The Forgotten Communitarian

PPI President Will Marshal explains why Bill Clinton’s contributions to restoring the language of civic obligation are so frequently overlooked over at Democracy:

“In “Restoring the Language of Obligation,” [Issue #24] James Kloppenberg laments “the ignorance of most Americans about the centrality of the concept of obligation in American history.” Yet there’s a gaping hole in his own synopsis of that history—the 1990s, when civic themes re-entered the nation’s political discourse in a big way”

“Invocations of civic duty and the disinterested pursuit of the common good were touchstones of American politics from colonial days until around the 1970s, says Kloppenberg, when liberals “traded the language of duties for the language of rights.” He argues persuasively that the ensuing fixation with rights talk and identity politics sped the unraveling of the New Deal coalition, and, by eroding more expansive notions of social solidarity, abetted the rise of Ronald Reagan’s anti-government populism.”

“But there his recap ends, skipping the striking period of civic ferment that followed. In politics, for example, Bill Clinton and the “New Democrats” consciously sought to reclaim the civic-republican tradition. Concepts like mutual obligation, community, and national service, and balancing citizens’ rights with their responsibilities, were central to the nation’s political conversation in the 1990s, and even migrated abroad via the “third way” dialogue between Clinton, Tony Blair, and other center-left political leaders.”

Read the entire article HERE.

Online Petitions Distract Congress From Real Issues

Anne Kim, PPI Managing Director of Policy and Strategy, explains how online petitions distract Congress from real issues over at U.S. News:

“Recently, Congress finally wrapped up weeks of heated debate over the survival of the Export-Import bank—a tiny, independent, and once-obscure agency that involves just 2 percent of U.S. exports.”

“The sudden spotlight on the once-incognito Export-Import bank is in part about election year politics; there aren’t enough teapots to hold the tempests politicos seem to brew daily. But credit also goes to a cottage industry of special interests organizations that make a living serving up “issues” as red meat for their memberships (and coincidentally as vehicles for their fundraising).”

“The campaign to end Export-Import Bank, for example, was one of several national petition drives being peddled by the right-leaning National Taxpayers Union. (The organization’s home page invites visitors to “Donate,” “Shop,” or “Take Action,” in that order, and the merchandise includes such books as How to Fight Property Taxes available for $9.95.) It was also a top legislative priority for the lobbying arm of the conservative Family Research Council, FRC Action, which prospective members can join for just $25, as well as a “key vote” for the Club for Growth.”

Read the entire op-ed HERE.

The Forgotten Communitarian

PPI President Will Marshal explains why Bill Clinton’s contributions to restoring the language of civic obligation are so frequently overlooked over at Democracy:

“In “Restoring the Language of Obligation,” [Issue #24] James Kloppenberg laments “the ignorance of most Americans about the centrality of the concept of obligation in American history.” Yet there’s a gaping hole in his own synopsis of that history—the 1990s, when civic themes re-entered the nation’s political discourse in a big way”

“Invocations of civic duty and the disinterested pursuit of the common good were touchstones of American politics from colonial days until around the 1970s, says Kloppenberg, when liberals “traded the language of duties for the language of rights.” He argues persuasively that the ensuing fixation with rights talk and identity politics sped the unraveling of the New Deal coalition, and, by eroding more expansive notions of social solidarity, abetted the rise of Ronald Reagan’s anti-government populism.”

“But there his recap ends, skipping the striking period of civic ferment that followed. In politics, for example, Bill Clinton and the “New Democrats” consciously sought to reclaim the civic-republican tradition. Concepts like mutual obligation, community, and national service, and balancing citizens’ rights with their responsibilities, were central to the nation’s political conversation in the 1990s, and even migrated abroad via the “third way” dialogue between Clinton, Tony Blair, and other center-left political leaders.”

Read the entire article HERE.

The Net Roots, the Super Rich, and the Ugly, Endless Election

PPI Executive Director Lindsay Lewis explains the outsized and damaging influence of both the super rich and net roots activists over at The Daily Beast:

“The Wisconsin brag-and-blame games have begun. Democrats wasted no time dismissing Gov. Scott Walker’s recall win as proof that the big out-of-state money trumped local sentiment, while Republicans are still fuming about labor’s national push to oust him. ”

“Both sides are right.”

“The people of Wisconsin have been merely pawns in the new era of nonstop nationalized campaigning. Election Day is now just the pause between quarters in a campaign game that never ends. The battle over Walker had very little to do with Oshkosh, Madison, or Milwaukee. The U-Hauls, vans, and flights leaving town now like the Ringling Brothers Circus packing up its tent poles en route to the next town—while Wisconsinites are left with the elephant dung to clean up.”

Read the entire op-ed HERE.

Election Watch: The Republicans Gain Momentum

Mitt Romney crossed the 1,144 delegate threshold to officially claim the GOP presidential nomination via Texas’ May 29 primary. As planned, his campaign launched an attack on the president’s fiscal and economic policies, focusing initially on “failed stimulus projects” and then featuring a surprise visit by the candidate to the site of the bankrupt Solyndra facility, which received a $535 million “clean energy” loan guarantee from the DoE.

But the Romney “pivot” was overshadowed by bad publicity from his strangely timed, May 29 Las Vegas fundraiser, starring Donald Trump (at Trump’s Vegas hotel). The “Trump” made it vastly worse by releasing a barrage of statements reopening the Obama birth certificate “issue.” The big question today is whether the latest not-so-good news on the economic front—a BLS May “jobs report” showing a downward revision of the last two months’ jobs gains and an underwhelming 69,000 new jobs for May—will dominate the presidential campaign for the period just ahead.

Continue reading “Election Watch: The Republicans Gain Momentum” →

Keep Drug Bill Pro-Innovation

PPI believes in the importance of smart regulation as part of a well-functioning economy. But we’ve also repeatedly advocated that regulation and legislation should aim to boost innovation, not get in its way.

Unfortunately, not all politicians in DC have gotten the message. Over the next couple of days Congress will be voting to reauthorize the Prescription Drug User Fee Act (PDUFA), which speeds up the process of reviewing new drugs by using fees collected from manufacturers.

On net, this is a pro-innovation bill which is strongly worth supporting. But it’s worth noting that one amendment, submitted by Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT), would gratuitously undercut the incentives for innovation. The amendment, as I read it, would take away marketing exclusivity for a drug if a company was found guilty of any one of a long list of criminal or civil violations related to the drug, including illegal marketing.

Continue reading “Keep Drug Bill Pro-Innovation” →

Start-up 2.0: Another Welcome Boost for Entrepreneurs

Last month, Congress and the president passed major legislation (the Jumpstart Our Business Startups (JOBS) Act) aimed at making it easier for start-ups and small businesses to gain better access to capital. It was one of the few bills passed in the last year that wasn’t born out of crisis or in the shadow of a looming government shutdown.

This week, a bipartisan group of Senators has introduced a summer sequel worth watching in what they’ve dubbed “Startup Act 2.0.” This legislation would take one more big step in giving young businesses three crucial ingredients for success: talent, time and money.

Talent. Perhaps the most ambitious and creative proposal put forward by this group—Sens. Jerry Moran (R-Kan.), Mark Warner (D-VA.), Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) and Chris Coons (D-Del.)—is the creation of “STEM visas” for foreign students who come to America and earn advanced degrees in math or science, and “entrepreneur visas” for legal immigrants who start their own companies.

Continue reading “Start-up 2.0: Another Welcome Boost for Entrepreneurs” →

Republican War On Economic Data is Anti-Business and Anti-Growth

The House Republicans appear to be conducting a war on economic data. They seem to think that defunding data collection is all gain and no loss.

In fact, the anti-data Republicans are really anti-business and anti-growth. Government spending on economic data collection should be thought of as fully equivalent to investment in long-lasting infrastructure. When we build highways or airports, we expect them to be used by the private sector for economically-valuable activities. Highways facilitate the sale and use of automobiles, the construction of homes, the transportation of goods. Airports make air transportation possible, fostering all sorts of jobs and growth.

Just like spending on highways and airports, government investment in economic data collection provides a long-lasting boost to private sector economic activity and to private sector growth. To give one very simple example: Political polling would be much more expensive and less accurate if the pollsters did not have access to government economic and demographic data. The government data enables the pollers to make sure their sample correctly represents the actual population.

Continue reading “Republican War On Economic Data is Anti-Business and Anti-Growth” →

Election Watch: The Growing Impact of Super-PACS

This week’s major down-ballot contest was in Nebraska’s Republican Senate primary, where State Senator Deb Fischer came from far behind to beat the long-time front-runner, Attorney General Jon Bruning, along with “movement conservative” favorite, State Treasurer Don Stenberg.

Despite some media treatment of the outcome as another “conservative insurgent” victory over an “establishment moderate,” it’s not at all clear that ideology had much to do with Fischer’s victory. A late PPP survey (which very accurately predicted the outcome) showed Fischer drawing support from all ideological elements of the GOP, and benefitting from a loud and expensive Bruning-Stenberg slugfest that mainly focused on Bruning’s ethics and possible vulnerability against Democrat Bob Kerrey.

Continue reading “Election Watch: The Growing Impact of Super-PACS” →

PPI Battleground Home Values Index: Home Values Tick Upward

We have had a bevy of economic and political “events” in the last six months that have focused on stabilizing home prices. The President’s efforts on refinancing are starting to pay dividends, and the major settlement between the attorneys general with five of the biggest mortgage servicers offered some order to a market process that previously bordered on chaos. Money from the settlement has started to flow to the states, even though there is a looming concern that some of those funds are being used to close budgetary holes instead of helping families.

This past week, the National Association of Realtors held their Mid-Year Legislative Meetings and on Tuesday, PPI helped to assemble a panel of experts to discuss on-the-ground issues and upcoming housing issues.

The government’s role in the future of housing and current regulatory uncertainty was the most discussed topic. All panelists agreed that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac aren’t going anywhere anytime soon and their future existence, in whatever version they take, would be necessary for a 30-year fixed rate mortgage, which is currently 95% of all loans being made.

Continue reading “PPI Battleground Home Values Index: Home Values Tick Upward” →

Stop the Uncertainty Surrounding Ex-Im Bank

Late yesterday marked a formal end to the two-year debate on whether the Export-Import Bank (Ex-Im), the U.S. export credit agency, deserves to live to see another day. (It does.) What was once a routine process for Ex-Im reauthorization was held back by congressional charges of corporate welfare by the Tea Party. But while the decision to reauthorize the Bank for another two and a half years is good, the fact that it took so long is not: at this rate negotiations for the next round will have to begin before this legislation is finalized. That is a heavy drain on congressional and Ex-Im Bank resources. One has to ask, is there a way to avoid the same extended debate next time around?

Yes, with a little more clarity on why two-year long ideological attacks on Ex-Im creates uncertainty that hurts U.S. companies and detracts from Ex-Im’s effectiveness. As someone who worked at the Bank for almost three years, I’d like to offer some of that clarity.

Continue reading “Stop the Uncertainty Surrounding Ex-Im Bank” →

Dropbox, Google Drive, and the Consumer Price Index

I was looking at the April CPI this morning, and I got to thinking about Dropbox. I use Dropbox literally 25-50 times a day.  I’m working on a file on my Apple laptop, save it to the Dropbox folder,  and I can be sure that the same file will show up on my PC when I get home.

Dropbox costs me nothing for 2.5 GB worth of storage. More important, I’m getting a valuable service for nothing.

Now comes along Google Drive, which supposedly functions much the same way, and offers 5 GB of storage.  Now, I’m not going to switch any time soon because Dropbox is working fine for me. But a reasonable interpretation here is that the “price” of seamless online storage has fallen.

Continue reading “Dropbox, Google Drive, and the Consumer Price Index” →

Election Watch: Obama Makes History

It’s been a turbulent last few days on the campaign trail. On Tuesday, Indiana Republicans drove six-term Sen. Richard Lugar from office in favor of hard-core conservative state treasurer Richard Mourdock. While Lugar’s loss seemed inevitable well before primary day, the margin of his defeat—61-39—was shocking given his relatively conservative voting record over decades, and his staunch orthodoxy over the usual hot-button issues like abortion and taxes. Mourdock’s many out-of-state backers, including the Club for Growth, Jim DeMint’s Senate Conservative Fund, and virtually every right-wing blogger on the planet, made it abundantly clear that getting rid of Lugar was intended to teach the national Republican Party a lesson about the price involved in disrespecting the Tea Party Movement (Lugar had never even attempted to pander to them) and sticking to the outmoded traditions of Senate bipartisanship.

The day after the primary Mourdock reinforced the “lesson” by calmly telling Chuck Todd that he defined “bipartisanship” as “Democrats coming to the Republican point of view.”

While Indiana’s current pro-GOP tilt makes Mourdock a slight favorite in a general election contest with Rep. Joe Donnelly, the unexpected vulnerability of the seat has scrambled many early assumptions about the 2012 Senate election landscape, particularly when combined with Olympia Snowe’s recent surprise retirement. Today the Washington Post’s Paul Kane published an overview of Senate races quoting several leading handicappers as giving Democrats a slight edge in their battle to hang onto control of the chamber; it all may come down to the vice president’s tie-breaking vote.

Continue reading “Election Watch: Obama Makes History” →

The Fine Art of Cabinet-Making: Five Ways to Build a Stronger Executive Team

The job of the presidency has grown so large, so overwhelming in its power and responsibility, that no one human being can excel in all its many dimensions, from the ceremonial to the political, from making policy to managing a vast bureaucracy. In an atmosphere of bitter partisan division and a 24-hour news environment, presidents more than ever need help at the highest levels possible. Fortunately, there is a well-established yet greatly underutilized institution readily available to lend a hand: the presidential cabinet.

Although the cabinet and its role in government are not formally established in the Constitution, presidents since George Washington have convened a collective body of the heads of the executive departments. Washington used cabinet meetings to tap into the wisdom of such luminaries as Secretary of State Thomas Jefferson and Secretary of the Treasury Alexander Hamilton. In her 2005 book Team of Rivals, Historian Doris Kearns Goodwin demonstrated how the strong and diverse cabinet assembled by Abraham Lincoln girded the nation at its time of greatest peril. FDR convened his cabinet the day after the Pearl Harbor attacks, while JFK famously relied on a subset of his cabinet during the Cuban Missile Crisis.

Over the past half-century, however, the rise and expansion of the White House staff has centralized deliberation and decision-making increasingly within the confines of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. Between this reliance on professional staffers and life in the ever-more restrictive “security bubble,” presidents have had less and less direct access to a range of views and opinions. Indeed, while the Kennedy and Johnson cabinets met monthly, the Obama cabinet has met less than one-third as often.

Today, cabinet meetings are often little more than occasional photo ops to bring together POTUS, the VP, the heads of the 15 executive departments and a few other “cabinet-rank” officials such as the heads of the Office of Management and Budget and the Environmental Protection Agency, the Ambassador for the United Nations, and the U.S. Trade Representative. Virtually the only time they are seen together by the public is in the front row at the annual State of the Union Address.

By contrast, many of America’s democratic allies benefit from the much more central role played by their cabinets, particularly in parliamentary systems where they are critical partners in the governance of their nations. In countries such as the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, and Germany, the executive leadership comprises an entire team of senior politicians who meet weekly to lay out political alternatives and strategize about policy implementation. In many parliamentary systems, the cabinet is considered so central that the members are all considered to share “collective responsibility” for the work of government.

Under the U.S. Constitution, the American president will always remain paramount, but both the president and the nation could benefit greatly by enhancing the role and strengthening the position of the cabinet. Below are five ideas to maximize the reach and impact of the president’s hand-picked first-string team.

Read the entire memo here