.

Successful Blogs Have Links

Figure skating and NASCAR may share the possibility of injury as the root of their popularity.

Or maybe figure skating is fixed.

A graphic of just how bad employment has suffered during this recession. (H/T Mrs. RWC)

The sad end to the life of Orson Welles.

Krugman offers up some not so run of the mill insults.

give your ID card to the border guard
Yeah, your alias says you're Captain Jean-Luc Picard
Of the United Federation of Planets
'Cause he won't speak English anyway

Ryan's Road Map & Revenues

Reihan Salam (one of my favorite bloggers) notes a criticism of Paul Ryan's Roadmap when it comes to revenues:

I've been heaping praise on the Ryan Roadmap because it strikes me as a serious, thoughtful response to our long-term, slow-burning fiscal crisis. But it suffers from a glaring flaw, namely it's too-rosy revenue projections. Howard Gleckman has offered a smart critique that deserves Ryan's attention.

But, and this caveat is a whopper, CBO assumed this wonderful outcome would occur only if the revenue portion of Ryan’s plan generated 19 percent of GDP in taxes. And there is not the slightest evidence that would happen. Even though Ryan’s plan has a detailed tax component, his staff asked CBO to ignore it. Rather than estimate the true revenue effects of the Ryan plan, CBO simply assumed, as the lawmaker requested, that it would generate revenues of 19 percent of GDP.

It does seem to be a legitimate criticism that Ryan has decided to pick the revenue level rather than subject his own revenue plan to scrutiny at this time. Having said that, it's important to consider the number that he settled on.

Using CBO and OMB figures, The Heritage Foundation reports that the 30-year average historical tax burden is 18.4% of GDP. In other words, this average is very close to the 19% that Ryan chose for the CBO analysis.

Ryan could have chosen a number lower than this average in some attempt to score points with the hardcore anti-tax faction, or he could have chosen a much higher number which would have allowed him to spend even more on his Medicare vouchers and deflect at least some of the criticism he has faced. That he chose to do neither of these and instead went with an utterly reasonable assumption is certainly to Ryan's credit.

Baldwin on Credit Cards

Representative Tammy Baldwin recently issued a press release entitled Cracking Down on Credit Card Companies and which included this item:

A woman from Madison wrote to say that the 2 percent she’d been required to pay each month on her credit card balance had suddenly been raised to 5 percent. “It has doubled our payment and it will be nearly impossible to keep up with my payments,” she said.

Without any additional details, this sort of fragmentary anecdote seems like a flimsy reason to crack down on anyone,credit card companies included, so I sent the following email to Baldwin's office:

Ms. Goodman,


This recent press release from Congresswoman Baldwin's office included this item:


A woman from Madison wrote to say that the 2 percent she’d been required to pay each monthon her credit card balance had suddenly been raised to 5 percent. “It has doubled our paymentand it will be nearly impossible to keep up with my payments,” she said.


While I am sympathetic to the plight of those who have been negatively impacted by circumstances beyond their control, I'm not sure this fits that category. Wouldn't it be more accurate to say that a person unable to make a payment of 5% of her outstanding credit card debt each month has too much credit card debt?


Perhaps you can share some additional details of this woman's story that could add needed context to this press release. Otherwise it just seems like Ms. Baldwin is fighting to protect people from the consequences of their own bad choices.


I do want to say that I do not live in Ms. Baldwin's district, but I am aware that she may have aspirations for statewide office, perhaps replacing Senator Kohl. Any information you could share on that matter would be greatly appreciated.


Jeremy R. Shown
De Pere, WI

No response yet, but I did see that Paul Ryan is considering a run for Senate in 2012 (H/T Fox Politics).

Kagen's Idea of Being Fiscally Conservative

Steve Kagen in The Press Gazette today:

Everywhere I go, people are saying the same thing: Government must live within its means. I agree; after all, being fiscally conservative is the Wisconsin way

The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel 12/13/09:

Rep. Steve Kagen is the biggest spender in the U.S. House when it comes to spending taxpayer money on maintaining his congressional office, according to the latest quarterly logs of expenditures by members of Congress.

Too easy. Though I suppose spending right up to your allotted amount of taxpayer money is technically living within your means.

WI-8 Fundraising Numbers

Since tonight's 8th district candidate forum was cancelled*, I thought I would put up the current fundraising numbers.

This information is from FEC.gov. The site had zeroes in for Stern, Williams, and Thomas, so that is why they do not appear on the screen shot.

I've been following the race pretty carefully, and I have to say the biggest surprise in these numbers has to be the $50,000 that Marc Trager reported. His candidacy has been the least talked about, and yet he raised almost as much as Roth, who was viewed by some as the first "real choice" to enter the race.

For those who are surprised at just how big Kagen's fundraising numbers are, it is important to know that over $450,000 of his receipts have come from Political Action Committees (PAC's). Much of it from organized labor PAC's.

*It's rescheduled for next Tuesday, the 16th. Check out the N.E.W. Patriots for details.

Tea Party Foreign Policy

Fox News Sunday featured and interview with Sarah Palin in the wake of her appearance at the Tea Party convention in Nashville.

In one of the clips they featured, Palin had this to say:

"Treating this like a mere law enforcement matter places our country at great risk," she said. "To win that war, we need a commander-in-chief, not a professor of law standing at the lectern."

Palin, in a pre-taped interview with "Fox News Sunday" earlier in Nashville, said the way Obama is approaching national security is causing an "uneasiness" among many Americans.

"We are in war," Palin said.

I am wholeheartedly in agreement with the Tea Party principles of smaller and smarter federal government. One that taxes less and, more importantly, spends less. By and large, these have the been the issues at the forefront of the Tea Party movement. If the Tea Party becomes nothing more than the next platform for the disastrous neoconservative foreign policy of the Bush years then they'll have to count me out.

I have also argued against civilian trials for terror suspects, but Palin seems to be arguing a larger point and hinting that Palin '12 could mean no end to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

I know there are some that see the contradiction in simultaneously arguing for smaller government and enormous military expenditures, but judging by the reaction to Palin's speech those folks hadn't made it to Nashville.

Sentences to ponder*

Cutting checks — the core business of the Social Security Administration — is something government does well. Micromanaging medical providers, as we've discovered through long experience, is not something government does well.

That's Reihan Salam on Paul Ryan's Roadmap. An interesting and important notion given the fact that it sounds like Obama has not given up on health care reform just yet.

*Shamelessly stolen from Marginal Revolution. Since my traffic is several orders or magnitude less than theirs, I doubt they will ever find out. Before they do though, I need to figure out my own way to introduce these. I'm open to suggestions.

(Mis)Targeted Google Ads

Google's email program, gmail, includes one line advertisements featured at the top of the window where email messages are displayed.

The other day I got an ad encouraging me to support the National Republican Senatorial Committee in their efforts to elect Republicans to the Senate.

I like politics, so this ad seems appropriate. In fact, I had just linked the NRSC website in a blog post a few days earlier, so it seems like a perfect fit, right?

The only problem is that in the post I was critical of Republicans for spending too much money, and I essentially called the head of the NRSC stupid.

The things that google can do to target ads is nothing short of amazing, but it's obvious it remains an inexact science.

Successful Blogs Have Links

The Iraq war as told through magazine covers.

Newly released home video footage of the Challenger disaster.

Ben Bernanke, witness for the defense.

Crazy like a demon sheep.

Left vs. Right in graphic form.

Supply and Demand, what else is there?

Kagen Votes With Pelosi 96% of the Time

Jeff at the Appleton Blog was wondering about the similarities in voting records between our own Steve Kagen and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

Open Congress.org has a head to head vote comparison tool that makes it easy to find such information. According to Open Congress

Steve Kagen and Nancy Pelosi have voted together 215 times on roll call votes since January, 2007 in votes where neither abstained, representing a voting similarity of 96%.

More details at the link, including a side by side on all roll call votes.

How do you take your tea?

The Wall Street Journal reports:

Republicans are stepping up their campaign to win donations from Wall Street, trying to capitalize on an increasing sense of regret among executives at big financial institutions for backing Democrats in 2008.

In discussions with Wall Street executives, Republicans are striving to make the case that they are banks' best hope of preventing President Barack Obama and congressional Democrats from cracking down on Wall Street....

"I sense a lot of dissatisfaction and a lot of buyer's remorse on Wall Street," said Rep. Eric Cantor (R., Va.), the second-ranking House Republican and a top Wall Street fund-raiser for his party.

Cantor seems like a smart guy, but someone needs to tell him, you don't cure buyer's remorse by selling yourself out. I mean is, "give us some money mr. banker, we'll make sure you can do whatever you want," really a Roadmap for America's Future?

It's no wonder the Republicans got tossed out of power. If they get back this year or 2012, it may largely be due to the overwhelming incompetence of the other guys.

I better be careful, before I know it I'll be at a rally wearing a stars and stripes top hat with tea-bags hanging from the brim. Wait, that will never happen, no matter how bad things get.

H/T Yglesias

We're All Austrians Now...Or Not

When I linked the Keynes vs. Hayek rap video the other day, I mentioned that I wasn't convinced this was really an accurate description of the debate playing out in the country as a whole. In fact, I don't think this is an accurate description for the debate that is playing out in the United States Congress.

It is the case the Keynes has received a lot of attention lately due to the debate over the need for, and effectiveness of, fiscal stimulus in response to the economic crisis, but Hayek simply hasn't gotten the same visibility.

Freidrich August Hayek was an economist affiliated with what is now known as the Austrian School. Some of his major work was on business cycles, the booms and busts that economies experience. Here is a description of one of his insights (from the Library of Economics and Liberty):

One cause, he said, was increases in the money supply by the central bank. Such increases, he argued in Prices and Production, would drive down interest rates, making credit artificially cheap. Businessmen would then make capital investments that they would not have made had they understood that they were getting a distorted price signal from the credit market....he concluded, artificially low interest rates not only cause investment to be artificially high, but also cause “malinvestment”—too much investment in long-term projects relative to short-term ones, and the boom turns into a bust. Hayek saw the bust as a healthy and necessary readjustment. The way to avoid the busts, he argued, is to avoid the booms that cause them.

Sound familiar? You would think with an insight that so nearly describes our recent history, lawmakers, and everybody else, would be beating down the door to the Austrian School, and that this would show up in their decision making.

Well, the Senate recently had a chance to demonstrate whether or not they had made such a conversion with the confirmation vote on the guy who exerts an enormous amount of control on our money supply, Ben Bernanke. The result? Sean Scallon at the @TAC blog said it best:

Yes the two political parties may have bitter disagreements when it comes to abortion, or climate change, or health care reform, but when it comes to benefiting themselves and the establishment they serve they do know how to come together for a common purpose.

I mean you had Sen Thad Cochran, Republican of Mississippi and Charlie Schumer of New York, as different as two men can possibly be from two completely different places and backgrounds, and yet Ben Bernanke brought them together. Not only can he drop money from out of the sky, not only is he’s Time’s Man of the Year, he’s also a peacemaker as well. Perhaps he should nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize as well. Ain’t he swell?

So, rumors of a Hayekian awakening are, I fear, greatly exaggerated. We now return you to your regularly scheduled boom and bust cycle already in progress.

Republicans Can't Cut Spending Either

Politico has the story of how some of those in Congress that bemoan wasteful government spending vehemently oppose cuts to programs that directly affect their districts or states.

I realize that this should be a shock to no one, but it is an important point nonetheless. It is particularly troubling when Republicans, who pride themselves on being the party of fiscal discipline, simultaneously chastise the Obama administration for profligacy and for cutting a program whose value begins and ends at the borders of their congressional district.

Here is Senator Claire McCaskill (D-MO) on cuts to the C-17 program, cuts endorsed by the Bush-appointed Secretary of Defense:

I have tried very hard to not be parochial in my approach to budgeting, but it’s awfully hard in this economy to look down my nose at the thousands of people that are employed in St. Louis building the C-17

Not an endorsement of the cuts, but an understandable and thoughtful response to a tough situation.

Now here's Senator John Cornyn, a Republican from Texas, on proposed cuts to the space program:

I happen to believe that human space flight should be one of the things that we are doing,...It’s not just that it’s in Houston, but I think it’s very positive.

You may or may not be aware that Cornyn is a rock-ribbed establishment Republican and is the guy responsible for getting Republicans elected to the Senate. His early meddling in the Florida Senate race earned him the ire of conservatives and may come back to haunt him.

My first reaction to reading Cornyn's quote above was, just how stupid does he think we are? Now, though, I'm beginning to wonder just how stupid he is.

Look, Houston, we have a problem. We spend too much. On everything. We need to spend less. One of the ways that we can do this is by not sending a man to the moon anytime in the next ten years. I'm sorry you won't get an upgraded shiny new control room, but we just can't afford it right now.

If Republicans can't stand up and say this, who will?

Kagen's Fundraising Advantage May Not Matter

WTAQ reports:

Democratic incumbent Steve Kagen of Appleton has almost 5 times as much in his campaign account as his nearest challenger. Kagen had $550,000 in his war chest as of December 31st as he goes for his third term. And former roofing contractor Reid Ribble of Kaukauna had the most among Republicans with $115,000.

When Ribble addressed the Outagamie County Republican Women last August, a question about fundraising was among the first asked. Ribble's response was that in this race, Kagen would always be able to use his personal wealth to outspend just about anybody that the GOP put up against him. This is true even if the challenger is able to match Kagen's fundraising, which is probably not likely due to the advantage of incumbency.

Given this state of affairs, the "5 times greater" that WTAQ reported, and that I heard on Wisconsin Public Radio, doesn't seem like the critical number.

What is likely to matter for all of the GOP challengers in this race will be the absolute level of their own fundraising, not the level relative to Kagen. The question becomes will they have enough to finance a professionally run campaign? This includes reaching some minimum level that would allow for wide exposure in different types of media.

This level, of course, is going to be quite high, but the fact that Kagen will probably raise some multiple of the GOP candidate's funds shouldn't necessarily insure his victory.

Would we waste a fiscal crisis?

Matthew Yglesias concedes there is a need to correct our fiscal balance over the longer term. While he doesn't see the political will to do anything substantial in that regard at this time, he speculates that changing conditions could also change the political calculus:

The other factor here is that while you can easily look at a budget projection and forecast a coming fiscal crisis, we’re not actually in a fiscal crisis. Interest rates are quite low and there’s just no real way to cut the deficit back further within the bounds of current politics. The actual arrival of a crisis will presumably expand the bounds of what can be put on the table.

I fear that it is simply too much to hope that our leaders will do something about this situation before such a crisis arises

While I would like to hope that such a crisis would expand the bounds of possibilities, the example of the Lehman Brothers collapse suggests that this might not be the case. Institutions that rely on short term financing of debt are vulnerable to rapid changes in lenders' willingness to lend. When that willingness runs out, then the hard choices have to be made.

Now the U.S. is no Lehman Brothers, but I'm not sure that a true fiscal crisis would really open up the available options. Yglesias is referring to the possibility of raising taxes or cutting spending in meaningful ways on programs that, absent a crisis, are absolutely off limits (Social Security, Medicare, and defense).

Another possibility is that, like the failed financial institutions of this crisis, the government would simply turn to the Federal Reserve to inflate away our debt. This would be incredibly short-sighted, and ultimately worse, since we would need to continue to borrow at the higher interest rates resulting from inflation. That said, it doesn't mean our policymakers won't try it once they are confronted with an actual fiscal crisis.