Who are the go-to economists for the 2008 campaign?
David Leonhardt provides the answer in the New York Times: For the 2008 campaign, the six leading campaigns have each signed up their first-string economic policy teams. These advisers don?t hold the sway that the political aides do, but they can ultimately have a bigger effect on the world. If the next president is going ...
David Leonhardt provides the answer in the New York Times: For the 2008 campaign, the six leading campaigns have each signed up their first-string economic policy teams. These advisers don?t hold the sway that the political aides do, but they can ultimately have a bigger effect on the world. If the next president is going to reform health care, attack climate change or address middle-class anxiety, the solution is going to be shaped by these policy advisers. As Douglas Holtz-Eakin, John McCain?s director of economic policy, says, ?If you?re specific about what you want to do and you win, you have a mandate.?Read the whole thing to see who's advising who. I'm relieved to see that Obama is getting decent economic advice -- his chief economic advisor is University of Chicago professor Austan Goolsbee. Leonhardt's conclusion emphasized a point I've made here in the past: The truth is that if you put the economic advisers, from both parties, in a room and told them to hammer out solutions to the country?s big economic problems, they would find a lot of common ground. They could agree that doctors and patients need better incentives to choose effective medical care. They would probably hit upon education policies along similar lines, requiring that schools be held more accountable for what their students are, and are not, learning. They might suggest a carbon tax ? a favorite idea of Mr. Mankiw ? to deal with global warming. And they would shore up Social Security by reducing benefits for high earners, as Mr. Hubbard has suggested. Not all of these ideas are politically feasible at this point, but presidential campaigns can change what?s feasible. Here?s hoping that this year?s crop of economic advisers has the courage of their convictions.
David Leonhardt provides the answer in the New York Times:
For the 2008 campaign, the six leading campaigns have each signed up their first-string economic policy teams. These advisers don?t hold the sway that the political aides do, but they can ultimately have a bigger effect on the world. If the next president is going to reform health care, attack climate change or address middle-class anxiety, the solution is going to be shaped by these policy advisers. As Douglas Holtz-Eakin, John McCain?s director of economic policy, says, ?If you?re specific about what you want to do and you win, you have a mandate.?
Read the whole thing to see who’s advising who. I’m relieved to see that Obama is getting decent economic advice — his chief economic advisor is University of Chicago professor Austan Goolsbee. Leonhardt’s conclusion emphasized a point I’ve made here in the past: The truth is that if you put the economic advisers, from both parties, in a room and told them to hammer out solutions to the country?s big economic problems, they would find a lot of common ground. They could agree that doctors and patients need better incentives to choose effective medical care. They would probably hit upon education policies along similar lines, requiring that schools be held more accountable for what their students are, and are not, learning. They might suggest a carbon tax ? a favorite idea of Mr. Mankiw ? to deal with global warming. And they would shore up Social Security by reducing benefits for high earners, as Mr. Hubbard has suggested. Not all of these ideas are politically feasible at this point, but presidential campaigns can change what?s feasible. Here?s hoping that this year?s crop of economic advisers has the courage of their convictions.
Daniel W. Drezner is a professor of international politics at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University and co-host of the Space the Nation podcast. Twitter: @dandrezner
More from Foreign Policy
Saudi-Iranian Détente Is a Wake-Up Call for America
The peace plan is a big deal—and it’s no accident that China brokered it.
The U.S.-Israel Relationship No Longer Makes Sense
If Israel and its supporters want the country to continue receiving U.S. largesse, they will need to come up with a new narrative.
Putin Is Trapped in the Sunk-Cost Fallacy of War
Moscow is grasping for meaning in a meaningless invasion.
How China’s Saudi-Iran Deal Can Serve U.S. Interests
And why there’s less to Beijing’s diplomatic breakthrough than meets the eye.
Sign up for Morning Brief
Foreign Policy’s flagship daily newsletter with what’s coming up around the world today. Delivered weekdays.
By submitting your email, you agree to the Privacy Policy and Terms of Use and to receive email correspondence from us. You may opt out at any time.
