Political scientists like to argue that politics is about who gets what and that self-interest tends to drive policy preferences. But the real world doesn't always work this way -- certainly not when it comes to government benefits. Some of the same states where residents rely most heavily on public programs routinely elect politicians who are determined to slash these very same programs.
Not a day goes by without a conservative leader or media outlet arguing that the stimulus has been a failure and that uncontrolled government spending is only making the recession worse. Of course, this is nonsense. Worse, it is one of the most damaging lies that conservatives are now telling about the economy.
Everyone in both political parties says they want to bring down unemployment, and that sense of urgency is sure to grow after today's dismal job numbers, which show unemployment creeping up to 9.2 percent.
After the sudden demise of the News of the World today, tabloid editors will surely think twice before drawing on illegally obtained information. But other unethical practices – used by a range of print, broadcast, and online media businesses – will continue, like paying sources for dubious information (“cash for trash”) or fabricating juicy stories outright to boost circulation or ratings.
One of the more bizarre features of political life over the past two years has been the sense on Wall Street that it has been unfairly demonized in the wake of the financial crash. Top bankers have famously soured on President Obama because of his occasional criticisms of Wall Street -- despite the Administration's record of going easy on an arrogant financial elite who blew up the economy.
It is no secret that government regulators often mete no more than a slap on the wrist for corporate wrongdoers guilty of serious crimes. As I have written here and elsewhere, federal authorities routinely reach settlements in which corporations do not actually acknowledge doing anything wrong and agree to financial penalties.
Republican lawmakers in Minnesota have forced a government shutdown in that state by refusing to agree to any revenue increases at all to help close the state's $5 billion budget deficit. Governor Mark Dayton, in contrast, has offered a mix of steep spending cuts and a modest tax hike on high earners.
The historic financial reform law that President Barack Obama signed last July is more akin to an outline than a detailed regulatory mandate. It will only have teeth when numerous rules are written and oversight mechanisms are put into place. Getting the money for this work wouldn’t have been a problem if Democrats still controlled the House--but they don’t anymore.
Preet Bharara, the U.S. Attorney prosecuting the insider trader cases, is quoted in a recent New Yorker article as saying that a lack of manpower was the reason that authorities hadn't prosecuted more people involved in the financial crisis: "If the well is dry," he said, "a thousand more people aren't going to get you water in that well."
When Joseph Stiglitz and Linda Bilmes published a book entitled The$3 Trillion War, they were criticized by some academics and reviewers for inflating the costs of the Iraq war. Well, now it appears that the authors' figures may have been too low.
Representative Sandy Levin is one of the top Democrats in Congress when it comes to trade issues and given that he represents Michigan -- where the economy has been battered by globalization -- it is no surprise that he has long taken a critical stance on free trade agreements. But Levin is not entirely hostile to such pacts.
I have been predicting for the past few months that as part of a bipartisan budget deal Republicans will agree to raise revenues by reducing tax breaks and then cloak this retreat in high-minded rhetoric about "tax reform."
Here's what I don't get about House Majority Leader Eric Cantor quitting the budget talks because he opposes any tax increases: Nearly every conservative budget plan out there -- including the Ryan plan -- embraces a fiscal scenario in which taxes consume a greater share of GDP than they do today. Everyone on the right knows taxes will have to increase somewhat, so why doesn't Cantor just accept the inevitable -- especially with the stakes so high?
New York – At a time when anti-government ideology is driving policy making in Washington, a refresher course on the concrete benefits and products of a robust public sector is needed. The programs, infrastructure, and services that have make America great are possible due to an often dreaded source: our taxes.
David Callahan, a senior fellow at the think tank Demos, contends the tax code should differentiate between charities and overtly partisan advocacy organizations. Now neither type of group must reveal the names of its supporters.
Wealthy nations, led by the United States, should move to reduce or eliminate all tariffs on imports from developing countries as one way to help offset the extraordinary costs these countries face in confronting climate change. If U.S. tariff policy continues on the current trajectory, the U.S. is likely to collect about $90 billion in import duties on products from developing countries, excluding China, by 2020.1 The combined total collected by the European Union, Japan, and other wealthy countries may exceed that amount.
The United States has long granted trade preferences to developing countries that meet various criteria. These criteria, which are stipulated by the Generalized System of Preferences (GSP), have changed with time — reflecting U.S. economic and foreign policy priorities.
While the criteria include non-support for terrorism, enforcement of intellectual property rights, and respect for internationally recognized worker rights, the GSP does not include an environmental provision.
The United States has long granted trade preferences to developing countries that meet various criteria. These criteria, which are stipulated by the Generalized System of Preferences (GSP), have changed with time — reflecting U.S. economic and foreign policy priorities.
While the criteria include non-support for terrorism, enforcement of intellectual property rights, and respect for internationally recognized worker rights, the GSP does not include an environmental provision.
Over the past eight years, even as the U.S. signed a number of new bilateral trade pacts, the U.S. government actually decreased its capacity for promoting strong labor standards and enforcing the labor provisions of trade agreements. The Bush Administration sought to slash funding for the Bureau of International Labor Affairs (ILAB) at the U.S. Department of Labor and, though it wasn't entirely successful in this effort, it still managed to significantly downsize the agency.
