TheCenterline.org

Anthony Weiner: One Colossal...Distraction

2011-06-09T21:59:00.003-04:00

I am sorry for my long absence, and grateful for those who have inquired about it. I've been busy elsewhere, with less to say than during the midterm elections and their immediate aftermath.

After all: How does one top the Arab Spring? The answer, it seems, is with tasteless Congressional tweets.

This list got my blood boiling again. How did we miss scandals of this magnitude? It's easy: we mire ourselves in trailer-park tweets.

The things we give a free pass to every time we give one more crap about Anthony Weiner's appalling sex life. You can't blame the media if you click through to the stories. Really, are our priorities that much better than his?

The Night Before Christmas: Centrist Version

2010-12-22T11:45:00.001-05:00

‘Twas the night before Christmas, and in the Beltway

Lame ducks were a-stirring, turning night into day.

With compromise showing, and gridlock abating,

Congress hoped it could rise from its all-time low rating.

A clean swap of tax cuts for unemployed hope

Gave goodies to those at both ends of their rope.

Eight GOP stalwarts killed “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,”

While several Nast donkeys voted earmarks to Hell.

The President reached out to business, for once,

Making effort to stave off the hat of the dunce.

Independent Republicans backed down on START,

Putting right over party, at least for their part.

But expansionist government awfully clatters.

Both parties must try to remember what matters.

At the polls in November did clearly appear

A half-mandate, born of Obamacare fear.

“Now Boehner! Now Cantor! McCarthy and Ryan!

That judge in Virginia has got the Dems cryin’!

A new IRS form for each little chore?

Pelosi and Reid: it isn’t paid for!”

“The problems we face are plain indelectable.

We just want solutions that verge on acceptable!

We don’t want you selling us pie in the skies.

But we surely expect you to all compromise.”

“There are battles ahead, some would say by the slew;

Just ask new/old budget boss Jacob J. Lew!

His appointment at building consensus is hintin’,

As anything would that reminds us of Clinton.”

“Please start with the budget commissioners’ finding

(as the last resolution, come March, won’t be binding).

And muster the votes – nay, muster the nerve –

To fulfill the DREAM of those willing to serve.”

Will the pols heed their word? Are they starting to see?

That common sense reigns, outside of D.C.?

While Washington dollars continues to hemorrhage,

The U.S. consumer’s begun to deleverage.

State lawmakers, too, are making tough choices;

They’ve started to hear their constituents’ voices.

New Jersey – not much known for giving a hoot –

Has even come up with a train substitute!

The Census has told us the seats states will get;

The FCC’s pledged to neutrality of ‘net.

New FDA powers should help us avoid

Any more poison spinach, and maybe typhoid.

Now why can’t the Congress show the same unction?

The whole of the Earth sorely needs you to function!

No promising everything; please, no tit for tat –

But the judgment to say, “we want this – don’t need that.”

The voters have said: “Neither side has a rout;

You must work together to find a way out.

We don’t expect discourse like Calhoun and Clay,

But insist that this chance you don’t fritter away!”

Daylight

2010-12-15T12:56:00.001-05:00

All of a sudden, it's rough going for a Chief Frustration Officer. Things haven't looked this good in ages.

The coming-out party for No Labels got some brutal spitballing on twitter (and dismissals running 3:2 against excitement on WaPo). But there's a serious group behind it; despite Bloomberg's visible participation, it's too decentralized to function as a star vehicle for a single candidate. They're organized, staffed, and focused as much on the soft goal of civil discourse as on the hard concrete of political action.

This is real-world confirmation of the fake-news blowout that Stewart and Colbert staged on the Mall Halloween weekend. Give them time.

There is also evidence that said civil discourse may yet produce beneficial political action. Already, the tone is changing. We are likely to have stability in the tax code for two years, reflecting the short-term stimulus that is desirable to shore up the recovery. And while the most extreme candidates failed at the polls, and earmarks are enjoying a predictable last gasp, the best impulse of the Tea Party -- to rein in long-term obligations -- is joining with the deficit commissions to create new pressure to adjust entitlements.

The ugly process of adjusting political reality to financial reality has begun, but it will take time. Let's give it all it needs.

Meanwhile, the President is reaching out to American business for the first time. Within the beltway, a redux of the 1986 tax reforms is even plausible, for the first time since...1986. As with entitlements, to which its fate is bound, let's give tax overhaul time.

Critically, the economy is now a support, not a distraction, to political efforts. Inflation is muted, industrial production is picking up, and the consumer -- shell-shocked for the past two years into pure deleveraging mode -- has more recently struck a striking posture between reasonable saving and growth-sustaining spending. In a macro sense, this is a far more balanced -- and thus better and more sustainable -- a recovery than we had reason to expect.

That is the daylight. Here is the darkness.

Economic security is ebbing back unevenly. The coasts are better off than the middle, as are the college-educated. In the U.S. as (even more so) in the U.K., overdue state retrenchment means public sector employees are losing out -- and they're finding it hard to adapt to the private sector. Along with the building trades, this entire column of our society has been essentially excluded from the workforce.

A narrow band of workers now bears the brunt of the economic risks that remain. How we address their condition, a question thoughtfully posed by our friend from San Diego, will say a great deal about where a politically realigned nation addresses questions not only of fundamental equity but of market economics, secondary education, and global competitive posture. Watch this space.

Finally: with housing still bottoming, even those with in-demand skills find it difficult to pick up and move to where the puck will be. And so we find that the first of our economic constraints remains the last to erode.

Hey, there's a reason why renting is the new flipping. And why multifamily is the first of the commercial real estate sectors to recover. But that's a blog of a different color.

Tax Deal: Room to Breathe

2010-12-07T12:33:00.003-05:00

This isn't a plan. It's a punt.

As the kindred spirits over at Rise of the Center smartly point out: "Neither side compromised here, this is a straight up horse trade." Obama keeps unemployment benefits and payroll deductions, and the Republicans keep the tax rates that have been in effect for a decade.

In short: the big winner is the status quo. And in terms of certainty for businesses, financial markets, and the consumer who relies on both, this is more than acceptable.

Best of all is the agreed term. Two years is enough to shore up the recovery, and brief enough to limit the budget fallout from failing to fund these provisions. And it is plenty of time to put lawmakers' feet to the fire to create the kind of long-term "grand compromise" outlined by Simpson and Bowles (and Rivlin and Domenici).

The current agreement suggests that such a compromise will be possible. Consider the deal on the estate tax, which finally suspends the 55% Euthanasia Incentive Credit currently in effect. Are a 35% rate and $5 million exclusion arbitrary? They're debatable, but they smell right to me.

Any student artist will tell you that getting proportions right is hard. To me, a 2% bump in the top rate strikes the right balance between incremental revenue and sustained entrepreneurial incentives. To me, a continued extension of unemployment benefits should be joined by a reduction in total benefits paid, perhaps to 75% of current levels. To me, all this should be in the context of a simpler code that "broadens the base, lowers the rates."

But others will disagree. Sussing out the best ideas -- and the true measure of political possibility -- takes time. Thanks to this crude horse-trade, we've got it.

Compromise This

2010-11-30T10:56:00.004-05:00

Well, here's an offer you can't refuse: John Boehner and Mitch McConnell's victory-lap-as-olive-branch op-ed in today's WaPo. It is a tired assemblage of haughty cliche, rhetorical feints and faux overtures. They use the word "together" five times, without mentioning a single Democratic priority they'd be willing to consider.

My favorite paragraph:

Democrats in Congress are working feverishly to move legislation on everything except stopping the tax hikes and lowering spending. Their focus for the brief post-election "lame duck" session is on controversial items such as immigration, a repeal of "don't ask, don't tell," more spending and environmental regulations.

The weird thing? Half the horses eligible for trading are right there, and the other half shouldn't be hard to wrangle.

I'm with (or very NEARLY with) Boehner and McConnell on many points. So much so, in fact, that I'm willing to allow some horse-trading to get them. And if "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" doesn't wait for the courts for full repeal in the process, or decorated foreign veterans of the U.S. armed forces find a route to citizenship, so much the better.

Compromise THAT, gentlemen.

Good News (No, Seriously)

2010-11-16T19:17:00.003-05:00

Put aside today's market slide for the moment. (Not as an investment strategy: who really knows the state of earnings quality or the downward-spiral risks of QE2?)

But in a number of important fronts, what a week it's been:

McConnell caved on earmarks. Savings in dollars will pale against gains in Senators' focus, bipartisanship (Obama and Tea Partiers welcomed the move), and the transparency of the system. Thank you, Sen.-elect Mike Lee!
Simpson and Bowles spoke the truth on budget priorities. Anything that gets the Times Editorial Board to line up (literally: bless the dying print medium) against Paul Krugman warrants attention. Note the latter's reflexive attack on a presumptively regressive tax structure even before he runs the numbers, even while the FT notes that the proposal "to tax dividends and capital gains as ordinary income...[gives] the tax code (lower marginal rates notwithstanding) a strong progressive twist."
Don't like Simpson Bowles? The NYT gave you a shot at creating your own deficit-reduction plan online.
Staff Sergeant Salvatore Giunta became the first living recipient of the Medal of Honor for service in the current conflicts in Iraq or Afghanistan.
The Senate took moves to grow less hierarchical, and Dems sharpened their leadership structure (albeit leaving some unhappy). Both moves could presage more substantive discussions in the media.

Perhaps most important of all: TLC's (ahem) reality show, "Sarah Palin's Alaska," drew five million in its debut. (Have I ever had more fun tweeting an event?) No numbers yet, but the smart money has this easily trouncing Tina Fey's honorifics at the Kennedy Center, which aired on PBS on Sunday.

On economics, I refer to a Bloomberg summary:

American industry churned out more automobiles, computers and appliances in October, keeping manufacturing at the head of the economic recovery that began more than year ago...

Exports and business investment may keep assembly lines busy in coming months, just as the initial spark from the need to rebuild inventories wanes. Increases in global demand that are benefiting companies like General Electric Co. gave American consumers time to repair finances and resume spending, leading to a more balanced recovery.

We've got years of monster deleveraging ahead yet. We've got an entire housing finance system in need of total overhaul from borrower application to securitization to (in the wake of robo-signing) title insurance. None of this will be fun. And let's not forget that earnings quality I muttered about at the outset. (It's the new "book value" for 2011.)

But for the first time in years, it feels as though the pendulum is swinging in a better direction -- with a bit more potential for unexpected consensus* -- and just a bit more in the open.

*not actually unexpected if you knew who to ask and read the last paragraph. Watch this space.

So What's The Damage?

2010-11-03T11:15:00.003-04:00

As it is essential to liberty that the government in general should have a common interest with the people, so it is particularly essential that the branch of it under consideration [the legislature] should have an immediate dependence on, and an intimate sympathy with, the people. Frequent elections are unquestionably the only policy by which this dependence and sympathy can be effectually secured.

-- The Federalist #52

Well, Mr. Madison: you have our sympathy. And so do at least 13 of the top 20 House centrists, all late of the 111^th Congress. This includes top-rated Frank Kratovil (MD-1) and John Adler (NJ-3), with races in AZ-8 and NY-25 still too close to call.

Things went better in George Washington’s “cooling saucer,” the Senate, and the Governors’ races. The Loony Tunes candidates fell in Connecticut, Delaware, Nevada and New York, despite the general lack of appealing alternatives, and Buck looks headed the same way in Colorado. Chafee -- a pure victim of the national mood in his loss in 2006 -- and Murkowski rode borrowed vehicles to victories from partisan exile, even as Florida melted under the heat that three-way contests can generate.

And victories for Nikki Haley and Susana Martinez made history for inclusive politicking in red and blue states equally.

It helps that several hits are cushioned by candidate quality and experience. Turnovers to returning veterans Kasich, Coats and even Toomey recall (relatively speaking) a more familiar and mainstream form of conservatism than the Joe Millers of the world. Though I am not a member of the Barbara Boxer or Jerry Brown fan clubs, money certainly did not win the day in either big race in California.

Some hope for new ideas remains, too. Sen. Wyden, a proponent of an alternative healthcare strategy in bipartisan partnership with Utah’s Sen. Bennett, won handily in Oregon, improving prospects for Congress to improve on Obamacare rather than simply repeal it, as Sen. Bayh argues in today’s Times. Even Rand Paul, though (shall we say) out there on a number of questions, was among the few Tea Partiers who spelled out his approach to budget cuts. It is a place to start.

Bear in mind, gentle reader, that many of this year’s fallen were newcomers who rode Obama’s train into town. While we mourn the Blue Dogs and some other good centrists today, many more lost who squandered their two years on votes to enlarge government at any opportunity, and sometimes without debate. They got their comeuppance. And that Senatorial cooling saucer survives. It can contain a bit more hot water yet.

As Madison wrote near the conclusion of Federalist 52: “It is a received and well founded maxim, that, where no other circumstances affect the case, the greater the power is, the shorter ought to be its duration.” It may smart today. But it’s a lesson the more extreme freshman will also be asked to ponder as they take their oath. Boehner is mindful of how the government shutdown threw the Gingrich revolution into reverse. If he sticks by his compromise offer on the Bush tax cuts, it could be the beginning of something more constructive than anyone on Fox or MSNBC currently anticipates.

Top 10 Slogans Observed At The Rally

2010-10-31T22:30:00.002-04:00

What a blast my wife Kelly and I had on our day trip to the Rally for Sanity.

Due to massive A/V deficiencies, we still have no idea what happened onstage. But we met some great people and saw some crazy good signs. If you'll indulge, gentle reader, a little comic relief from the usual TheCenterline.org sobriety...

Top 10 Signs at the Rally for Sanity:

10. "Magic Powers Are Not A Choice - Equal Rights For Wizards"

9. "Anyone For Scrabble Later?"

8. "25, Single, Not In Tea Party, Don't Live W/My Mother, Won't Go 'Dutch' On Dates"

7. "Save Ferris" [I know-this rally skewed older than you think]

6. "The Rant Is Too Damn High" [I know-this rally skewed way New York]

5. "They Confiscated This Sign At The Airport [1/3 of every UN meeting I've been to is devoted to a variation on this complaint)

4. "Speak Softly And Don't Be A Big Dick" [next to picture of TR]

3. "Moderates R Sexy"

2. "I Masturbate, And I Vote" [hey, Delaware is practically next door]

And the self-servingly #1 sign carried indefatigably by Kelly Macmanus Funke (no relation of course) is:

"Fear The Center"

To be clear, you should NOT fear the following:

Porta-Potties crunkling under the weight of Stewart/Colbert enthusiasts dying for a view...

...tree-huggers of the purest sort, angling to improve on the Porta-Vus...

...giant Ahmadinejad puppets who are, quote, "Gay For America"...

...Lord Vader, who after all only seeks "to restore order to the galaxy"...

...tear gas attacks, provided you are appropriately garbed...

...certainly not apple-faced Secret Muslims...

...much less the Nth generation of Tom Lehrer's "Folk Song Army."

No no no no no...fear none of these. But after one more Congress of ever-increasing extremism, as reform promises fade and debt gets debtier and debtier, you should absolutely, positively....

Top-Ranked Centrist Kratovil In Top 10 Race... By Money

2010-10-31T20:48:00.000-04:00

Frank Kratovil, who ranked first with a score of 92 in TheCenterline.org's ratings released last week, finds himself in one of the 10 most expensive races in the country as the DCCC and RCCC pour resources into the Maryland 1st.

This against an opponent, Andy Harris, who believes energy security lies in abolishing the Department of Energy and developing ANWR -- and that "the Constitution protects an individual's right to keep and bear arms for security and defense of self, family, property..."

Harris is a physician and naval reservist who has held the line on taxes over his decade-plus in the state senate. But his black-and-white view on all investments by government -- and his activist, expansionist interpretation of the "well-regulated militia" clause -- are no match for Kratovil's ability to separate the wheat from the chaff.

A former prosecutor, Kratovil is a great match for the politically balanced district that elected him in 2008, and he has a great future as a consensus-builder in Congress. But first he has to persuade the good people of Maryland to let him keep at it.

Amtrak Points: Paboo It Is!

2010-10-27T12:42:00.000-04:00

"Moderates Do It Without A Lot Of Unnecessary Screaming"

It hints at the role centrists play in getting stuff done. It brings a smile to the face. It's PG rated for family viewing. And it's bumper-sticker ready.

Thanks to all who submitted, whether via facebook, the blog or email. And especially to Paboo for posting the winning slogan. Get ready to rally...

Top 10 Centrists in Election Jeopardy?

2010-10-27T09:15:00.008-04:00

My apologies to those having difficulty clicking through to the complete rankings list on IE8. Chrome and Firefox are doing better, especially if you right-click and open as a new tab or window.

For now, here are the top 10:

Kratovil - 92
Adler - 87
Kissell - 82
Boccieri - 80
Markey (B., Col-4) - 80
Teague - 80
Giffords - 78
Gordon - 78
Herseth Sandlin - 78
Childers - 77

A reader notes that both top-scoring Kratovil and Lance, the highest-rated Republican in the list, are in tougher re-election fights than they expected. In Maryland, Kratovil has been forced to characterize his own vote for better TARP oversight (as a condition of releasing TARP funds) as an anti-TARP vote. This, even though GOP.gov states:

While the legislation does include many conditions on TARP spending, and transparency improvements that Republicans may support, many Members may be concerned that H.R. 384 is designed to grease the wheels for a release of the final $350 billion tranche of taxpayer money...

G-d forbid a member should require "conditions" and "transparency improvements" as the price for "support" of the final tranche of a system-saving, 8.2%-returning program!

In Pennsylvania, 2nd-rated centrist Rep. Adler is in a "wire close" race, due in part to the backfiring of a bone-headed strategy by Democrats to split the Republican vote by introducing a tea party candidate. In Arizona, Rep. Giffords is still looking at a Cook Report "tossup" in a district that went for Bush and McCain (though boasting nearly 30% independent registration).

Meanwhile in North Carolina, 3rd-rated centrist Rep. Kissell is hedging on his principled vote against Obamacare -- presumably to help maintain turnout among the liberal Democrat contingent in a C.D. the Almanac of American Politics calls "split personality." And in South Dakota, Herseth Sandlin was highlighted as a vulnerable Blue Dog in a WSJ article yesterday (as I retweeted from OpenCongress.org).

If only two extremes averaged out to one center. But without actual voices populating the middle, we will have no compromise solutions from the mainstream -- and no tie-breaking votes for them. Policymaking will be a lopsided mix of conservative and liberal wins.

Maybe it will even out after all. After a parent croaks, you can take advantage of the complete repeal of the estate tax...to pay for your state-mandated health plan and your neighbor's subsidized Corolla and haphazardly refinanced house. It will be dizzying.

Amtrak Points for Sanity Rally Slogan: Last Day!

2010-10-26T21:53:00.001-04:00

With trains beginning to sell out this afternoon, a winner will be announced TOMORROW!
In the spirit of eBay, the current best bid is Paboo, with: "Moderates do it without a lot of unnecessary screaming."
May the most moderately awesome line win...

111th Congress: Democrats Dominate Centerline.org Ratings

2010-10-25T07:39:00.007-04:00

They crammed the most unwieldy healthcare legislation since Medicare D down our throats. (Unwieldier, actually.) They resorted to wasteful gimmicks like Cash for Clunkers, passed mortgage relief that didn't relieve mortgages, and marred otherwise sensible legislation with mission creep and old-fashioned party politics.

But in the end, what mattered -- what we will remember as the real story of the 111th Congress -- was its role in responding to the financial and economic crisis. For all the defects in the design and execution of TARP and the stimulus package, they saved the financial system from ruin, and the states from making cuts in a single budget cycle that will be debilitating enough when spread over two or three.

This sense of priorities made the difference in the scoring by TheCenterline.org, because we dared to assign greater weight to votes that were manifestly more significant than others. Only a handful of lawmakers scored over 75 on our 100-point scale. But 19 of the top 20 were Democrats -- owing largely to their greater support for these urgent measures. Right-click to see the rankings here.

Next time will be different. The 112th will be far more constrained by debts and diminished revenues, and members will have to drastically refocus their priorities. But this year, my hat is off to a man I'd never heard of: Frank Kratovil (D-MD1), who with a score of 92 led the pack, and to Leonard Lance (R-NJ7), who topped the Republican rolls.

The first time is always a work in progress. Thanks to all who posted, called or emailed with feedback during the rating process. I'm happy to email the spreadsheet to anyone who's interested.

You can read more about this year's results here.

The Rally for Sanity: Cancel It?

2010-10-22T16:27:00.001-04:00

WaPo's Lozada says Stewart should cancel the rally...ah, but is he being meta, or simply META-meta?
Head to twitter.com/CenterlineOrg for up-to-the-minute articles of interest to centrists, meta and otherwise.
Also, Amtrak's dynamic pricing suggest sold-out trains will be here shortly...only a few days left to pitch your best rally slogan!

Chris Christie: Imposing a "Social Agenda"?

2010-10-18T11:05:00.003-04:00

Over the weekend, the Star-Ledger ran this headline: "Gov. Christie brings social conservatism to historically blue state, experts say." The evidence?

In his first year in office, Christie also drew attention from social advocates by cutting funding to historically protected programs like public schools, health programs for working poor people and legal aliens, and family planning clinics.

Note the emphasis on funding over rights. And programs that are "historically," not "constitutionally" protected.

Sure, Christie is higher than sly in couching his cuts, as Peggy Noonan illuminated (" 'As much as I love teachers...' That's good."). And I don't doubt that the Gov found it less painful to impose these cuts less than for some others he's called for. But on balance, there is plenty of truth in his spokesman's assertion that "spending was cut across the board ... Many people, many interests, were disappointed, but this is what the fiscal crisis we inherited required."

"Many people, many interests were disappointed..." That's just the price of repairing a broken hull. As Noonan would say: that's good.

Two New Criteria: Repealing Don't Ask, Don't Tell (Good) and Debt Limits (Bad)

2010-10-16T13:15:00.001-04:00

Specifically and respectively, House Roll #317 on an amendment to H.R.5136 and H.R.1065. The presses are nearly ready to run on the Excel spreadsheet...

The Bono...OK, Lugar-Cardin Amendment

2010-10-15T15:20:00.001-04:00

Thanks to those who have asked to add non-defense (and non-tourism-idiocy) -related foreign policy criteria.

Bono, the Africa-trotting, HIV-trouncing friend of W. who used to write insightful pop lyrics, now writes insightful pop-eds. In one a few weeks ago that I just got around to reading, he calls out the Lugar-Cardin amendment to Dodd-Frank that increases transparency for US-traded extraction companies re: their payments to government officials in Africa.

Bono concludes: "And the cost to us is zero, nada. It’s a clear thought in a traffic jam."

This is how to judge members of Congress. Unfortunately, it was withdrawn before coming to a separate vote (Sen. Leahy "championed" it in committee, making a separate vote unnecessary).

And so the search goes on for additional criteria. For now, I'm going to stick with the plan: a rating system based on important votes, vs. the "votes with Pelosi 93% of the time" sort of nonsense that reflects every vote to rename a post office. But in TheCenterline's Congressional Ratings 2.0, the first thing I'm going to do is build cosponsorship of key pending (or failed) legislation, which expands the palette meaningfully.

Congressional Ratings: Let The Adjustments Begin!

2010-10-13T19:51:00.001-04:00

Conservative friends of long standing point out that as much as I crave campaign finance reform, I found McCain-Feingold unconstitutional and couldn't support it. (I prefer such playingfield-leveling approaches as requiring FCC-licensed to provide free airtime to bona fide candidates.)

Applying the same logic, I am persuaded to reconsider my position on the DC voting rights vote. Just because updating that corner of the Constitution is warranted doesn't mean an act of Congress will satisfy the urge. (What can I say: I didn't name myself Chief Frustration Officer for nothing.)

To my conservative brethren upset that I came to accept the value of stimulus spending and financial reform, and my left-leaning comrades astonished that I can't get past the mammoth new healthcare laws...I genuinely appreciate the feedback. But I have too high a regard for the peril we faced in 2008-09 to discount the former, and have spent too much time in the private sector to accept the latter. As yet, I don't have anything on those scores to add to my thoughts here.

I'm still on the hunt for distinct votes that will call out extremists on key social issues. Most groups I've approached for recommendations have plenty to say about pending legislation and their personal Congressional committee champions, but little guidance on past roll call votes.

Congressional Rankings: Draft Criteria

2010-10-13T12:18:00.001-04:00

When I first broached the idea of ranking members of Congress based on centrist criteria, I described the policy passions and initial legislative priorities that motivated me. Here is a breakdown of specific votes of the 111^th Congress, and where I propose that a centrist lawmaker should have pulled the lever.

Wikipedia suggested which votes I should consider; OpenCongress.org will be my chief data source. For judgment on what constitutes the “right vote,” I look to readers for input -- before I start running the numbers.

Congressional Ranking Criteria: Financial Legislation

2010-10-13T12:17:00.001-04:00

American Recovery and Reinvestment Act: PRO. In hindsight, a stitch in time that saved nine, especially for the states. But be forewarned: we can't afford any more of this sort of tailoring.

Dodd-Frank Wall Street & Consumer Act: PRO. For all its sins of omission and commission, this landmark reform improves systemic oversight and resolution authority, and incorporates the Volker Rule. These advances trump lingering uncertainties: in fact, it’s good that the agencies, not Congress, will manage the details. (Can’t wait to see what they come up with for the GSEs.)

Helping Families Save Their Homes Act: AGAINST. This convoluted effort to forestall foreclosures failed impressively in its purpose, while eschewing more creative solutions and stoking moral hazard.

Credit CARD Act : PRO. A welcome, bipartisan blow against decades of unregulated usury. The Coburn amendment, allowing licensed gun-owners to carry firearms in national parks, is odiously ungermane. But if Obama could stomach it, so can I.

Worker, Homeownership & Business Act : PRO. The $8k tax credit proved somewhat effective in cushioning the continuing descent of home prices; the extension of unemployment is warranted for the hardest-hit states. But neither can be funded indefinitely.

Hiring Incentives to Restore Employment: AGAINST. Harmless enough, but hard evidence that Congress has no clue what actually drives hiring in the private sector.

Cash for Clunkers: AGAINST. Desperate, expensive and effective chiefly in distorting the demand curve for autos. (With Toyota taking top market share, it failed even in its goal of promoting American nameplates.)

Congressional Ranking Criteria: Healthcare Legislation

2010-10-13T12:16:00.003-04:00

Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act, Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act: AGAINST. Strongarmed through because politically unsaleable, sweeping in impact though conceptually limited to tweaking a failed system: this was the best we could do since the equally irresponsible Medicare D?

Children's Health Insurance Program: PRO. Despite mission creep, this remains by most accounts a successful and efficient way to give more kids a healthy start. Bears watching to see if future Congresses strengthen the program, or just bloat it.

Congressional Ranking Criteria: Other Domestic and Social Policy

2010-10-13T12:16:00.001-04:00

American Clean Energy and Security Act: PRO. The best litmus available on the most permanent impact any Congress can have: saving the planet. And through time-tested market mechanisms to boot.

Omnibus Public Land Management Act : PRO. Seriously: how do 140 members seriously oppose federal management of federal lands?

Edward M. Kennedy Serve America Act: PRO. This expansion of AmeriCorps builds this honorable, fully-tested program in some well-considered ways at manageable cost.

Caregivers & Veterans Health Services Act: PRO. Advances care for our women veterans among other good things. (No impact on rankings as vote was justifiably unanimous.)

Family Smoking Prevention & Tobacco Act: PRO. This latest tweak in the regulation of tobacco advertising also gives the FDA some teeth.

Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act: PRO. Though other fixes might have been fairer to business, the injustice -- here corrected -- to employees facing decades of low pay was greater still. (Ultimately, the courts may well bring the better balance Congress should have provided.)

DC House Voting Rights Act: PRO. Ensign's pro-gun poison pill spoiled this latest attempt to restore some measure of representation to the District of Columbia's 600,000 residents. But Lindsay Graham’s co-sponsorship reminds us that the right to representation is a conservative principle, too.

Employee Free Choice Act: AGAINST. Drop card check, and I’m for it. Or at least constructively indifferent.

Congressional Ranking Criteria: Defense and Foreign Policy

2010-10-13T12:15:00.001-04:00

Weapon Systems Acquisition Reform Act: PRO. This fully-vetted, much-anticipated reform of DOD procurement passed unanimously, and rightly so. It should pay for itself in minutes.

National Defense Authorization Act: PRO. As a moviegoer, I love the idea of the F-22 Raptor; as a taxpayer, other priorities rightly take precedence. Despite germaneness issues, the Matthew Shepard hate crimes provision represents inclusive public policy.

Iran Sanctions, Accountability & Divestiture Act: PRO. Opposition to sanctions for those who aid Iran’s petroleum complex came from earnest quarters, including business and Iranian-American groups. But the Act reminds us that Congress can sometimes still let politics stop at “the water’s edge.”

Travel Promotion Act: AGAINST. The purpose of this law is to encourage international tourism by taxing international tourists. The kicker: the $4 administrative charge to facilitate collection of the $10 international levy that put the European Commission in a twist. Thank the Senator from Vegas -- and the 77 other groupthinking senators who voted with him.

SPEECH Act: PRO. This measure, intended to protect Americans against foreign libel judgments (especially in the UK), sent the right message. Go First Amendment! (Note to staff: find out how many voted for SPEECH after supporting a flag-burning amendment…)

Under Review: Worth Including?

2010-10-13T12:14:00.001-04:00

Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act: Is this so toothless, so riddled with loopholes, that only a cynic could vote for it? Or is it a first step toward fiscal sanity?

TARP and TALF: I initially wrote that a centrist should defend “yes” votes on the most successful – and hated and misunderstood – tools Congress made available to contain the financial crisis. But they fell on the watch of the 110th Congress, not the 111th. Any objections to including these votes in my calculations, for members who sat in both Congresses?

Congressional Rankings: Draft Criteria Posts Today

2010-10-13T11:22:00.000-04:00

Later today, I will post draft criteria for the major legislation of the 111th Congress. The legislative acts will be those crowd-sourced by Wikipedia; the "yea" and "nay" criteria will be my own. But before I start the number-crunching, I will be grateful for your contributions.

OpenCongress.org, a terrific resource I wish I was in a position to support more generously, is the database Bill Owens (D-NY) turned to in a bid to shore up his moderate credentials. It is my main tool for sourcing voting information. But as OpenCongress.org put it: "It’s important to get the full picture here, including knowing which bills members agreed or disagreed on."

I will be very interested to see where Mr. Owens ranks based on a more comprehensive voting data set -- and against all of his peers, not just Boehner and Pelosi. Check back here tonight or in the morning -- and tell me where you think I've got the centrist position on a given vote wrong.

$200 Billion Here, $200 Billion There...

2010-10-13T10:30:00.000-04:00

New York faces $200B in retiree costs "while setting aside almost nothing."

The money shot:

“So far, the market doesn’t care,” said Edmund J. McMahon, the director of the Empire Center. “The market seems to assume, on the basis of nothing, that at some point all of these places are simply going to stop paying retiree health benefits.”

Or if you prefer:

The information is starting to come to light because of a new accounting requirement. One city, Schenectady, found the cost too overwhelming to calculate, warning that it “will be astronomical, with the potential of bankrupting municipalities.”

Feel good, near-bankrupt Harrisburg: you owe us for taking one for the team here and making you look financially responsible.

Congressional Rankings: Gay Marriage

2010-10-12T13:29:00.002-04:00

Work is progressing on TheCenterline's Congressional rankings. A friend this weekend suggested the Defense of Marriage Act -- but that passed in 1996. The Respect for Marriage Act, which would have restored federal recognition of legal marriages throughout America, including gay marriages, never went to a vote, though it did garner 91 cosponsors.

In the spirit of political cross-pollenization, I will reach out to some gay Republicans to see what they consider the most telling vote on this issue in recent sessions. And I'll welcome any recommendations posted by readers.

Short Pieces From The Long Weekend

2010-10-12T13:28:00.000-04:00

As followers of twitter.com/CenterlineOrg have already seen, here are the best op-eds I stumbled across over Columbus Day weekend.

Comedy division: Gail Collins ranks the very best awful elections nationwide. http://nyti.ms/a9Fch3.

Tragedy division: Tom Friedman captures the collapse of a Senate compromise. http://nyti.ms/bUyvsC.

And in this morning's FT, a comer for the newly minted realism category: Gideon Rachman on the limits of Tea Party power. http://tinyurl.com/2dfvcyv \

Each of these offers a dose of sense in a homeopathic dose. Happy reading!

David Brooks: "The Quintessential New Republican"

2010-10-07T14:24:00.000-04:00

For those who missed David Brooks's column, "The Austerity Caucus," he proclaims: "The quintessential New Republican is detail-oriented, managerial, tough-minded, effective but a little dry." He makes the critical point that "the governing soul of the party is to be found in statehouses where a loose confederation of über-wonks have become militant budget balancers."

It's not just Republicans, and it's certainly not just governors, who are taking action outside Washington. Not since Alan Ehrenhalt published The United States of Ambition a generation ago have I seen the states and counties increase their share of attention.

With less media glare and greater room to maneuver, the state chambers deserve the interest of ambitious young things nationwide. Given the challenges our states face -- California and New York being merely the most obscene examples -- perhaps Governing Magazine will become the Economist for tomorrow's movers and shakers.

Cultural Interlude: The Met's New "Rheingold"

2010-10-06T12:42:00.001-04:00

Last year, I described the Ring Cycle as "a parable of regulatory failure, brought about by irregular financing for a home even the gods cannot afford." In short: the perfect opera for the subprime era.

Thin grounds for talking opera trash on a political site, I know: future cultural musings will be banished to my family blog, macfunke.com, or my occasional writing for the New York Press and CityArts. But since I demanded "a Ring for our time" -- and since Times critic Daniel Wakin says Robert Lepage has delivered a new production "for our video-saturated, MP3-playing, computer-dependent, YouTube-watching age" -- you can find my thoughts on the new "Rheingold" here.

Congressional Rankings: Cap and Trade

2010-10-04T12:56:00.001-04:00

Over the weekend, I buttonholed my former employer and mentor Tom Kean at the annual Women's Association of NJPAC* benefit for his thoughts on criteria for my Congressional rankings. He pointed out that only a handful of Republicans voted for cap & trade legislation -- and didn't pause before adding that three of those were from New Jersey (Representatives Lance, Lobiondo and Smith).

Liberals will prefer a straight carbon tax, and conservatives will oppose any further environmental mandates. Though cumbersome, cap & trade has precedents in Clean Air Act emissions certificates (1977), the Acid Rain Program (1990) and the Chicago Climate Exchange (2003) and, for the internationally minded, emerging regimes under Kyoto.

Cap and trade is operationally tested, political feasible, and becoming the global standard. It relies on the development of private-sector solutions to achieve a public good within an accountable context. Consider a "yes" vote a constructive add to the Centerline.org criteria.

*New Jersey Performing Arts Center. NOT a political action committee - though Jersey being Jersey, the cast of characters had some...overlap.

It's Not You, It's...Pakistan?

2010-10-01T16:24:00.003-04:00

Quote of the month re: Pakistan comes from the New York Times:

“We are clearly in the phase of our relationship where we’re trying to tell them we’re being diddled,” said Teresita C. Schaffer, director of the South Asia program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington.

I'm not foolhardy enough to opine on our course in Pakistan. I just think it's great the Grey Lady has introduced "diddling" into the analysis.

Huffington Post Bus To Rally

2010-09-29T10:09:00.002-04:00

Quite a bid by Arianna Huffington, promising seats for all NYC attendees to the Rally for Sanity!

Impatient for details on the Arianna Express? Free Amtrak Guest Rewards points are still up for grabs right here for the best slogan suggestion. And Amtrak has a bar car. (Note on the standings: current lead held by "Less Polarizing, More Polar Icing" by Juge Gregg. I would make a crack about the Mets being in last place, but now that they're already at the bottom of the Arab League...it comes about 2:30 into the bit.)

Help Rank Members of Congress

2010-09-24T00:42:00.005-04:00

Birds do it, bees do it -- or at least the ACLU, National Journal and American Conservative Union do it, along with a host of single-issue PACs, NGOs and other TLAs (three-letter acronyms). But how do members of Congress stack up by the standards of the American mainstream tradition of pragmatism and principled compromise?

In the coming weeks, I plan to rank members by how they cast key votes since the financial crisis began. Here are some starting criteria. I'm looking to debate and improve these, and add others you might suggest.

TARP / TALF.  Say what you want about what Paulson did with the money. It was a financial panic few Americans have ever seen. Congress acted, checks continued to clear, and all the ATMs kept working. (Can you imagine if they'd stopped?) And the total tab to taxpayers is declining with every passing quarter -- just $66 billion of the initial $700 billion. Aye aye, cap'n.

Initial Stimulus.  I questioned this when it was passed, on grounds that too few projects would be shovel-ready to restore confidence or make a dent in our infrastructure needs, and that too much money would simply flow to plug states' Medicaid and general operating holes. In hindsight, it has given states the time they needed to make Herculean cuts, while avoiding the crisis of confidence that wholesale shutdowns in state operations would have produced. With some reluctance, I'll be looking for yes votes here, too.

Subsequent Stimulus.  The economy is barely off the mat and to its knees, and the specter of 1937 is out joyriding in columns of many stripes. But Professor Rogoff is persuasive: debt exceeding 90% "implies higher future taxes (inflation is also a tax) or lower future government spending" -- and that while the U.S. may retain its solvency better than most, the implications for growth turn decidedly negative after the 90% threshold.

We are at or (when state, county and municipal debt is counted) already well above that threshold. Barring major offsetting changes to entitlements, we can't afford more without threatening the very growth we hope to produce by further spending.  Deleveraging has to run its sad course; I'm looking for "no" votes here.

Healthcare.  A big one -- as big as the creative solutions the President promised to deliver, but never did.

Obama could have articulated a fresh vision for healthcare, instead of doubling down expensively on a broken system (essentially sweeping millions more patients under the already threadbare rug that is Medicaid). He could have asked: "What does the public sector do well? What does the private sector do well? What system could better tap these resources than the unmanageable claptrap we have today?"

Alternatively, he could have passed a basket of small-bore, sensible programs with broad support and considerable promise, and built further reforms as lessons were learned over time. He did neither.

Instead, we have escalating costs when the economy can least easily bear them, and little better shot at long-term curve-bending than the phantom savings the Republican Congress promised when they steamrolled Medicare D into law. Our need for reform of this sector called for greater vision -- and quite likely well-thought-out new roles for both the public and private sectors. Failing that, the responsible vote was a resounding "nay."

Have I managed to offend both right and left in equal measure yet? If not, I'll keep going...

Credit Card Reform.  Usury has been lawful at least since I got out of school, and that's a while now. It is less so today. BIG yes, and get Elizabeth Warren in there as soon as possible.

(OK, so that one actually passed almost 2:1 in the House, and by a 95% margin in the Senate. I figured it was time to point to a "won-won" situation -- you know, to break up the narrative a bit.)

What about the social issues? What were the most divisive votes of recent sessions, which might help root out those members whose principles outpaced their pandering?

TheCenterline.org on Facebook; CenterlineOrg on Twitter

2010-09-23T17:49:00.000-04:00

It's official: you can now find (and "like," hint hint!) TheCenterline on facebook here and on twitter @CenterlineOrg. (TheCenterline was taken; inspired by Gloria Gaynor, I will survive.)

Million Mod March Slogans: Gauntlets Are Gently Laid

2010-09-23T17:42:00.002-04:00

Charlie in (and very much OF) North Carolina directs us to that rich vein of truth called McSweeney's for some potential category killers, which include in part:

"Live free or give me a reasonable alternative!"
"Some taxation, some representation!"
"What do we want? Rational discussion! When do we want it? ... What works for you?"
"We request change in a reasonable amount of time after comprehensive discussion of the options!"

...while Juge and Katharine showcase some of the best DC has to offer:

"We are moderate as hell and we're not gonna take it any more!"

"Less polarizing and more polar icing."

"Quiet down you loudmouths, we are trying to watch the Daily Show."

Management offers its thanks!

Farrakhan Lives!

2010-09-22T09:57:00.003-04:00

Hours after I reminisced about the Million Man March, so did Jon Stewart, who dug up an even funnier clip from the Master. (Boy, that guy could ramble: the original "million man" pledge ran five minutes.)

Million Moderate March: A Sloganeering Challenge

2010-09-21T19:42:00.001-04:00

I was at the Million Man March in 1995, and I'm psyched to be heading down on October 30 for the three-peat courtesy of Stewart and Colbert.

After Louis Farrakhan, they have big shoes to fill in the humor-on-the-Mall department, as the Daily News amusingly covered (and Maureen Dowd was still hilariously invoking years later).

The Million Mod March deserves better slogans than its partial inspiration, Farrakhan, provided. "Got competence?" and "take it down a notch, America" are perfectly serviceable. But We Can Do Better.*

I do mean "we." The best "I" got for a homemade rally sign is: "Lawmakers, kindly reduce your focus on social matters where no consensus is possible, whilst making good on your pledges of financial rectitude and sensible initiatives where government has a unique mandate and track record of success."

Not exactly bumper-sticker stuff. I'm asking for your help in boiling it down.

All comers from any party are invited to post their best stuff right here on this thread. No cash, but I'll spot a geographically fortunate winner 6,000 of my hard-won Amtrak Guest Rewards points for round-trip coach fare from BOS or NY to DC for purposes of attending the event -- or stand you to the priciest cocktail you can find next time you're here in New York, if you're not up for the trip.

*as the ever-charismatic Sen. Paul Simon put it in his book of that title -- which comes up as item #45 under a search for those words on Amazon these days.

New New York State Voting

2010-09-15T15:16:00.003-04:00

I miss the satisfying "clunk" of the old machines, but experienced none of the difficulties Mayor Bloomberg took the Board of Elections to task for in the new scanned-form process. I found the type legibly sized, privacy sufficient if not ample, and the whole procedure quick and straightforward.

Sure, one of the poll workers at the 2nd Canaan Baptist Church tried to persuade me that no Republican primary was being held, but her supervisor corrected her immediately and quickly sourced a Republican ballot for me.

Given that my (R) ballot actually broke a machine up in my old neighborhood in the 140s the morning of the Sept. 11, 2001 primary, I explained that I could understand her trepidation! I was sent off with a laugh, a thank-you for doing no damage this time around, and a degree of confidence that my vote had in fact been tallied and backed up in a reliable way.

It is no consolation to anyone whose vote was delayed or denied yesterday. But the failures yesterday seem to have been those of the old human system, not the new electronic one. We'll get used to the latter and, One Fine Day, perhaps get around to reforming the former.

The Mosque Debate

2010-08-25T13:33:00.005-04:00

Today, peace-loving Americans who are Christian, peace-loving Americans who are Jewish, and in particular, peace-loving Americans who are agnostic or atheist all have great need of understanding and support from peace-loving Americans who are Muslim. We have even greater need of credible kinship with peace-loving Arabs, Persians and others who are Muslim.

For these reasons, a Muslim Cultural Center -- if led, as the proposed center by all accounts would be, by peace-loving Americans -- is a good idea. It would profoundly support our allies in the Arab world, and quite possibly deter some radical Islamic plots against lower Manhattan.

Obama's in a tough spot, given how vulnerable to, and innocent of, charges of Islamism he is -- and so close to the midterm elections. But in equivocating on "the mosque," he has again missed a pivotal opportunity to lead.

In March of 2008, I applauded his speech on race because "there are times when rhetoric is itself the substance of change." Since then, he has failed centrists on policy matters at every opportunity. Now, he no longer even succeeds where rhetoric can make a mark, by leading people to consider things from a completely different point of view.

Make no mistake: this is a failure of the center. The center does not split today's difference, but envision tomorrow's consensus. Left and right both look backward for guideposts; only the center is independent enough to create the future.

From the national park system to the moon shot, presidents were beset by objections from established quarters on both sides, only to see their vision become mainstream. The extraordinary glory of the civil rights movement stands as something that neither bigoted left nor bigoted right saw coming. Yet through much sacrifice by those outside the two traditional parties, the promise of the 13th, 14th and 15th Amendments became the law of the land in letter and, predominantly, in spirit.

It is for this reason that forward-looking centrists support gay marriage, seeing it as the next natural promise of the end of miscegenation laws. It is for this reason that security-minded centrists, who love peace, can support a mosque near Ground Zero, provided it is founded in the interests of a peaceful future. And it is for this reason that Obama has again failed -- this time, even the test of envisioning a better world. And isn't such a vision the reason I voted for him?

Deflation, Price Adjustments, and Lower Cost Trends

2010-08-12T14:33:00.007-04:00

Times today had this roundtable of views about the prospect of deflation.

It was balanced, but lacked insight -- mostly because all five merely addressed aggregate pricing. In truth, prices can move downward for at least three different reasons.

First, there is the favorable trend toward lower costs because people just get better at doing stuff over time. You get more laptop computing power for your buck every year (nay, month); A/Cs use less energy now than just a few years go.

Second, nontradable assets (like real estate) that got out of whack with reality get adjusted back where they ought to be. You can judge this based on how much a house costs to buy vs. to rent, or what multiple of salary people are paying. Similarly, falling commodities have the effect of a tax cut or other stimulus. The boom of the '90s was on the back of $10 oil following the collapse of the Soviet Union; who complained then?

Only the third form of downward price movement is a threat: true deflation, which is a self-reinforcing feedback loop of falling expectations of wages and prices across the board. Given continuing evidence of longer hours worked and increased income for that majority of Americans who do, after all, have jobs, this seems unlikely.

Economists should stop talking up all falling prices as though they all have one cause, and reporters should hold their feet to the fire. Different diseases call for different treatments. And some falling prices don't need to be cured at all.

Smart Moves Upstate

2010-07-19T12:13:00.002-04:00

Crain's reports today that the City is taking advantage of lower land prices Upstate to accelerate purchases of parcels near reservoirs.

This positive legacy of the Pataki administration is government at its best: 1) urgent, 2) long-term, 3) prudent planning 4) that the private sector cannot accomplish, 5) executed according to clear operational policies that ensure 6) accountability and 7) success 8) while staying within budget.

Management reserves the right to add criteria at any time.

Stimulus vs. Entitlements

2010-06-09T23:21:00.003-04:00

Sometimes David Leonhardt just nails it:

Almost nobody in Congress is agitating for the ideal economic solution: a combination of short-term stimulus with longer-term spending cuts and tax increases.

He stops short of outlining how these twin political miracles might be achieved. Alas, so do I.

The (s)tate of New York

2010-03-16T11:51:00.002-04:00

A recent anonymous commenter took issue with my call for a grassroots response to fix state government, to be modeled after the multi-year organizational success -- as opposed to the ideological content -- of the Contract With America. I even went so far as to suggest that the Tea Party phenomenon might prove a catalyst for such a response.

Perhaps the commenter is unaware of the abject dysfunction of many state legislatures, and how great is the need for structural reform. For anyone who doubts the dire state of New York State, where I reside, check out this article.

In brief: anything so dire that Californians find it cathartic is in need of reform wherever they can get it. And if the ranks of today's famously unkempt Tea Partiers cough up tomorrow's Bull Moose candidate, don't be too shocked. From coast to coast our finances are in ruin, and any sign that people are waking up is a positive first step in my book.

Quote of the Year So Far

2010-03-14T11:12:00.002-04:00

Assemblyman Daniel J. O’Donnell, a Democrat from the Upper West Side, said: “I ache for the return of dysfunction. Dysfunction had its problems, but at least dysfunction has function in its title. We are not functioning at all.”

What is uber-true in NYS is also broadly true nationwide. We need a new Contract With America -- but one focused more on restoring the mechanics of government than on ideological goals. Like the Contract, it must be embraced at the grassroots level by ordinary citizens who start off by simply showing up to run for School Board.

There are shades and shards of this in the Tea Party movement. But if they are to go the distance as Gingrich did, coherent and visible leadership with media staying power must emerge from their ranks. As it stands, they are exhausting their protest spirit in nothing more than one great long lament of what has already come and gone.

Time For Subprime Gods

2009-05-06T00:02:00.007-04:00

I just witnessed the final moments of a god. Specifically, James Morris's Wotan in Die Walkure. (He returns Thursday for Siegfried, but I'm done until Gotterdammerung closes the Otto Shenk production out altogether on Saturday; he is unlikely to return to the role next year.)

Morris, whose decades of service in the role earn him every drop of applause he receives, has nonetheless grown underpowered and overponderous. He knows too well what will happen next. His is thus a ceremonial and peremptorily fatalistic Wotan, with none of the reluctance Albert Dohmen showd last week in relinquishing the god's incertitude or adolescent ways. There is, in effect, no Puck left in his [rhyme goes here]: his philandering is too much merely remembered to possess him, shape his motive or admit much of an arc.

The same maturity first afflicts, then elevates Linda Watson. Her Brunnhilde was persuasive in the anguished third act, but lacked the barbaric yawp of Katarina Dalayman's ever-teen goddess-daughter. Too much Erda makes 'Hilde a dull gal.

Trooper that he is, an ill Domingo gave his all before yielding to a game Gary Lehman in the part of Siegmund, and Adrieanne Pieczonka was a riveting, anxious Sieglinde. But on the whole, after 20 years of dutifully Teutonic mists (and the tenors who made them dance), we are due a Ring production for our time.

After all, is the entire cycle not a parable of regulatory failure, brought about by irregular financing for a home even the gods cannot afford? As with the disposal of Yankee Stadium last season, Otto Shenk's Ring deserves a fond farewell. But in the spirit of the Ring Cycle itself, we all know it's time for a new generation to take the reins.

How I Spent My Summer (and Fall, and Winter) Vacation

2009-04-16T18:12:00.006-04:00

I'm grateful to those who've asked about my year-long hiatus. What happened?

In a phrase: Fannie, and Lehman, and Bear, oh my! Perilous times for those (like me) who work in corporate America, even those far from the financial services sector.

But on Capitol (or shall we now say "Capital") Hill, it's also a generational opportunity to replace shopworn epithets and partisan acrimony with new policy solutions.

The ascent will be bloody and the window will be brief. Already, we've reverted to the old "tax and spend" versus "party of the rich" nonsense...

But let's give it a shot. It would be nice to bring back a museum, jazz or opera review or two while I'm at it.

And yes, I'm aware that I owe most of you a drink.

Ah, the pleasures that overtime taketh away...and recessions restoreth! Let's hope we can all let the budget axe rest for a spell, at least on the weekends.

Obama's Great Speech

2008-03-21T12:39:00.003-04:00

Like many, my opinion of Obama ramped up with his speech on race because it reminded me that even today, there are issues for which rhetoric itself is the substance of change. His willingness to offer strong words on a subject where they can make a difference breaks a barrier not just of race, but of leadership.

The speech appears to be modeled carefully after Robert Kennedy's astonishingly beautiful off-the-cuff remarks after MLK was killed. It is my favorite moment in the history of American oratory. Obama's may be the best speech on the subject since.

I'd like to think that those who dismiss the influence of such events today are underestimating Joe Six-Pack. Indianapolis, where RFK's speech was delivered, remained calm that night while dozens of cities across the country erupted in violence. Listen to the audio on the link above, from the initial gasps to the concluding applause.

Joe Six-Pack heard the message, all right. For the first time, I agree with those who believe that, given the chance, they'll hear Obama's as well. This shapes and improves the upside in this year's presidential contest.

On the everyday issues that matter, McCain is still my man.

On the issues that cut deepest, Obama outshines him spectacularly.

And inasmuch as politics depends on sharp elbows to get things done, Hillary is still any betting man's pick in the fight to come.

Each candidate has major flaws, but change of one stripe or another is coming for the better no matter who wins. For the first time since McCain and Bradley blew out their chances in South Carolina in 2000, I almost feel like we simply can't lose.

The Merits of Margin Calls

2008-03-11T17:33:00.003-04:00

Lost in today's euphoria are the reports that circulated yesterday of $325 billion in what JP Morgan describes as a "systemic margin call." The FT had a great piece on this as well.

Margin calls have a great way of getting people back to basics. The
good news: this may be the most important part of economic therapy to
date for what ails us. The bad news: it may be what puts us over the
edge.

The write-downs we've seen so far are almost meaningless, because
accounting rules require that firms write down even performing loans.
If there's zero market for a security, you mark it to $0 even if the
underlying assets are performing at 60%, 85%, whatever. So a lot of
people think Citibank will have a great Q4 or even Q3 -- whenever the
logjam clears for CDOs -- and they can write this stuff back up by
huge amounts.

In contrast, margin calls are not a fluke of accounting regulations.
They require investors to put up for what they borrowed. The good
news is that, unlike "subprime write-downs," this process gets to the
heart of the mountain of leverage that plagues the marketplace. The
bad news is that as everyone rushes for the exits at the same time,
nobody knows which doors will break or what walls might come down.

Half the equation should resolve itself through ordinary market
forces. The Yahoo article is right that corporate bond spreads have
risen, so a lot of stuff is getting cheaper. Vulture types will swoop
in at some point, helping stem the tide and stabilize pricing.

But it is the nature of the credit default market that unwinding
derivative positions requires the PURCHASE of offsetting swaps for
credit insurance. And those are in short supply. So while the
headline may be about a fire sale, the plot of this chapter will read
more like a "short squeeze." That $325 billion figures is not a "mark
to market" -- it's cash that investors need to show today or tomorrow
or next week. And once the vultures are out of offsetting swaps to
sell, we'll find out who's actually left holding the bag.

Mac Is Not Bush

2008-03-10T12:00:00.003-04:00

Some smart people I admire keep telling me a vote for McCain is a vote to continue the failed policies of the Bush administration. They've taken his worst rhetorical blunders, blended in some lesser blunders ripped from their context, and drunk the stinky Kool-Aid that results.

I have more sympathy than most for what it takes to make it as a
centrist Republican in a primary contest. I think McCain is pandering
now, and as President will revert to his record which is:

- closer to HW than to W on taxes (still Right of Obama, but who ain't)

- closer to TR than to W on the environment (by a lot)

- closer to Ted Kennedy than you'd believe on healthcare (they
co-sponsored a "patient bill of rights" half a dozen years ago)

- likelier to reform Social Security in ways that are a bit more
complex than "privatization" or other one-word solutions/paper tigers

He's collaborated with Kennedy on immigration and healthcare, Sen.
Clinton on military affairs, Feingold on election reform, and others
on everything from earmarks (which are problematic for both fiscal and
ethical integrity) to healthcare insurance for children.

The idea that a McCain presidency would be a mere continuation of the policies of the former Governor of Texas -- a man who wouldn't cross the aisle to save his own mother (that's what Jeb is for) -- is a temporary and necessary fiction forced upon him by circumstances of party, media and geography. It's unfortunate, it diminishes him as a "saint," but it preserves him as a candidate with a shot at the chance to govern.

Did I smirk a bit when Chicago-native Hillary said she was a lifelong
Yankees fan, or when she endorsed a flag-burning amendment after a
career standing up for the First Amendment? Yes. Do I make such
things the cornerstone of my arguments against her? No.

NC Prosecutor thinks I'm nuts for respecting Ben Stein's opinion, but here he is on this sort of subject in the abstract:

"I watched Barack Obama speak in Madison, Wis. As usual, Senator Obama gave a fine oration, with thunderous applause from the audience as his reward. But then I was beguiled by a series of gifts he was going to give the American people (of course, with their own money): universal health care, antipoverty programs, large grants to college students in return for community service (a darned good idea) and other goodies.

....Now, I know it's primary season. I know Democratic candidates have
to make obeisance to the populist, antibusiness wing of their party,
just as the Republican front-runner, Senator John McCain, has to make
bows and curtsies to the supply-side part of his (and my) party.

....As I said, Mr. Obama is a smart man. And Senator Clinton is a
smart woman. I have worked in politics and with politicians. I know
they have to say crowd-pleasing things (just as Republican leaders
have to say that cutting taxes raises revenue)."

It is fitting that it is Obama's supporters, not Clinton's, who are jumping all over what McCain is saying today. They aren't looking at McCain's record, because their own candidate's is so sparse.

Let Them Pay Rent

2008-03-07T17:14:00.006-05:00

Since none of the conventional solutions for the housing & foreclosure crisis seem to be working, how about this for distressed borrowers with ARMs:

1. Owners keep the keys but sign over their deeds to the bank, forgoing what little equity they have.

2. Bank becomes a landlord, charging some large percentage of whatever the total mortgage payment had been prior to the rate increase in the ARM -- in the case of "interest-only" loans, perhaps 100% or more.

Benefits:

1. Dramatically diminished dislocation of stressed borrowers.

2. Collateral damage to neighbors and indeed neighborhoods is
diminished with sustained occupancy levels.

3. Increases liquidity in the overall national market for homes, as
renters don't have to wait on the sale of their own homes in order to
take possession of a new one. This supports broader economic
liquidity (people can relocate to take a new job in a softening
economy, eg).

4. Moral hazard is mitigated by some loss of principal by current homowners, and by making banks deal with the real-world problem they helped create.

5. Rather than write down more crippling losses under accounting rules
-- often of performing assets, further distorting the market! -- banks
keep assets on their books that retain considerable value: the homes
themselves, rather than "zero-value-because-hard-to

-value" CDOs.

6. Likewise saves lenders both the out-of-pocket costs and the
diminished equity from neglected/stripped properties that are
associated with the foreclosure process.

7. Stable flow of rental income frees capital for banks to resume
lending on their own balance sheets.

8. Minimizes the intrusion of the federal government; suggests a wide
range of possible roles as mediators, guideline-setters etc. for state
and local governments at little or not cost to them.

Obstacles:

1. Banks aren't landlords. Possible solution: outsource
administrative functions to mortgage brokers. I'm not entirely
kidding: they're in need of work, too, and this would be more
productive than what they were doing, while using at least a few of
the same skill sets: market knowledge, interfacing with residential
real estate clients etc.

2. Identifying the "banks." This is the tough part: the technological
enabler of the subprime and even prime (ARMs, mostly) debacle is the
disintermediation of borrower and lender by the CDO. Solution: no
idea, except to say that there will have to be one even for normal
foreclosures to proceed. I'm sure there will be some sort of
legal/administrative hybrid solution soon.

3. "You're killing the American dream." Actually, this could help get people back
on track by keeping them in their homes. Who knows: some borrowers,
aided by the stability of staying in their homes, might be ready in a
year or two for a normal mortgage -- and on a home they enjoy that has
repriced to a level that they can afford.

Be gentle, readers...it's just a thought. And as Larry Summers said recently: the country has "never been in more need of serious economic thinking than we are now."

How Barack Broke My Heart

2008-02-26T13:59:00.007-05:00

I wanted to much to fall for the bright teeth, strong voice and, perhaps most of all, the blank slate that together constitute Barack's appeal. After 8 years of lousy policies, no policies at all is pretty seductive.

Then I stood gaping as specifics dropped from his mouth after winning Wisconsin.

Guarantee everyone in the country a healthcare plan "at least as good as what I get as a member of Congress" within 4 years?

Forego taxes on all senior citizens making $50,000 or less -- nearly the national median income for a family of four?

Specify a demon's roster of dictators you'll sit down with -- the only thing he seems prepared to do on "Day One" -- even absent an agenda to guide discussion?

And this collaborator, this antimicomanager, wants to go into classrooms and dictate equally to all teachers in all circumstances, "I don't want you teaching to the test"?

Oh yes, and somewhere in there, he's going to collaborate his way out of our global trade agreements, and everyone will move to Lake Woebegone right before taking the SATs.

I'm more solidly behind McCain in the general than ever. At least with Hillary, her shamelessness will guide her toward the latest polls rather than to social and economic policies that have been discredited for, oh, let's call it 20 years.

There is a shark swimming betwixt hope and naivete (on a less good day, some might call it "pandering"). Senator Obama has jumped it.

In the general, as governing philosophies come front and center, Obama will be shown up for the #1 Liberal that National Journal ranked him. He'll keep the Democratic coalition he forged against Hillary. But centrist hearts will return to the former Navy aviator in droves.

Where's The Shock In New Hampshire?

2008-01-09T19:13:00.000-05:00

The establishment Democratic candidate did well with self-identified Democrats in the state that made her husband the comeback kid. She was helped by high turnout among registered Democrats, while her opponent fell victim to Dartmouth's echo of the dewey-eyed "cellphone vote" that never came through for Kerry in 2004.

The most electable Democratic candidate lost some votes to the most electable Republican candidate (and local victor in 2000) in a state that lets folks with no party allegiance affect the outcome of party contests.

The most religious candidates fared worse than they did in Iowa, while the most exciting new candidate translated his newfound stature after the success of his ground game there into well-deserved strides in New Hampshire -- hopefully guaranteeing the fair fight that Democrats deserve on Super Tuesday.

What you tell a pollster after you've just seen an amazing news report is one thing. What New Hampshire did after she* pulled that curtain behind her was simply revert to what she told the same pollster in October.

It's fun watching Tim Russert call Hillary's clear victory one of the great upsets in U.S. history, and a tickle to hear an old white guy opine on NBC News tonight about how Hillary warmed the hearts of Granite State women at the 11th hour to make it happen. But really, tell me exactly what we learned last night, other than that wild swings in polls taken during brief periods of media volatility aren't all that reliable?

*New Hampshire has been a noticeably less macho state since they lost the Man in the Mountain.

Veni, Vidi...

2006-12-04T20:29:00.000-05:00

The quote of the week comes from Beirut:

Families with little children, old people and young people, all heeded the call of Hezbollah, the Shiite Muslim party and militia, packing buses and cars all over the country. By nighttime, however, only several thousand demonstrators remained, smoking water pipes, playing music and vowing to stay, some in tents, until the Western-backed government fell.

“We are having fun, yes,” said Hussein Hanoum, 27, of Hermil in the Bekaa Valley of eastern Lebanon, as he lay across a sidewalk in the midst of a huge crowd. “We have no work. We have nothing else to do, so we came to overthrow the government.”

The mood was lighthearted, but the turnout underscored the challenge this politically divided and fragile country faces as it confronts its most dangerous political crisis since the end of a 15-year civil war in 1990.

And folks around here say Generation Y lacks ambition.

Rangel Rules...!....?

2006-11-29T16:03:00.000-05:00

I had quite a time at my marathon party a few weeks ago defending a statement of mine to the effect that Charlie Rangel, my Congressman lo these many years, is an honorable and productive force in our politics.

As I generally do, I left myself in an awkward position, inasmuch as I find the Congressman's views wrong on -- well, pick something: spending priorities, education standards and mechanisms, Constitutional interpretation, entitlements reform, local law & order issues, the role of the state (not to mention the State and City) in healthcare...

Here' s the thing: though he's been as blunt in getting his points across as anybody from Central Casting could ask of a Harlem institution (which is what he is), I've seen him stay on the respectful side of the line countless times on NY1 and in print. He's got "message discipline," but he's proved himself capable of actual dialogue. And now, as Reagan used to say, there he goes again:

http://www.newyorkbusiness.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061128/FREE/61128005/1086/FREE

After Chavez's "sulphur" wisecrack, Rangel (along with, it must be said, Schumer and others) even came to W.'s visible defense while most on the Left were still giggling. He earned his bronze star, and we'll all be better off if he can achieve a working relationship with the Republicans on the mighty committee he now chairs.

Hell, if he can ixne the AMT -- that's more than my party did in six years (twelve, really). NC Prosecutor? Your savage point will go unremarked for now. But that's just my standing policy at this point. Watch this space.

My New Number Is 8525

2006-11-19T19:33:00.000-05:00

It was a dark and stormy night.

Last Thursday, to be precise. And at 6:30, Cingular's Midtown store hadn't yet taken delivery of its allotment of five (5) new HTC 8525s.

By 7:30, they'd made their first sale to a nontechnical chump with his first straight-up corporate gig in years. What was he getting into?

Here's what he knew going in: quad-band global reach. G3 high-speed downloads. Mobile 5.0 supporting on-the-fly edits to Office docs. An eye-friendly screen and carpal-coddling QWERTY.

Here's what he didn't: power-consumption considerations if you want to stay continuously linked. (This ain't no Blackberry.) And new degrees of complexity in getting email accounts to sync as desired across a bewildering array of wireless data options.

OK...so it's just two emails and four data options: GPRS, HSDPA, G3, Wi-Fi. But toss in IR, Bluetooth, and UMTS -- some sort of uber-term? -- and we poor hick-boys have plenty to keep our eyes off "Meet the Press" until the the new Congress takes over.

Do I get my email through ActiveSync or within Outlook? Do I go the Java-to-go route for my gmail? Why does my device always default back to the battery-debilitating "as mail arrives" setting? Why do my calls come through in sleep mode, but my emails don't? Why are there three buttons dedicated to the start menu? Do I dare to eat a peach?

Dear reader, I promise: you'll never be bored reading my answers on such subjects, as I have few to offer.

Pelosi Matter

2006-11-19T12:07:00.000-05:00

This just in: Democrats are fractious.

Alas, Poor Lincoln: I Knew Him, Horatio

2006-11-07T23:55:00.000-05:00

What to say about the loss of Linc Chafee? Rhode Island was one of today's purest "national" elections. Ohio was about jaw-dropping Republican corruption at the state level; it was local corruption on the (D) side that fueled Kean's insurgency in New Jersey.

But not Linc Chafee. One of the bluest states ate one of its bluest bloods to show its hatred of the Bush administration. It officially orphans me as a Rockefeller Republican.

Other races read more like a repudiation of Bush's incompetence than of his ideology. Webb served in Reagan's cabinet, and remains locked in a close thing against a perceived racist in a state that adopted a gay marriage ban in a walk; Santorum fell to Democratic pro-lifer.

Tonight's hodgepodgey lilt toward the Dems isn't an endorsement of Pelosi-style liberalism. True, Dems would have picked up even more seats absent redistricting in many states. Yet on the other side of the equation, many Republican voters stayed home -- in part because the Democratic challengers appeared more fiscally conservative than the Republican incumbents. The hip-shootin' good folks at the WSJ helpfully picked this scholar to elaborate on these points.

But ultimately it comes down to one basic truth: the four words in the American political vocabulary that have lost all utility are "liberal," "conservative," "Republican" and "Democrat." Will the modestly realigned Congress press for a more effective prosecution of the wars in Iraq and (remember?) Afghanistan? Everyone hopes so. Will the newly elected representatives from states that also adopted "Defense of Marriage" referenda mess much with W. on "values," or adopt immigration reform that pleases anyone? Don't hold your breath. Tonight's shift lacks the focused reaction of 1974, or Newt Gingrich's long-planned, crystal-clear agenda of 1994.

Tactically, I see only two developments of note tonight. One is Lieberman's idiosyncratic victory on a third line; the other is the prospect of some new blood spoiling for the chance to earn stripes for competent governance. Neither is more than a baby step for political centrism in the U.S. But they're the first we've seen in some time. Watch this weary page for signs that tonight's polls make any difference on taxes, civil rights, electoral reform, or anything else that goes to the heart of why politics matter.

Election Night: Americans In Paris

2006-11-07T23:39:00.000-05:00

While the rest of the blogosphere was busy pontificating and prognosticating, I used a few precious spare moments before starting my new job this week to check out the “Americans In Paris” exhibit at the Met. It’s a coherent treatment of greatest hits, with a slew of starving artists, garden promenades, opera scenes and other social amuse-yeux -- and a few quieter pleasures tucked in for good measure.

Winslow Homer’s panels on the Civil War and most of the Whistlers you can keep; they seem more like academic or sentimental studies than evocations. But Theodore Robinson’s landscapes alternately anticipate, recall, or merely mimic Cezanne, doing more to outline the future of spatial relationships in American art than the competing land, sea and sky textures in Homer’s landscapes. Robinson's “La Debacle,” riffing on Zola’s novel of the same name concerning the Franco-Prussian war and the Paris Commune, is a deliciously oblique gloss on the attempts of the pampered class to get a grip on the perils of political insanity.

That’s my take and I’m sticking with it!

Other masters do not disappoint. Most remember Eakins for his provocative oarsmen, but here he’s in fine form capturing the indoor attentions of a writing master and cellist Rudolf Hennig. As advertised, John White Alexander’s famous portraits of decadent women (and men, dressed as their ladies or Alexander’s own patrons directed) are still sensational by virtue of nothing more than luxurious pose, light effects, and a presumed glint in a dreaming eye. Sargent’s “Daughters of Boit” depends on its scale to adequately communicate the sense of what one critic called “four corners and a void,” and by itself worth is worth the price of admission.

Some little gems struck me, as well. There’s a small scene of a beach in which Charles Pearce punches up the foreground with one puck of a parasol, while skillfully tossing behind his subject (his wife, actually) the kind of endless ribbon of pebbles and waves I wish I’d taken a few days to gaze into myself between heading to my new office tomorrow. Willard Metcalf accomplishes a similar feat on the social side of things in a sliver of a painting called “Au Café,” sketching a narrow vista of social anxieties that any hipster nervously picking which car to hop on the L train will surely respond to.

There’s a tremendous range of depictions of and by women. Mary Cassatt’s pat domestic scenes are redundant and over-represented, setting her up -- perhaps unfairly -- as the Tammy Wynette of the show. (For crying out loud: there’s a Marie-Denise Villers self-portrait, “Young Woman Drawing” from 1801 just outside the exhibition galleries. Let Cassatt paint herself already!) Julius Leblanc Stewart’s “Woman in an Interior” is high irony: this smirking, self-confident strumpet all but busts out of her chair, her picture frame, and the portrait’s own title.

Happily, some women artists have a lot to say as well. Ellen Day Hale’s self-portrait merits the same praise of "native wit and courage" that a Boston critic gave it when it was first exhibited; Cecilia Beaux’s snapshot of a cat lady in New Jersey may yet be a bit too “fresh” or “relevant” for some out-of-town visitors.

It’s fitting that the latter marks the entrance to the final gallery, “Back in the U.S.” Crossing that threshold feels like landing at JFK and flying through the short customs line for U.S. citizens. Hassam’s transparent cheerleading doesn’t feel so trite here; next to Edmund Tarbell’s subtler assurances of American prerogatives, Hassam’s flags and shots of both flowers and women in warm bloom ring false but fair.

Since Jon Stewart, Anderson Cooper and J.C. Watts are presently getting on my case about the election returns, let me add that Pearce’s “Arab Jeweler” speaks directly to today’s polls. How little our disastrous romance with that region has evolved since we first starting painting it in our minds. There’s even something for John Ashcroft, who’s done well for himself, I think, in his national visibility tour (including a game interview in Esquire): Boston’s refusal of the nude statue of woman and child called “Bacchante.” Happily, the Met didn’t mind the sloppy seconds and took McKim up on his offer. Check it out.

Times Endorsements: the Ethics of Incoherence

2006-11-02T17:52:00.000-05:00

OK, I've been uncharacteristically nice about some strong reporting in the Times lately. Someone on 43rd St. must have sensed my cynicism flagging, and is determined to do something about it.

Let's start with this, from their ringing Oct. 30 endorsement of Robert Menendez for U.S. Senate in New Jersey:

Mr. Menendez has a history of ethical lapses that have been all too common for Democratic officials in New Jersey, especially for those, like him, who continue to take an active part in local party politics...but Mr. Kean has gone so far overboard in criticizing the senator that he has attempted to use an episode in which Mr. Menendez actually [ed: gasp!] fought corruption early in his career as an example of unethical behavior....Our unqualified endorsement goes to Robert Menendez.

Apparently Kean's "vague promises to vote against pork and to be tough against corruption," as he did in five years in the state senate, aren't enough for the Times. [Disclosure: I'm proud to have written for Gov. Tom Kean, Sr.; I am not connected with Sen. Tom Kean, Jr.'s campaign, but know people who are.]

Fine: the Times is willing to acknowledge and forgive "a history of ethical lapses" as long as it serves their ideological agenda. But just three days earlier, they endorsed Christopher Callaghan -- whose experience amounts to running "a tiny office of about a dozen people where he was, in effect, Saratoga County's accountant" -- for comptroller, because the manifestly more capable Alan Hevesi twice had to write a check to cover transportation costs for his ailing wife.

The only balanced account of the Hevesi situation I've seen is here; clearly he was in the wrong. But why punish the state's top bean counter for a straightforward lapse, while giving an "unqualified endorsement" to Hudson County's culture of corruption? For comptroller, we need somebody who's qualified to manage $140 billion in pension accounts. For the U.S. Senate, we need someone of character. In the space of three days, the Times has got it exactly backward.

Then there's the question of what choices voters should have at the ballot box when a damaged candidate suddenly threatens to wreck the party for his Party. The Times scoffs at the idea of a carefully orchestrated Hevesi resignation, in which:

...he could not be taken off the ballot, [but] the public could presumably be told whom they were getting...The public should choose between the candidates offered, and that means they should choose Mr. Callaghan...There have to be consequences for bad behavior -- for political parties as well as individual politicians.

How principled: they'll support somone who's less qualified -- and a Republican, no less! -- to maintain the integrity of the ballot. But does anybody remember a different Robert running for Senate in New Jersey just a few years ago, who stepped down shortly before the election to make way for a stronger Democratic candidate?

Here is the editorial page on October 1, 2002:

Senator Robert Torricelli's announcement yesterday that he was withdrawing from the New Jersey Senate race was the correct step to take. His ethical lapses had irreparably damaged his personal reputation, his stature as a legislator and, judging by recent polls, his chances for re-election...His failure to do so earlier has left his party scrambling to find a replacement and the election itself in a state of legal chaos. The task now is to find a way to give New Jersey's voters the choice they deserve.

Much of the speculation yesterday focused on the implications of Mr. Torricelli's decision for the New Jersey Democratic Party and for the balance of power in the United States Senate, where Democrats hold a one-vote margin. These are intriguing questions. But they are secondary to the larger issue of how to give New Jersey's voters a competitive race. Several things must happen to make that possible. The Democrats, led by Gov. James McGreevey, must move quickly to find a credible replacement. The courts must then expeditiously approve the ballot substitution, which in turn will clear the way for an energetic one-month campaign that, with Senator Torricelli out of the picture, can focus tightly on loftier issues than his seamy behavior.

In his emotional announcement, Mr. Torricelli said he would file a court petition to remove his name from the ballot and clear the way for another candidate, to be named in coming days from a short list being considered by Governor McGreevey. The Republicans are likely to argue that under New Jersey election law, it is too late to put another name on the ballot. But legal wrangling over ballot access cannot be allowed to obscure the central issue, which is one of democracy. The guiding principle should be the voters' basic right to a genuine election.

Two days later, the Times painted a rosy scenario for "a vigorous if necessarily abbreviated campaign;" on October 8, they prodded the candidates to "agree quickly on at least three debates" in the remaining month.

The Times didn't have long to wait for its comeuppance. On October 15, they chastized their ad-hoc white knight Frank Lautenberg, for "insisting on including all the third-party candidates in any debate, and [dropping] the debates scheduled by Senator Robert Torricelli, the original Democratic candidate."

The Times came so close to learning from their mistake. "We make this endorsement with some trepidation," the editors wrote of Callaghan -- who after all is, by all accounts, an honorable man of some professional accomplishment. But can New York, of all states, really afford to give on-the-job training for a position that is so much about financial management skills, and so little about the politics of envisioning a better society?

For those of us going to polls throughout the tri-state on Tuesday, the trepidation continues.

[As Robert George observed in a conversation on this subject, the incoherence of Times endorsements also extends to their treatment of Shays, Spano and others.]

My Apologies

2006-11-01T16:43:00.000-05:00

And thanks to those who've inquired after my e-absence. Like any good political centrist, I've been really busy in this election season...busy getting myself ready to start a new job.

You know: in the workforce. The private sector. Where you get rewarded for doing things, rather than obstructing them, shading them gray, morphing them into Satan, and sticking them with a nasty soundtrack to make their parents feel ashamed.

The last few weeks have required some old-fashioned Orwellian doublethink on my part. Of course I've tracked the news; of course I've seen some ads; of course I've laughed at Jon Stewart's more insightful montages of negativity. (We've gone from nattering nabobs to nightmarish newsclips.) Every year, it gets worse. And I'll have some digs in on that as it regards New York, New Jersey, and the media in a moment.

It's just that lately, life has been mostly about commercial real estate, corporate transition strategies, and getting all those personal emails from before I went the gmail route off the company server.

Healthcare Snapshot

2006-10-19T16:59:00.000-04:00

Here's a good state-of-healthcare snapshot, comparing the advantages and disadvantages in Europe and the US. This isn't a puff piece about the industry, and it hits hard on just how much inequity there is in the U.S. system. But along the way, a NYT commentator -- gasp! -- acknowledges that Americans actually get some benefits from all the money we put into healthcare...that the entire world benefits from our investment in new medicines...and that Europeans do NOT have any silver bullets when it comes to costs, quality of care, or social equity.

In my view, a great read about a subject generally prone to imbalance from both system critics and industry defenders.

An Economy of High-Tech Manufacturing

2006-10-17T14:23:00.000-04:00

Today's inflation report was confusing enough in the key numbers: energy way down, core producer numbers hopping up more than expected. Much gnashing of teeth about it all on Wall Street. But buried in the footnotes is an interesting contrast: though "manufacturing output" continues to slog downward, "high-technology industries" are zapping along:

Output of high-technology industries rose 1.9% in September and is up 22.7% in the past year. Excluding high tech, manufacturing output fell 0.5%.

As Al Gore pointed out during one of the debates in 2000, it's no use clinging to old jobs that just aren't competitive. We need to let go of those rungs and move on to -- create, actually -- higher ones. The VP used environmental technologies as an example, but there are plenty more. We still make stuff...just not those old frame-and-body things from GM and Ford that nobody wants to buy. That 22.7% pace is sustainable because of the small size of the base, and the availability of skilled labor to acquire the skills needed on an incremental basis. Given time -- and the generous severance that characterizes the packages coming out of Detroit -- tens of thousands could soon be much more productive than they ever were at the Big Three.

It is with great pain that I say such nice things about Gore. It helps ease my discomfort to note that it is the free market, not government subsidies, that is rewarding these innovations -- and preserving a U.S. economy that remains, for the moment at least, the envy of the world.

My Kind Of Peace Prize

2006-10-13T13:35:00.000-04:00

The Nobel Peace Prize this year went for the developer of microloans that are estimated to have lifted 17 million -- mostly women -- out of de facto indentured servitude to middlemen for want of an average $200.

No, it's not the prize for economics. It's for peace, whose prospects are strengthened by workers who have a stake in their societies. It's a little off the usual political grid, and it's a terrific choice. The Nobel committee has come along way from their ignominious endorsement of Yasir Arafat a dozen years ago.

It's just a pity that Bangladesh is doing more to advance an "ownership society" than we are. Perhaps on Nov. 8 we will see some viable plans surface to reshape the Bush tax cuts from a simple wealth transfer vehicle into something economically productive that rewards the middle class.

The Speech North Korea Needs To Hear

2006-10-10T12:35:00.000-04:00

"Why don't we feel safer?" the New York Times asks after the failure of U.S. policies that have "whipsawed between negotiations and posturing, incentives and sanctions." What course, indeed, would make it so?

Perhaps Jean-Luc Picard would have the answer, but we don't. In the meantime, the gathering consensus -- from the pacifist NYT and Japan to assistant secretary of state Chris Hill (Kim “is really going to rue the day he made this decision”) -- appears to be: now's the time to ratchet up the toughness, using some blend of guns and butter-sanctions.

Even the UN Security Council, nimbly if cheaply mocked on Jon Stewart last night, is uttering some grave syllables on the subject. But doesn't all this tough talk just reward Lil' Kim's nuclear tantrum with the attention he so obviously craves?

I'm neither psychologist nor priest, and I care little for the state of Kim's soul when so many others hang in the balance. If there were a viable military option to castrate North Korea's WMD, I'd sign off in a heartbeat. But why doesn't one find a single word aimed at understanding what drives an impoverished nation to put plutonium enrichment over feeding its people? If indeed we are stuck with diplomacy that has to date so conspicuously failed, what words would we try next?

I don't know who should deliver this speech, or in what forum -- much less whether it would have any effect. But a first draft might go something like this...:

The greatness of the North Korean people is written in their persistence through long sufferings brought on from within and without. But will this greatness never find expression through a modern system of agriculture; the broad educational attainment characteristic of a world power; or a production capacity to serve its own population, and rival its neighbors in open markets?

All these things today’s nuclear powers had achieved before they sought to harness the atom. All these things we in the United States would gladly pursue even more fully if we could, by magic, remove knowledge of nuclear armament from the Earth -- indeed even from our own rolls.
This we cannot do. Since Hiroshima, nuclear weapons have been our necessary shame. No so-called "nuclear power" has escaped this shadow.

Those without the bomb seek it as a source of strength. But this weapon was developed anxiously, of necessity, when all the world was at war. It blighted our enemies and poisoned our own scientists, ending a terrible war in terrible fashion. In every generation since, its competitive development has strained our resources when all the world sought to rebuild.
From Eastern Germany to Calcutta, the drive for more prosperous societies continues. But too often it competes for resources with nuclear ambitions whose value is limited, and whose meaning is misunderstood.
A program of true greatness has yet to start in North Korea, but neither Asia nor the West will stand in the way. We will render what assistance we can if we are asked. And as you grow in the genuine strengths of a healthy society, we will carry the burdens of these weapons alone. That much is assured.

All know that, whatever the means, the world will remove a lethal threat should it emerge — and that no army in Asia is sufficient to stop such action. But why dwell on the one path that none wish to take?
The West stands cursed with the burdens of nuclear weapons. Rather than attain some rumored strength, any land that seeks and achieves the same will find itself both similarly cursed, and accursed by nations. Does North Korea not deserve, instead, a path to greatness — one closed to it until now?
That path is now open. A seat at the negotiating table is still yours. A second test could destroy it forever.

Crazy language? Idiotic to paint nuclear arms as a peculiar burden, rather than a strength?

I'm just trying to find words to 1) help Kim save face by painting an alternative way to distinguish his people, while 2) denying him the rhetorical confrontation he wants by calmly emphasizing the downsides of membership in the nuclear club.

Ok, so maybe I don't have the answer; neither does anyone from Tokyo to the Kremlin to Foggy Bottom. A psychiatrist might ask if that makes me feel a little better. But as the New York Times editorial board understands, knowing I'm not alone doesn't make me feel any safer.

Kings George, Henry, Richard...and Colin?

2006-09-20T11:32:00.000-04:00

One of the random pleasures that sets autumn in New York squarely at the pinnacle of human experience is the late-afternoon call from a friend to share discount tix to a solid performance of, say, Richard II downtown. Which I happily did last night. Laundry can wait.

Comparisons have been made between Bush and Richard in their formation of advantageous alliances, and their views on the legitimacy of rulers. A more obvious parallel is the groundswell of rancor leveled against a leader bound blind for foreign adventures, be they in Ireland or Iraq. And now, with the revolt of noble lords Graham, McCain and Warner, we also begin to see how the power to depose "with a little pin/Bores through his castle wall, and farewell king!"

From 2006, Richard II reads like an indictment of the divine right of kings - not because a king might act poorly, but because without recourse to the popular franchise, a poor king's subjects must choose between fealty and treason. Happily we've passed that point in political development. But while we do have our midterm plebecite coming up, a little leadership from the House of Lords is always to be welcomed.

I am inspired by the uprising of Republican senators. And now, by his principled if overdue break of silence, Colin Powell comes to lend them the support and direction they need.

Those Who Know tell me that Powell has missed his chance at the presidency. But to rise to the challenge at a juncture that strains the country recalls the patient discipline of Severus - Rome's first dark-skinned emperor, btw - who, Gibbon wrote, "had concealed his daring ambition, which was never diverted from its steady course by the allurements of pleasure, the apprehension of danger, or the feelings of humanity."

For his agonizing reluctance to seek political glories, Powell also evokes Cincinnatus. How cool if the the ever-loyal, much-abused, General - now banished from the Administration, and provoked finally to action by intimations of tyranny that, by sanctioning torture, might threaten the safety of troops once his own to command - were to assume the sudden mantle of Bolingbroke as well?

Chafee Victory, Like This Post, Overdue

2006-09-19T11:57:00.000-04:00

Never mind all those pills the national campaign machine had to swallow to get him past the primary. All you need to know: no candidate need fear the wrath of Right-Wing Rhode Island Republicans. (Laughing yet? Thought so.)

Remember, RI has an open primary. The same unaffiliated voters who came out to support Linc in the primary will be back to keep him in office this fall.

Reading Lolita in Damascus?

2006-09-06T16:15:00.001-04:00

Reading about Ahmadinejad's call to somehow purge Iran of its PhDs reminded me of one of the few recent NYT "political memos" to rise above the level of a high-school scandal sheet. (If the writer's first name is Adam, Richard or Elisabeth and the dateline in Washington, you can pretty well bet you already know what it says.)

Actually it was more of a cultural memo, on Koranic schools for girls in Syria, and it was revelatory. Imagine an Islamic state born of a secular culture in which female citizens, from the earliest age, are trained to study the Koran and to challenge interpretations of it that are poisoned by a chauvanistic war culture and "mere tradition"? One in which sharia not only encompasses the harshest elements of the religion, but also reflects pride in the joyous verses found at the back of the Koran?

It would be like taking an Old Testament culture and suddenly infusing it with the Song of Songs. That's a caliphate we at least can do business with.

It's a long shot, but these things develop - for good or ill - over a course of generations. "Let France have good mothers, Napoleon said, "and she will have good sons." The same guarded optimist should hold out for a tidy little reaction against Ahmadinejad's Phd purge. If such developments don't succeed as a counterweight to Saudi-style madrassas, we're stuck with another 100 years of this crap.

A Plan B Discussion That's Far Out

2006-08-24T13:40:00.000-04:00

Robert George has provoked an abortion debate that's out of this world.

The Chafee Factor

2006-08-22T15:54:00.000-04:00

A bit of an oxymoron, isn't it? "[insert product name or demographic tag]...FACTOR" is supposed to galvanize consumers and tantalize pundits. Just put it on and Shazamm!, models swoon, Maureen Dowd reluctantly included.

It doesn't work for Linc Chafee. Oh, the nickname comes easy enough: this is one of those Rs that Ds can accept because he's brahmin enough to seem hardworking where it counts, and comfortably slack on the rest. But a glimpse on the campaign trail leaves you feeling sorry for him, as though an inevitable defeat to a blustering populist is just what the poor man needs to go home to his J24 and his purebred pets and family.

I'm actually to the right of Chafee on spending and some other matters, none of them trivial. But he represents a neglected tradition that voters take for granted. I don't mean the tradition of hereditary governance: today's White House offers ample evidence that declension continues to afflict the stock of the Puritans.

I mean a tradition of collaboration, a reputation for even-handed dealing. Many officials who exemplify these qualities are in fact old money, but there is plenty of ancient cash washing around Washington that doesn't make the grade. Personally, I will take honor in public service wherever I can find it.

Chafee voted against his president, both on the Senate floor and in the voting booth. There is no reason for even liberal Rhode Islanders to reject him. For generations, they've said "yes" to Chafees right and left. Perhaps Linc doesn't have the fire to win in the age of 527-funded sniper fire. Perhaps he hasn't evolved to meet the challenge. But if the unaffiliated voters eligible to vote in Rhode Island's quasi-open primary don't turn out in large enough numbers to ensure his presence on the ballot in November, then it is the evolution of the voting public that is cause for concern.

A Curse of Their Own

2006-08-17T09:57:00.000-04:00

So the most profitable franchise in Christendom has a new half-billion-dollar subsidy from taxpayers like me to reduce the number of regular seats, while bloating the skybox ratio:

Declaring the start of a new era for the Yankees and for the Bronx, officials broke ground yesterday on a $1.2 billion project to build a 51,000-seat replacement stadium. The ceremony took place as throngs of police officers cordoned off protesters who oppose the project because it will eliminate most of two parks and require $400 million in public subsidies.

But my jaw hit the floor when I read this:

The ceremony, which drew the likes of the former Yankees catcher and manager Yogi Berra and the actor Billy Crystal, occurred on the 58th anniversary of the death of Babe Ruth.

Selling out ordinary fans for profit is just Steinbrenner as usual, bless him. But dancing on the Babe's grave in the process is the type of near-iconic hubris that sent him our way in the first place. I hope we all enjoyed 2000, folks, because last time an owner spat in the face of the House-builder, the curse lasted 86 years.

Bolton and Diplomacy

2006-08-15T12:17:00.000-04:00

...are two words that don't belong in the same heading. To be sure, the UN reforms that conservatives seek (particularly in the accounting department) should be pursued. But most criticisms of UN inefficacy inhere in diplomacy itself. There are plenty of things it cannot do. It cannot, for example, demonstrate leadership.

But it can provide a forum for the (often face-saving) wiggle room that nations need at the margin. The tenuous ceasefire in Lebanon is a fine example of a halting step that is better than none at all. Right now it is being improvised daily; more and better diplomacy will be needed to strengthen it as events continue to unfold.

Diplomacy can't generally do much more, but sometimes it can do this much. It is what it is. And John Bolton is precisely what it isn't. Anyone for whom a Google search for his name + the word "burst" generates this kind of result is simply the wrong man for the job.

Sen. Voinovich shouldn't hesitate to say so. He had it right the first time. It would be a shame for one of those stalwarts regularly and unfairly derided as a "squish" to lose his backbone now, when it could do the most good.

Islamo-Fascism, Indeed

2006-08-14T12:03:00.000-04:00

Finally got around to Leslie Chamberlain's Nietsche in Turin (1996) this weekend. She writes of the corruption of Nietzsche by National Socialism thusly:

The idea of war, warfare and military campaigns was often on Nietzsche's mind. There is no way of escaping that, and it has allowed his misuse and has lost him readers. But there is a kind of absurdity about that misunderstanding, because Nietzsche mainly used the military idea in a transformed sense, the way the Greek word agon is sometimes used today to signify cultural challenge. Often the military metaphor referred to his own struggle to assert 'a pessimism of strength' over the decadence of contemporary life....When he was a soldier in 1886 he linked the discipline, valour and rigour of those months with his instinctively rigorous taste in matters of daily living and aesthetics.

How often are we reminded that properly speaking, jihad refers first to the inner struggle, not to any battlefield? Islamic extremists are doing to the Koran what Hitler did to Twilight of the Idols.

A Step Back in Michigan

2006-08-09T10:36:00.000-04:00

While the DailyKos crowd crows about a victory that may portend more moderation than they expect in Connecticut, less ragtag forces are demonstrating that old-fashioned muscle can still kill common sense in my own party. After an assault from the Club for Growth, Republican centrist and incumbent Joe Schwarz lost his Congressional primary to state rep Tim Walberg.

Apparently an endorsement from President Bush wasn't enough to certify Schwartz's rightward credentials. The terrifying discipline of Republican extremists will always trump the premature (and quasi-delusional) victory laps from the blogo-Left. Whatever happens in Connecticut this November, be afraid, centrists of all descriptions. Be very afraid.

Who Really Won In Connecticut?

2006-08-09T10:11:00.000-04:00

OK, so I started this blog a year ago and didn't make any posts. Why? Because - like any political moderate you can point to - I had a job and a life to attend to. That's why "irate moderates" are so rare.

Don't take my word for it -- here is Mr. Sulzberger's crack staff on the subject:

The rebellion against Mr. Lieberman was actually an uprising by that rare phenomenon, irate moderates. They are the voters who have been unnerved over the last few years as the country has seemed to be galloping in a deeply unmoderate direction....

Mr. Lieberman’s supporters have tried to depict Mr. Lamont and his backers as wild-eyed radicals who want to punish the senator for working with Republicans and to force the Democratic Party into a disastrous turn toward extremism. It’s hard to imagine Connecticut, which likes to be called the Land of Steady Habits, as an encampment of left-wing isolationists, and it’s hard to imagine Mr. Lamont, who worked happily with the Republicans in Greenwich politics, leading that kind of revolution.

I love how Lamont's victory is being ascribed to the blogosphere. How many left-wing bloggers live in freakin' Greenwich? Lamont is a businessman, an entrepreneur. And in the general election, he'll need those qualities to win.

Lamont's win is a win for centrist Democrats in a Blue state. The fact that they are tugging a bit Left on the wars is fine. We'll see soon enough how in thrall he is to the liberal wing.

Now if only we could get the Times to spell-check "unmoderate."

As enticing as any plausibly centrist third-party candidacy would be, Robert George showcases why it it's an uphill road in the tri-state. Thanks for remembering Senator Javits, Robert. Remind me to ask you when to expect the 7 line extension.

Lieberman and the Political Center

2006-08-07T12:03:00.000-04:00

The Lieberman-Lamont race can go one of three ways.

#1: Lieberman loses the primary, runs independent and wins. The most interesting outcome. Americans are already registering as independent/unaffiliated in record numbers. A Lieberman victory on an independent line would show that familiar candidates can still win, even when there's no room for them in the parties they called home all their lives.

In time, a string of such victories could form the basis for a third, centrist party. Unfortunately, Lieberman isn't really a centrist -- except inasmuch as his very liberal (abortion, labor) and very conservative (non-abortion moralizing, pro-War stance) views sort of average out mathematically. But it gets things started.

#2: Lamont wins both the primary and the general. Least interesting, but most promising outcome as far as revitalizing our two disastrous parties from within. Connecticut sends an unbeholden entrepreneur -- albeit a shrill one -- publicly committed to new approaches to Washington.

#3: Lieberman pulls out the primary after all. It's a victory for sanity, perhaps -- but also for the entrenched party system, demonstrating that Connecticut Democrats, at least, prefer the status quo to anything else.

OK, four ways. Most amusing outcome: Republican candidate wins in November.

How to Save Social Security in Just Three Words:

2005-03-29T11:53:00.001-05:00

FIX MEDICARE FIRST.

Principles...Right and Left

2005-03-28T15:54:00.000-05:00

In our fondest hopes:

TAXES should be far simpler, somewhat lower…
…somewhat progressive, and structured to reward both work and innovation.

SPENDING should target core government roles…
…and be insulated from corporate and other special-interest giveaways.

The PRIVATE SECTOR is the undisputed champion of
economic growth and prosperity, lifting all boats…
…when effectively policed to ensure fairness, competition and system integrity.

Social advancement is for INDIVIDUALS to pursue…
…upon the level playing field of a strong basic education and an open society.

THE COURTS shouldn’t create legislation…
…but the undisputed common sense of our times should inform their deliberations.

Unless you still live at home or the first trimester has passed…
…what happens in ONE'S BEDROOM or thereafter is no one else’s business.

RELIGION has historically strengthened our society...
…and government should stay out of the way of Church, Temple and Mosque.

America should never fear to stand alone…
…whenever allies do not rally to support clear U.S. LEADERSHIP for what is right.

DIVERSITY in both people and state governments is America’s strength…
…yet we are one nation capable of rallying around core values and priorities.

Most of all, GOVERNMENT SERVES SOCIETY best when lawmakers and executives:

~ Prioritize important objectives realistically achievable by government;

~ Seek innovative approaches to evolving challenges, understanding that new ideas can spread credit, avoiding the gridlock traditional party lines and hidebound ideas provoke;

~ Recognize the political benefits of substantive discussion and compromise.

Objectives

2005-03-28T15:53:00.000-05:00

To create a forum within the punditocracy that will:

*advocate sensible policy at the federal level
*offer independent cover to elected centrists in both parties
*help identify and facilitate the undisputed but silent centrist majority
*support new channels of influence for politically moderate Americans
*maintain a more respectful tone than generally prevails in the blogosphere.