Site Design: Ink Works

WONK THIS WAY

Some people are saying that in an adverse political environment, research or policy are not very important. My self-interest here is obvious, but maybe I can still convince you this is a mistaken belief.

One implication that might be drawn from this belief not asserted explicitly is that facts don't matter. All that matters is who can shout the loudest. I beg to differ. You may be able to shout, but if what you have to say is crap, the volume isn't much of an asset.

Now you could say the other side has nothing but crap to say, but you would be kidding yourself. Underestimating the power of the opposition. It's a delusion. We still live in a conservative country, sports fans. People don't like unnecessary wars and Congressional corruption, but they aren't crazy about moving to an ample, generous welfare state either. There is no mass outrage over our unsustainable fiscal policy, or the ginormous trade deficits. Concern for poverty in the wake of Katrina has vanished faster than a sunshower.

The Bushists may lie like the dickens, but at bottom in many cases their messages are founded on certain commonsensical notions. And not infrequently, Democratic politicians talk absolute rubbish. The Repubs' messages are highly debatable, and from my standpoint invariably wrong, to be sure, but they are not hollow.

For some to discount facts is understandable since they often fail to appreciate how difficult it is to ascertain and document important facts. They dismiss policy analysis and research because they don't do it, don't know how to do it, and don't understand what role it plays in the political process.

I know you are begging for some examples, if you are still reading. What was the most important social policy fight this year? It was Social Security. The Bush initiative did not fail because people ran around screaming that investing in stocks is risky. Of course any fool knows that investing is risky, and any fool with enough money is going to invest. I do. So why did privatization go down?

I think in this case the most credit goes to Peter Orszag of Brookings, Jason Furman, currently at New York University, and Dean Baker of the Center for Economic and Policy Research. Orszag's work had an impact on AARP, and AARP's voice is significant. Furman did yeoman work as well. Dean had already written a book that anticipated the entire debate.

EPI did a raft of papers that I think had an impact on our main audience -- journalists and Hill staff. The fruits of all this sort of work made their way into blogs and mass media, but there were informed sources. It wasn't some tricky advertising guru or dude in pajamas.

This was research, not blogging. When good research gets into Congressional offices, it has an impact, even if you never hear about it. A knowledgeable staffer can look at something he or she disagrees with and still appreciate that it can present a political problem if it circulates, even if it never actually does circulate.

Another example is job growth claims made for the tax cuts. In this case EPI and this little site played a role. Sure, anybody can read a BLS report and point to whether jobs increased or decreased. But context is everything. How much of an increase is acceptable? At what point in the business cycle? What are the relevant differences in employment surveys? What tells us the overall shape of the labor market? If you think it's simple, you don't know jack.

My view is that bullshit starts to stink before too long, but a good idea can walk a hundred miles. We need propaganda and agitation, but to give the public something substantive that it can take to heart is the basis for progressive transformation of society. That's what winning is all about. Otherwise we're looking a rotating bands of miscreants, alternatively taking office, raiding the till, and getting thrown out by the next cohort of miscreants-to-be.

If you don't think the Democratic Party doesn't have the same potential for lyin, cheatin, and stealin, you are gravely misinformed. The only constraint on the abuse of power -- besides an opposition lurking in the wings -- is an engaged, informed public. Being angry and stupid isn't good enough.

Posted by max at December 22, 2005 09:20 PM

|

Other blogs commenting on this post