For the Yankees, The Economy's Never in a Downturn

Count me as surprised the Yankees beat out the Sox for Mark Teixeira, but it goes to show that New York and Boston aren't in the same league financially. As has become their custom under John Henry and Theo Epstein, the Red Sox don't overspend for big-ticket free agents like Teixeira. They just don't. I can't fault them for it. Why should the Red Sox pay more for Teixeira now, when we're on the verge of a deep recession or even a depression, than they did for Manny Ramirez back when it seemed as though the bubble would never burst? Apparently, this sort of logic is irrelevant to the Yankees, who have invested more than $400 million in new player contracts over the last few weeks. This fanciful attitude when it comes to finances is a bit jarring considering the latest news out of the state in which the Yankees play.

Really?

Is it just me or does this seem inappropriate?

Neither Appalled Nor Dismayed

This post by TNR's John Judis pretty well captures my feelings about the potential appointment of Caroline Kennedy to the U.S. Senate. Really, there's nothing more to be said about it.

Friday Fodder: Pro-Union Edition

• Bruce Raynor, president of Unite Here and the uncle of one of my childhood friends, makes the case in the L.A. Times that the true goal of those who opposed the auto bailout was to bust the UAW. He also suggests that foreign car manufacturers' long-term plan for their U.S. plants involves the demise of UAW in particular and the continuing decline of American unions in general. This is why the Employee Free Choice Act is so "controversial." It would probably result in the resurgence of unions and the return of some fairness to relations between American industry, broadly defined, and labor.
• You can read here about yet another Southern embarrassment.
• E.J. Dionne argues in favor of Obama's selection of Arne Duncan to head the Department of Education. He sees the pick as an attempt to change the terms of the education debate. "To declare that the only test of a politician's commitment to reform is a willingness to break with unions creates a no-win choice for Democrats," he writes. "They must either betray long-standing allies or face condemnation as the captives of special interests." For an alternative and far less sunny view of Duncan, check out this piece by Henry A. Giroux and Kenneth Saltman. I find their rejection of any private sector involvement in public education naive, but their account does raise some questions about Duncan's view of public schools.
• TNR's Damon Linker makes a solid case for the inclusion of Rick Warren in Obama's inauguration ceremony. Tapped's Tim Fernholz sees it differently. Though I'm certainly sympathetic to those who find Warren repugnant because of his support for Proposition 8, I tend to like Obama's deicision to invite him to take part. Bringing Warren into the tent, I would argue, is about appealing to young evangelicals, who are, believe it or not, in certain respects progressive. Specifically, many young envangelicals tend to believe in protecting the environment and are more moderate than their parents on issues like gay rights and, to some extent, abortion. What Obama is trying to do here is pull a reverse Reagan. By appealing to conservative but reasonable Americans, he can create an opening for progressive ideals like real health care reform and movement on climate change.
• Don't look now, but Al Franken is poised to become a member of the U.S. Senate.
• MOVIE OF THE WEEK: Watched "Judgment at Nuremberg" for the first time earlier this week and thought it was outstanding. It's a very interesting exploration of post-war Germany that is as much about the German reaction to the war as the atrocities of the war itself. The film succeeds in being moral without being moralistic. The incredibly fine cast includes Spencer Tracy, Burt Lancaster, Montgomery Clift, Marlene Dietrich, Maximilian Schell, Judy Garland, and, bizarrely, a pre-Star Trek William Shatner.
  

Hope for Labor

Perhaps, with the selection of Hilda Solis as Labor Secretary, there's hope yet for the Employee Free Choice Act.

Obama and Liberals

Barack Obama's selection of evangelical pastor Rick Warren to give the Invocation at Obama's inauguration is only the latest sign that our president-elect is not interested in placating liberals at the expense of everyone else. I say this as a liberal who disagrees with Warren in the same ways that Obama does. It has been well established that President Bush considers himself to be the president of the people who voted for him, not the populace as a whole. Obama doesn't think this way. He is respectful of those who disagree with him, and not simply because it's a nice thing to do. It is strategically smart, in the long run, to court individuals whose views are quite different from your own. This is how you build consensus around the most important issues.

Thin Wednesday

Not much time to plumb and post today, but I am cheered by this development. And I continue to find this fascinating. And this looks very interesting, though I haven't had time to get all the way through it. Meanwhile ...

Vilsack at USDA?

I'll be curious to see what it means that former Iowa governor Tom Vilsack appears to be Obama's pick for Secretary of Agriculture. I actually voted for Vilsack in 1998 when I was living in Ames, Iowa, and overall I have a good impression of him. But if the selection of Vilsack is meant to signal to agribusiness that the status quo will remain in effect in terms of our agricultural policy, I think it's a poor choice. We shall see.

Smart Guys Talking Economics

Very interesting ongoing conversation this week at TPMCafe's Book Club among several brilliant economists, including Paul Krugman, Dean Baker, and Robert Reich. Ostensibly, they're discussing Krugman's new book, but it's a far-reaching discussion.

Isn't That True of Everyone?

Markos Moulitsas makes an impassioned case against the appointment of Caroline Kennedy to fill Hillary Clinton's open Senate seat in New York. Though I've also argued against her appointment, albeit with reservations, I take issue with the premise of Kos's argument. "When you're rich and come from a political family," he writes, "and are heir to American royalty, you can apparently dispense with dealing with pesky voters by simply ringing up the governor."

Well, yes, it's true that Kennedy has called Governor David Paterson to express her interest in the seat, just as other interested parties, like Andrew Cuomo, probably have. Wouldn't anyone who wants to be appointed have to reach out to Paterson? Isn't that how this works? Kos seems to think that it's not democratic for Kennedy to be appointed to the position, but also that it would be democratic for others to be appointed. I don't really see that. It may be true that Kennedy would be an overwhelming favorite in 2010 if she gets the appointment, but I think we could say that about any prominent New York Democrat. The fact is that the process of appointment is undemocratic, but that has nothing to do with Caroline Kennedy.

I have to say that I'm increasingly on the fence about Kennedy. I know it would probably be better, healthier for democracy, if someone else takes Clinton's place in the Senate. But I like Caroline, and I respect the Kennedy legacy, warts and all. And in any case, if Paterson doesn't select Kennedy, it seems to me that he's likely to choose Cuomo. I'll take the Kennedy legacy over the Cuomo legacy anytime.

Of course, this may be my inner Bostonian talking, which brings me to the subject of Caroline Kennedy's 2010 campaign theme song. There's really only one possible choice, and it also happens to be a Red Sox anthem.

Nut Bans? Kinda Nuts

I've long suspected that paranoia about nuts and nut allergies in children isn't particularly well-founded. (Very few types of paranoia are.) This report from Tara Parker-Pope of the New York Times only confirms my view. "The 'policy of avoidance,'" she writes, "means that fewer children are being exposed to nuts, likely increasing their risk for developing an allergy. A 2008 study in The Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology of 10,000 British children found that early exposure to peanuts lowers risk of allergy, rather than increasing it."

I find this sort of thinking sadly typical of today's parents of young children, whose parenting style seems to be marked by narrow-mindedness and overprotective tendencies. Children, while vulnerable, are not porcelain dolls.

(Not) The Greatest Tragedy of the Recession

The Arena Football League is canceling its 2009 season. Shame.

A Fitting Tribute

"The Senator from Nissan"

Paul Krugman gives the anti-union zealot Bob Corker a label that I hope will stick.

Straw Man? Uh, Yeah.

If you enjoy having your intelligence insulted, check out this story from Politico's John Harris and Alexander Burns on the subject of Obama and Lincoln. The headline, "Straw Man? Historians say Obama is no Lincoln," tells you all you need to know. I don't recall Obama ever saying that he was the second coming of Abraham Lincoln, only that he admires him. Since when is it controversial to express admiration for a president for whom practically no one expresses anything but? Here's the biggest howler line from the piece by Harris and Burns:

"There is a wisdom there," Obama told interviewer Steve Kroft, "and a humility about his approach to government, even before he was president, that I just find very helpful."

Humility? Obama's frequent invocations of Abraham Lincoln — a man enshrined in myth and marble with his own temple on the National Mall — would not at first blush say much about his own instincts for modesty or self-effacement.

Ah, that Obama. So presumptuous. Hmm. Where have I heard that before?

Your Tax Dollars at Work

From an Agence France-Presse story on the reconstruction of Iraq:

By mid-2008, according to the history, 117 billion dollars had been spent on the reconstruction of Iraq, including about 50 billion in US taxpayer money, the paper noted.

At one point, an official at the US Agency for International Development was given four hours [emphasis mine] to determine how many miles of Iraqi roads would be needed to be repaired and reopened, according to the newspaper report.

Finland's Amazing Childcare System

Very interesting post by Dana Goldstein of The American Prospect on the subject of Finland's incredible childcare system. I've long thought that excellent and inexpensive childcare is one of the major missing ingredients in American society. Unfortunately, it's just one ingredient on a long list that includes health care, education, and fair labor standards.

And So It Begins

Looks as though a major American newspaper is about to, in essence, go kaput. The first of many, more than likely. Among the numerous ongoing or pending catastrophes in American life (U-S-A!), this is one of the worst. Hello, increasingly ignorant populace.

Blame the Financial Sector ... Again

Dean Baker makes the argument that I've been making since the Big Three automakers first came to Washington to ask for a bailout. The biggest reasons for the Detroit automakers' struggles are the financial crisis and the broken U.S. health care system. NOT the UAW. NOT poor management. (Which isn't to say that the companies have been managed well.) Fortunately, it looks as though the White House is going to cave and use TARP money to provide the necessary bridge loan to the automakers. That's good, but why didn't the Administration simply agree to do that from the outset? It would have avoided weeks of pointless negotiation in Congress, and it would have prevented the economic crisis from worsening, which it has.

Can "Good" Teachers Solve Our Education Problems?

The always interesting Malcolm Gladwell makes a compelling case in this week's New Yorker that the best solution to the problems in our public education system would be devoting resources to finding and retaining good teachers. He argues that it's difficult to predict if a person will be a good, average, or bad teacher, just as it's nearly impossible to predict whether a good college quarterback will make an excellent NFL signal-caller. Therefore, the best approach is to try out a very large number of teachers, establish accountability standards that make sense, and keep the teachers who turn out to be effective.

I suppose this means that Gladwell comes down on the side of the "reformers" in the ongoing education debate. The reformers, like Gladwell, tend to be empiricists inclined to rely on statistics in making their decisions. I'm sympathetic to the reformers' argument, but "good" teachers can't solve all of the public schools' problems. Funding and class size, not to mention the legion of socioeconomic problems that can short-circuit the learning process, do matter. The best teachers may be able to thrive under any conditions, and that's fantastic, but if you improve working (or learning) conditions just marginally, it seems obvious that more teachers will be able to succeed.

Tim McGraw for Governor? Thanks But No Thanks.

Could Tim McGraw be the next governor of Tennessee? For the record, I will not be supporting him, his Democratic Party bona fides notwithstanding. But if this guy runs ...

Explaining the Financial Crisis

Excellent dissection of the financial crisis by Columbia University economist Joseph Stiglitz in Vanity Fair. Also a strong argument that Stiglitz ought to be a part of Obama's economic team. Doesn't appear that he will be, however.

Journalism, Meet Revenue

This suggests to me that perhaps there is a future for real journalism on the Internet. If YouTube upstarts can pull in six-figure incomes from ad revenue, then surely established newspapers should be able to make a relatively smooth transition to the Web. Right?

Having said that, those ads on YouTube are pretty annoying. They drive me crazy on TPM.

Department of Food?

Good column today in the New York Times by Nicholas Kristof on the subject of food and Obama's pick for Secretary of Agriculture. Kristof makes a strong case for substantial reform and quotes Michael Pollan, whose book The Omnivore's Dilemma I'm currently reading. Good column. Excellent book. Given Obama's selection of Steven Chu to head the Department of Energy, I think there's a respectable chance of him throwing a curveball when it comes to Agriculture, too.

Blago in 2016!

If it's true that Jesse Jackson, Jr. is "Senate Candidate 5" in the criminal complaint against Blagojevich, I'm wondering about the following statement attributed to the Illinois governor: "We were approached ‘pay to play.' That, you know, he’d raise me 500 grand. An emissary came. Then the other guy would raise a million, if I made [Senate Candidate 5] a senator."

It's very clear now that Blagojevich is a delusional megalomaniac. It's not too difficult to imagine him telling Jackson that he plans to run for president in 2016 and that he'd like Jackson to raise $500,000 for his presidential campaign and then Jackson, tongue in cheek, saying, "Sure, Rod, I'll raise money for you when you run for president. And oh, by the way, I have a friend who just won a major election. He can raise $1 million for you when you run for president. Looking forward to your campaign for president, Rod."

In all seriousness, I'm confused by Jackson's possible involvement in all this, especially by the fact that Blagojevich had the impression that Jackson was not one of Obama's favored candidates. But maybe Obama knows something about Jackson that we don't. Or maybe Blago was wrong. Certainly, regardless of the truth of the matter, Jackson has been treated unfairly by the media, who have engaged in a ghastly game of speculation about what he may or may not have done.

But Consistency Can Be Overrated

At the risk of contradicting myself, I remain a strong supporter of Al Franken, whom I see as the logical successor to the great Paul Wellstone. If nothing else, his presence would make C-Span more fun to watch.

Stand by Me

Saw this on Bill Moyers' program recently and thought it was great. Check it out.

Polls + Celebrity Culture = Crappy Democracy

I admit to having a soft spot for the Kennedy family, its members' many flaws notwithstanding. (Maybe it's the Irishman in me, or the part of me that still applies a possibly unmerited Golden Era sheen to the 1960s). Partially for this reason, I'm hard-pressed to argue against the appointment of Caroline Kennedy to Hillary Clinton's soon-to-be-vacated Senate seat. She seems like a fine woman, and I'm sure she'd be a fine senator. Yet I'm the same guy who argued against Clinton's presidential candidacy in no small part because I didn't think it was healthy for a Clinton to follow a Bush who followed another Clinton who followed another Bush. So I suppose, in the interest of consistency, I must argue against Kennedy's nomination and, for that matter, Andrew Cuomo's.

We live in a culture that is obsessed with and driven by celebrities, and we have a political culture that is at least in some part driven by polls. (If you're thinking that I'm parroting what was at one time a talking point of the McCain campaign, I guess you're right. I think Barack Obama is much more than a celebrity, but in the end there's no getting around the fact that he is one.) As a consequence, we end up with a political process that is increasingly dominated by people who have become celebrated, sometimes for fairly dubious reasons, and by an undue emphasis on polling, which purports to provide a sense of what "the people" are thinking. So what happens? The range of individuals elected to high office becomes limited, and the range of options they consider while in office is similarly limited by what the polls determine to be feasible political pathways.

Two recent polls suggest that New Yorkers favor Kennedy to replace Clinton in the Senate, with Cuomo not far behind. I'm hoping that New York Gov. David Paterson goes in a different direction. Of course, if he avoids trying to sell the seat to the highest bidder, he'll be setting a better example than some.

Robert Reich gets it right, as usual

This sounds about right to me, and Reich's proposal carries with it the added benefit of satisfying Republican critics of the auto bailout.

Long-term Problems, Short-term Solutions

This piece captures a truth about what Obama is being asked to do. He's going to have to take on several huge challenges (including the financial sector's implosion, health care, education, energy, and the environment) at one time and try to make up for years of neglect in a matter of weeks or perhaps months. That's a very tall order. I think he and his closest advisers are up to it, but I'm not sure about the Congress or state governments, which overall are likely to be hampered by parochial interests and outdated thinking.

Stimulus with Vision

David Brooks writes in his column today that the stimulus package likely to be passed early next year should not simply provide funds for already existing projects. Rather, he suggests, it should be guided by a vision for future urban, suburban, and exurban development. I agree, and I'm very much in favor of investing in public transportation throughout the country, though I think the focus on updating the power grid, improving schools, and making government buildings more efficient makes a lot of sense.

A Good Idea, Unlikely to Come to Fruition

Following up on the post below, I wholeheartedly endorse this idea. The Federal Writers Project of the 1930s was an incredible enterprise that provided assistance to a number of writers now regarded as some of the 20th century's best and also resulted in a much deeper understanding of the period than otherwise would have been possible.

How Dying Newspapers Threaten the Republic

There's so much bad news being reported each day, it's sometimes hard to keep up. So if you're just now learning that many of the country's largest newspapers are in deep, deep trouble, I'm not surprised. First came the news that the Rocky Mountain News had been put up for sale and, if not sold (which is likely if not inevitable), could be liquidated in January. Then it was announced that newspaper chain McClatchy plans to sell the Miami Herald. And just today the New York Times revealed plans to borrow as much as $225 million against its Manhattan headquarters, and the Tribune Co. -- which owns many newspapers, including the Chicago Tribune, the Baltimore Sun, and the LA Times -- filed for bankruptcy.

Considering the financial crisis, the bad economy, and the generally terrible state of the newspaper industry, none of this is especially surprising. Yet it is jarring, and disturbing, to imagine a United States in which major cities lack credible daily newspapers. Industry analysts have been issuing warnings for years that the day is coming when major and formerly successful newspapers will begin to die completely (as opposed to continuing the slow bleed they've been suffering for years). Looking at the publications I mentioned above, the one that seems almost certain to disappear is the Rocky Mountain News. It's difficult to see a buyer emerging in the next month for a struggling newspaper in an inhospitable market. (On a personal note, my father spent several years working for the Rocky Mountain News, which makes its impending death all the more sad.) With respect to the others, I don't know enough about the particular situations to make an informed judgment, but the fact that they're struggling so mightily is concerning enough.

Perhaps the disappearance of newspapers is inevitable. They've struggled financially for years, and that trend is very likely to continue and, as we're seeing, even grow worse. But if newspapers were to die out completely, it could be devastating to the health of American democracy. Most of the best reporting online continues to come from newspapers with a Web presence, and even the most impressive television reporting lacks the depth found in the average newspaper article. It's certainly possible that newspapers could be replaced by the growth of hundreds of online outlets doing original reporting, but we're a long way from there at this point.

I'm concerned that we could be headed for a future in which television news plays an even more dominant role in "informing" the American populace and frivolous commentary continues to crowd out serious journalism and original reporting. There's also the risk of completely losing good coverage of local and regional news. What's going to happen when a major newspaper folds in a city with no serious alternative? I fear we're going to find out soon enough.

The Daily Dozens Returns

Welcome to The Daily Dozens. First of all, thanks for visiting the site. I realize that you're probably here primarily because you know me and you don't want to be rude by ignoring my email or the link I've posted on Facebook. Thank you for embracing your guilt. Seriously, I hope that what you read here gives you legitimate reason to return in the future. My hope is to provide readers with sober, smart, and more than occasionally irreverent commentary on issues of importance -- be they cultural, economic, or political -- as well as on less easily classifiable questions that might be a smidgen less important. Trivia, too, deserves its day.

As we are all reminded daily, these are extraordinarily difficult times. The American economy -- and, indeed, the global economy -- are mired in deep recessions, the U.S. remains involved in two wars (neither of which seems destined for a neat and tidy resolution), the American health care system is in crisis, and climate change looms as an ever-worsening problem. These are among the many reasons why I decided to revive The Daily Dozens, the original version of which I wrote and administered for a time in 2004.

Oddly enough, the first version of The Daily Dozens actually still exists. When I discovered this the other day, I was amazed, though of course the continued existence of the original Daily Dozens is fairly unremarkable. That is the way of the Web. Once something is created, it tends to live on, whether it deserves to or not.

In looking over my first attempt at a blog, I was struck by one thing: I had readers. There were actual people out there who took the time to read what I'd written. And when I stopped posting to the blog in the late summer of 2004, they took pains to express their disappointment. I hope the new version of The Daily Dozens inspires a similar loyalty, and I will express my loyalty to you now by promising to post at least one new item each weekday and to keep this blog alive for as long as it is feasible to do so.

Thanks for reading.