The front page of this morning’s Washington Post makes for some sober reading. An article by Philip Rucker and Amy Gardner details the way immigration keeps coming up at GOP presidential candidate forums, even though the candidates will have been more likely to have begun the forums discussing jobs and the economy. Yet, polls show the issue way down on the list of priorities for most voters, including most GOP primary voters.
Over at Catholic Advocate, Deal Hudson has an article up attacking some of those Catholics who recently signed a letter to Secretary of Health & Human Services Kathleen Sebelius regarding the need to expand the conscience protection clauses of the new health care mandates. Hudson charges the group with, among other things, "incoherence" because they lambasted Speaker John Boehner for backing a budget that eviscerates programs that help the poor and vulnerable but they supported the nomination of Kathleen Sebelius.
It should be recalled that then-Sen. Sam Brownback, whose ideological leanings are right up Hudson's alley, also supported the nomination of Sebelius, but never mind.
The head of the Vatican Bank, Ettore Gotti Tedeschi, penned an essay in L'Osservatore Romano that seems to support their less-government-is-good mantra. And conservatives in this country have finally found a vatican text to support their claims. Writing at the blog International Liberty, Dan Mitchell suggests sending President Obama to the Vatican for an economics lesson.
Mitchell is correct, but not for the reasons he thinks. I, too, wish President Obama would go to the Vatican for an economics lesson, but he would be unlikely to meet with Mr. Tedeschi. I suspect he would meet with Pope Benedict XVI said just last week that we must put people before profits. What does Mitchell think of that? Just so we are clear, the head of the Vatican bank has no teaching authority, last time I checked. He is a banker. He may or may not know much about economics. But, he does not speak for "the Vatican" on the morality of various economic policies. I am sticking with Benedict on this one.
In Washington’s highly polarized political environment, you would expect that the publication of a memoir by a significant political figure would arouse the ire of those across the aisle. You expect the spokesmen for the other party to shout that certain charges in the memoir are “utterly misleading” or that they are “cheap shots.” You expect someone to denounce the books’ contents as “an attack on my integrity.” But, what you do not normally expect is to find those kinds of comments from those in your own party, from those who used to work alongside you.
Unless of course, the memoir in question is by former Vice President Dick Cheney. It appears that the comments quoted above, from two former Republican Secretaries of State, Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice, indicate that Cheney is really as loathed by some Republicans as he is by some Democrats. It is not difficult to see why. This is a man whose Manichean worldview shaped American policy in tragic and illegal ways. This is a man who seems incapable of not taking a cheap shot. This is a man who can find good things to say about Richard Nixon but nothing good to say about Barack Obama.
According to a report in this morning's Washington Post, some companies pay more to their top executives than they do in taxes. So, the next time you hear someone bemoan the high corporate tax rate, remember that it is highly unlikely the corporation is paying that rate. In fact, the well-paid CEOs are probably paying a lower rate than you dear reader.
If the Obama administration's communications team can't use studies like this - or the fact that GE paid no taxes and the hedge fund managers do not pay income tax at normal rates - to whip up a little economic populism from the left, they need to be fired.
A federal judge, appointed by Texan George H.W. Bush has gutted key parts of a new law that was to have gone in to effect in Texas on Thursday, requiring women to procure a sonogram 24 hours in advance of an abortion and requiring the doctor to explain what the sonogram shows to women planning an abortion.
As a First Amendment stickler, I agree with the judge that forcing any citizen to deliver government-approved speech is problematic. But problematic is not decisive. After all, we require cigarette companies, among many other producers, to put warning labels on their products.
But, the Sonogram Law exposes the hypocrisy of the pro-choice crowd. These are the people who are championing "science" in other debates, as in the discussion over mandated care under the Affordable Care Act or the debate on embryonic stem cell research. But, when science, in hte form of a sonogram, gives the lie to the idea that there is something other than a baby in the mother's womb, well, that is government intrusiveness.
Jonathan Cohn, at TNR, shows that the Stimulus worked, no matter how much it is maligned, and that its major problem was that it was not larger.
Of course, the Stimulus worked in another way besides just creating more jobs. It worked because when the economy was in free-fall it was necessary for the government to do something, almost anything really, to show that it was not going to stand by and leave the future of the economy to the impersonal forces of the market. We were in free-fall. We are not now. That, too, is how this much-maligned program worked.
Congressman Eric Cantor, the Majority Leader of the House of Representatives, indicated that before he and his GOP colleagues would consent to more funding for the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), they would have to make other budget cuts to offset the new funds. FEMA is quickly running out of money and had to divert funds from some rebuilding projects from earlier tragedies to meet the immediate needs of Hurricane Irene.
At one level, Cantor’s position is easy to understand. After all, despite the fact that ours is a wealthy nation, Cantor thinks our government takes in too much in taxes, even though tax rates are at historic lows. Cantor is one of those who want to apply a business model to the government budget, to stop spending more than we take in, someone who must have studied double entry accounting and knows that the numbers at the bottom of the ledger need to match. His comments on FEMA is just the latest iteration of an already well articulated stance.
Today, conservatives like to dismiss the value of the economic theories of John Maynard Keynes and "keynesianism" has became a sort of Tea Party cuss word. These same conservatives also tend to be fans of British Prime Minister Winston Churchill - and, who isn't?
So, it was with relish that I just this afternoon was reacquainted with a letter from Churchill to Sir John Anderson, the Lord President of the Council, dated January 28, 1941. Churchill had assigned Anderson the task of "harnessing to our war-making machine the full economic resources of the nation." In the letter he writes: "You should summon economists like Keynes to give their views to you personally."
In case you missed it in the print edition of NCR, here is a link to my article on Pax Romana.