TrueGenToo a blog of sorts

David Brooks on the Age of Obama

Tue, 12 May 2009 10:06:16 -0500

Brooks is not my favorite commentator... sometimes described as “a smarmy, intellectually dishonest snake” ... but he has a big head and is occasionally interesting. To read a review of a recent talk, click on the title above then this link: The Age of Obama.

Gwen Ifill: Going Beyond Obama

Tue, 12 May 2009 10:01:16 -0500

Journalist and TV host Gwen Ifill talks about the “other” black leaders who are re-shaping American politics. For a complete write-up (and comments) click on the title above then this link. The Young Folks Are Taking Over.

Note to Norm and Al

Sun, 8 Feb 2009 14:34:42 -0600

Hey guys. It’s me. A Minnesota citizen and voter. As you continue your WAY-too-long-drawn-out battle to see who won the ‘08 (that’s ’08!) election, just wanted to plant a couple ideas.

I’m looking for some sense of recognition for how close this vote was. Neither of you will have a mandate, which means whoever wins will have a responsibility to represent both sides of the political spectrum.

Al -- you’re smart, you’re cute, but, doggone it, half the state doesn’t like you! That means you’ll have to figure out how to get them to accept you. One voter’s suggestion: keep the grin, re-discover the humor, stick up for your social agenda with logic and evidence-supported arguments, and be a bridge to the Republicans on financial issues. They’re not ALL wrong in this area.

Norm -- how COULD you not capitalize on the incumbent’s advantage? Something must be missing. Could it be trust? One voter’s suggestion: Drop the BS about being non-partisan (4 years of a 95%+ record of voting with the Cheney/Bush ideologues isn’t erased by a few campaign months of slipping to 90%). Apologize. Then stick up for financial responsibility with logic and evidence-supported arguments, and be a bridge to the Democrats on social issues. They’re not ALL wrong in this area.

However this thing ends up, we’re going to expect the winner to represent us in a way that’s not radically different from how the other guy would have if a few dozen votes had been counted another way.

Oh... one more thing. Pay your taxes. And have them double checked by people who know what they’re doing.

Good luck! May the not-so-bad man win!

Stimulus, Stimuli

Sat, 31 Jan 2009 16:42:12 -0600

There’s been a lot of back and forth about the $800 to $900 billion dollar “economic stimulus” package currently being debated in Congress. Everyone seems to think we need one. The Democrats have proposed a multifaceted one; the Republicans have said no way.

Are they both sides being as disingenuous as usual? Maybe. There are things in the Democratic proposal that sounds perfectly reasonable (updating computers for the Agriculture Department; helping states handle Medicaid costs) that are difficult to rationalize as “stimuli.” The Republicans object now in ways they didn’t when the last administration pushed through a 700 billion “relief” package for bankers.

My thought? Let this bill stick to it’s name for a change and ONLY include spending that will clearly do one of two things: create jobs and/or put money quickly into the economy. Infrastructure repair and renewal. Good idea -- it’s needed, it adds jobs; it puts money to work. Give aid to states to help with budget shortfalls? Good idea -- keeps jobs from being eliminated. Extend unemployment insurance? Good idea -- if you’re unemployed you’re highly likely to spend, not hoard, that money. Re-sod the Mall in D.C.? Good idea -- see infrastructure above.

Bad ideas? Extending tax cuts for people making over $150,000. Doesn’t add jobs. Experience shows it doesn’t increase consumer spending. Sending out tax-rebate checks? Ditto. We tried it and it doesn’t crate jobs or stimulate spending long term. Cutting taxes for businesses? Maybe -- BUT, not until we see some proof that cutting corporate taxes either is likely to add jobs. Personally I doubt that cutting Ford’s taxes will get them to add jobs until people start buying more cars. Will cutting Exxon’s taxes add jobs? Prove it.

Best ideas? Forgive Federal student loans. Those (mostly) young people will be highly likely to spend that extra money on consumer goods. Add money to Social Security checks for people with HHI under a given limit. Again, highly likely to get spent. Fund programs in early education -- adds jobs for teachers and leverages America’s future.

In Awe of T-Paw

Sun, 25 Jan 2009 10:15:03 -0600

Minnesota’s governor Tim Pawlenty is awe-inspiring. As the rest of the world breathes a sigh of relief at the departure of Cheney/Bush anti-science/anti-evidence governing, T-Paw bucks the trend with a faith-based budget proposal.

He cites two priorities for dealing with a $5 billion state shortfall in an editorial piece in the StarTribune (1/24/09). The first is cutting taxes for business (or “job-providers” as he calls them). This is not a surprising stance for Governor NoTax or the other Republican rear guard Reagan-admirers. But, as has been the case since the early 1980s, there’s a flaw in the strategy: where is the evidence that cutting taxes for businesses A) boosts the economy enough to significantly address deficits of the size we now face; and B) where is the evidence that cutting taxes for businesses increases job growth?

Pawlenty’s other priority is to increase funding for education. This one is a bit surprising, since his NoTax stance has decimated education budgets for most of this century. But the Governor’s call is not just for increased investment in Minnesota’s workforce (the part that remains employed), it’s also a call for increased accountability. Pawlenty calls for outcome-based reward systems for teachers and tougher certification requirements.

Here’s where his evidence-challenged world view gets blurry. Perhaps Mr. P hasn’t seen the data, highlighted in an article by Malcolm Gladwell in the New Yorker (12/15/2008) about the LACK of correlation between teacher certification and classroom outcomes. Gladwell cites studies that show the difference between a good teacher and a poor one can mean as much as an academic year of learning for students. But how do you tell the good ones (top 85%) from the poor ones (bottom 10%)? The evidence shows that certification -- and Masters degrees -- don’t help. Calling for better outcomes AND tougher teacher certification may be contradictory impulses.

Bottom line? Our governor is holding the line against a rising tide of rational, logic-driven policy making. Finger poked firmly in the dike, he persists in ignoring any need for evidence to support his proposals, relying instead on faith-based buzzwords and those who worship his NoTax rep. Awesome.