Rick Levin for NEC Director

Several news sites are reporting that Yale President Rick Levin is one of the three finalists to replace Larry Summers as Assistant to the President for Economic Policy and Director of the National Economic Council.

Despite being two baby boomer Jewish economists who have run two of America's top universities, Levin and Summers could not be more different. Summers while many accounts a difficult manager is also one of the top economists in the world. (He ranks at a super-human 17, surrounded by numerous Nobel Laurates).

Levin, by contrast, is a spectacular manager, having personally trained the presidents of Oxford, Cambridge, MIT, Duke, Wellesley and the former president of Penn. (In a further comparison to Summers' ill perceived comments about women in science, four of these Levin acolytes are women.) That said, Levin doesn't even rank in the top 10% of economists, in part since he has served almost the past 20 years in administration, first as dean of Yale's Graduate School and then as University President.

Since the NEC is not a large government department or agency, and since Levin's skills are more as a manager than as an economist, perhaps he would be better suited for another position in the administration, should one open up. Unlike former President Bush, who for the first 6 years of his presidency diminished the importance of his Treasury Secretaries, President Obama has put Secretary Geithner front and center with his full support. Given the sprawling nature of that department, maybe it would be a better place for Levin.

As for NEC chair, how about Alan Krueger? Then again, he's already at his two-year public service leave limit from Princeton, and so he'd have to give up his tenure. That in itself is a topic for another time.

What happened to the Dems who voted against health care?

There were 34 Democratic members of the House of Representatives who voted against comprehensive health care reform last March. Politico has a story on it, but here are the details (from my own analysis):

Number who stood for reelection to the House: 30/34
Of those 30, number who won: 13 (38%)
Of the 2 who ran for higher office, number who won: 0
Of the 2 who retired, number whose seats the Democrats retained: 0

Great night for those who opposed health care reform!

I fully expect Nate Silver's blog to come out with a comprehensive analysis, looking at those Democrats who voted for it from Republican majority districts and how way they did. But, suffice to say, voting against health care reform to appease one's conservative constituents did not appear to buy sufficient good will.

Israel at 62

Today is Yom Haatzmaut (Independence Day) in Israel. While it shares many similarities with Independence Day in the US (July 4), including warm weather, BBQs, flags, fireworks, and a general day off, it has many differences.

Yom Hazikaron (Memorial Day) - is the day before Independence Day, and actually includes the country remembering its lost (as opposed to the US where the vast majority of citizens simply treat it as a vacation day). In the US, even now, many of US in certain socioeconomic spheres know only a handful of people who served in the military. Here, the vast majority of people served in the military, and those who didn't and don't even live here know dozens of people who did.

Israeli Independence Day is also different because it has a religious component. For most Jews, today's morning service were expanded, making them more like other post-Torah holidays, such as Hanukah. The idea is that in 1948 God really did intervene and save a ragtag, underarmed band of Jews, many of them Holocaust survivors, from the surrounding Arab armies. This was a miracle on the level of the Maccabee's victory in 165 BCE, and should be celebrated as such.

Despite this celebration, Israel is still a land of contradictions. Many parts are fervently secular (with Jews who have never set foot in a synagogue) yet others are fervently religious, almost theocratic. Its people are warm and hospitable yet often impatient and loud. It is full of Hebrew, the language of the commandments, prophets, rabbis, and commentators, yet also full of natively spoken English. It is democratic, yet it differentiates among fundamental characteristics of its citizens, with different laws applying to citizens based on their religion

It is also a land that needs to think past tomorrow. Israel has been scarred by Palestinian terrorism for decades and is obfuscated by their intransigence at negotiations, most specifically in 2000 at Camp David. A large portion of the society wants a second disengagement, this time from the West Bank, yet it is all too aware that its last two wars (in Lebanon and Gaza) have have fought to protect its civilians from enemies that have filled the vacuum left by its withdrawals.

And then there is the anti-Obama rhetoric. President Obama is so reviled here that he should consider running for Prime Minister. The fact that the blank check that former President Bush extended is no longer good has incensed Israels. General Petraeus' comment that “The enduring hostilities between Israel and some of its neighbors present distinct challenges to our ability to advance our interests....Arab anger over the Palestinian question limits the strength and depth of US partnerships with governments and peoples in the [Middle East] and weakens the legitimacy of moderate regimes in the Arab world” became construed as "Obama blames American deaths in Iraq on the Jews."

Many of these individuals were not particularly large fans of the President to begin with, either because of the color of his skin or because they have been Giuliani Republicans for years. Nevertheless, is entirely overlooked here that Obama has not proposed cutting a cent of foreign aid, or removing the exemption that allows American citizens to serve in the Israeli Army and not lose their citizenship for joining a foreign military, or reducing any of the intelligence sharing, or diminishing in any way the trade and economic cooperation between the two countries.

The President is pushing the Israelis to start acting like adults. Is the blanket building freeze a blunt instrument? Yes. Are there reasonable situations where some of the settlements in the West Bank (the Gush, Maale Adumin, Ariel) will likely remain part of Israel? Yes. Will Jerusalem almost certainly remain a unified city? Yes. Is Israeli being asked to do more than any other country in recent history that won territory in defensive wars? Yes. But, should Israel begin to do whatever it can to create a viable, contiguous block of Palestinian territory in the West Bank, including adjusting its financial incentives and subsidies? Yes.

Israel cannot continue the current situation. Consider what happens if it does: The Palestinians areas in the West Bank will continue to be more and more densely populated. The international community will continue to turn away from Israel and not give it the benefit of the doubt. And this great Jewish state, vital for the worldwide existence of the Jewish people, will be left with more settlers to forcefully relocate and an even more radicalized, frustrated Palestinian population.

This only gets harder from here. Israel is nearly a senior citizen. It's time to think seriously about creating a legacy that will last, and not just provide for tomorrow's breakfast.

The New Yorker on Holbrooke and Afghanistan

I highly recommend reading the New Yorker's recent profile of Ambassador Richard Holbrooke and his work in Afghanistan.

Food and Health Care

Michael Pollan has an excellent piece in today's Times about the fact that making insurance companies cover a larger swath of the population at a flatter rate structure will suddenly incentivize them to make us eat better, since they'll have to pay for it out of their end if we don't. Makes sense to me.

Also, if you haven't watched the President's speech to Congress, I recommend you do so.

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Texas almost certainly excecuted an innocent man

One of things I've been doing in Japan is reading long magazine articles, such as the one I linked to below about Memorial Hospital in New Orleans.

The New Yorker has a spectacular piece about what capital punishment opponents have been looking for: a case where a state (of course it was Texas), beyond a reasonable doubt, executed an innocent man.

The most damning (no pun intended) part is the description of the clemency and pardon process. In this case, the expert's report that proved innocence beyond a reasonable doubt was available to them, and not even read!

The Innocence Project obtained, through the Freedom of Information Act, all the records from the governor’s office....The documents show that they received the report, but neither office has any record of anyone acknowledging it, taking note of its significance, responding to it, or calling any attention to it within the government....The only reasonable conclusion is that the governor’s office and the Board of Pardons and Paroles ignored scientific evidence.

It's well worth reading the whole piece.

Election in Japan

As many of you know, there was a national election last Sunday in Japan. In it, the center-left Democratic Party of Japan (DPJ, not to be confused with the BJP in India or the SPD in Germany) won an overwhelming majority (308 out of 480) of the seats in the House of Representatives. (Japan's system is much more like Canada and the UK, where the lower house has most of the legislative power and also produces the prime minister, than it is like the UK where the upper house (senate) has a significant amount of power, and the president is elected separately.)

As the center-right Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) had ruled the country for all but 11 months of the past 50 years, this new balance of power will have a signficant impact on the Japanese government.

Karl van Wolferen, a noted Japan scholar, says that:

To say that the task that Hatoyama Yukio and his fellow leaders of the Minshuto [DPJ] have set themselves is daunting would be putting it very, very mildly....correcting the severe imbalance in the relationship between Japan's elected politicians and career bureaucrats is their priority....They want to have cabinet meetings with well-informed ministers who may deliberate on policy and bring up new business, rather than putting their hanko (Japanese name-stamps substituting for signatures) on documents prepared the previous day at the regular meetings of the administrative vice ministers....They want to eliminate the enormous waste and misappropriations of the nicknamed ‘second budget’, which in some years is almost as large as the national budget, but which is administered by the Trust Fund Bureau of the Ministry of Finance and is allocated at the discretion of the bureaucrats.

Read the whole piece here. (Hat Tip: New Republic's "The Plank" blog)

Senator Edward Kennedy, Zicrono Livrocho

I mourn the passing of Senator Ted Kennedy. It was rather surreal to read about it yesterday, but have nearly everyone I know in the US be asleep and so unable to commiserate with me.

I think the following clip from the Vice President speaks for itself.

Back to America: Health Care

A commerical, if you will, within our regularly scheduled Japanese programming.

I just read two excellent pieces on health care reform in the US:

Roger Ebert on Health Care Reform
5 Myths About Health Care Around the World

Both are worth reading.

Also, if you haven't read it yet, you should also check out How American Health Care Killed My Father.

Ambassador Huntsman (again)

Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr. has just accepted President Obama's nomination to be Ambassador to the People's Republic of China. This is an obvious choice for Huntsman. Here's his alternative:

• Govern Utah during a recession (never good, given that he'll have to cut something or raise taxes or both)
• Run for President in 2012, likely against another Mormon (Romney), who was governor of a more populous state (Massachusetts vs. Utah), during a boom (vs. a recession), who was a more successful business man (founder of Bain Capital vs. major player in family company), whose other public accomplishments are better regarded by the general population (head of the 2002 Olympics vs. Ambassador to Singapore and Deputy Trade Rep)
• Even if he wins, he'd have to take on a likely very popular president Obama

Instead, Huntsman gets:

• To not govern during the rest of this recession
• To sit out the 2012 primary and general elections
• To improve his foreign policy credentials, though one of the most important diplomatic posts in the world

Finally, the President gets to remove a moderate voice from the GOP conversation, increasing the possibility that the party will tilt more to the right, nominate a conservative member in 2012, and give him a landslide victory.

Cabinet Selector

Here it is: the ultimate technocrat toy I've been waiting for: a cabinet picker!

Here are my picks (notes where I dissented from the majority of pickers):

Obama/Biden:
Ag: Stenholm
AG: Holder
Com: Furman - huge campaign advisor; liberal leanings
Def: Danzig - Gates too polarizing, Reed's seat may go Rep, which would hurt chances of 60 seats
Ed: Napolitano
E: Moinz
HHS: Sebelius
HS: Kelley
HUD: Franklin
Interior: Inlsee
Labor: Granholm - term limited and can't run for pres/vice, with no senate seat likely to open up
State: Richardson
Trans: Rendell - Obama has talked a lot about putting more emphasis on Trans, and Rendell would add diversity (Jew)
Treas: Geithner
VA: Duckworth
EPA: McGinty
OMB: Orszag - From CBO, with Furman already used above
Trade: Brainard

McCain/Palin:
Ag: Sanford
AG: Giuliani- he's the reason why McCain won California and became the nominee
Com: Whitman
Def: Lieberman -makes it easy for Republicans to pick up Joe's seat - and he deserves a big prize if McCain wins
Ed: Keegan
E: Wilson
HHS: Huckabee - anti-obesity enthusiast - would give him a national profile
HS: Keating
HUD: Ken Blackwell - previous HUD experience
Interior: Allard
Labor: Engler
State: Woolsey - Lieberman not going to be State - he's not a negotiator; Negroponte too close to Bush administration
Trans: Peters
Treas: Paulson
VA: Sias
EPA: Shayes
OMB: Holtz - Eakin
Trade: Schwab

Thoughts on the VP Debate

1. Joe Biden hit a home run. He is a consummate gentleman. Someone (maybe his debate partner, MI Gov. Jennifer Granholm) said to him, "Joe, shut up and smile," which he did perfectly. He was always on point, with loads of facts at his fingertips. Furthermore, he was never condescending toward Palin. And, most importantly, he did not make a single gaffe.

2. Gwen Ifill should have dropped out of moderating the debate. As soon it became known that Ifill had a book coming out next year with Obama's name in the title, she should have stepped aside. The fact that she did not meant that Ifill was on eggshells the entire debate, unwilling to press Palin when she dodged a question (which happened almost every question). Another moderator should have repeated questions that either Palin or Biden would not answer.

3. Sarah Palin may not know who Achilles was, since she did nothing to convince me otherwise by making no effort to answer a question about what her Achilles Heel is.

4. And finally, the real loser of this debate was John McCain. Joe Biden made point after point about how McCain has voted on the wrong side of an issue, and Palin made almost no effort to refute them. If this were a high school debate, Palin would have lost in a landslide, since, at the end of the day, it is the unrefuted arguments that count.

The Republican Party and Community Organizing

Last night at the Republican National Convention, former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani and Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin mocked and belittled IL Senator Barack Obama's experience as a community organizer. This was dispicable. Do Republican even know what community organizing is? Here's a definition from a good friend of mine who is a professional community organizer:

"Community organizers, as many of you know, have loads of
responsibilities. The biggest one is helping people educate and
empower themselves to have agency in their lives and fight for their
own interests and for a better world."

It's incredible that the Republican pary would take such offense at the this. What did the founding fathers do when they met in their homes in Boston and New York and Philadelphia and Virginia? Community organizing! How have women gained the right to vote? Community organizing! How did the marches and protests in the civil rights movement happen? Community organizing! G-d forbid people actually meet among themselves and think about what problems they have and how best they can work together to make a difference. And G-d forbid they ask someone with experience bringing people together and experience petitioning government to help them be more effective.

On a more specific note, you should read the middle section of Obama's first book (Dreams from my Father) about his experiences in Chicago as a community organizer if you haven't already. It's an amazing story of a young man who spent time talking to people on the South Side of Chicago. Not as a politician, but just as a guy interested in helping them fight for themselves. It's experience that I think makes Obama exceptionally qualified to be President of the United States. There are plenty of people like the residents of Wasilla, AK in the US. But there are also plenty of people like the residents of the South Side of the Chicago, and they need our help more than ever.

Obama's experience as a community organizer gives him an incredible perspective, and it's something to be applauded. It's a big reason to vote for him.

The speech Joe Lieberman should have given

"Tonight is a difficult night for me. For the first time in my life, I am speaking at the Republican National Convention. As a lifelong Democrat who had the priviledge of running for Vice President on the Democratic national ticket in 2000, I never thought I'd be so publicly supporting a Republican candidate for president. But, today, here I am, and here's why.

"I've worked with John McCain for twenty years in the United States Senate. He and I have agreed on many issues and collaborated on legislation many times. In the past few years, however, on terrorism and on keeping America safe, he and I have seen more eye-to-eye than I have with many of my Democratic colleagues, especially Senator Obama. I support our President's effort to make us safe, from Afghanistan to Iraq and beyond, and John McCain and I stand together on that front.

"Many of my Democratic colleagues do not see the progress we have made in Iraq in these past few years, and many continue to oppose a surge that John and I supported that has achieved results. Another of my colleagues, Senator Biden, even wanted to break up Iraq into multiple countries. Unlike these colleagues, John McCain has held firm in his support for our efforts for peace in freedom in Iraq, and he will continue them as president.

"I also agree with John on other issues, from his efforts to reform immigration, campaign finance, and curb global warming. John has shown true bipartisan leadership on major issues facing our country, and for that I stand with him. I urge you to stand with him as well."

Time for Joe to go

Okay Senator Reid, enough is enough. As much as it pains me to say it, it's time for you to strip Senator Joe Lieberman of his seniority and his chairmanship.

First and foremost, let's clear up a misconception. If Lieberman caucuses with the Republicans in the Senate, won't the senate be split 50-50 the way it was in 2001, with Vice President Cheney give the Republicans control? No.

Each two-year congress passes an organizing resolution at the start of its term. Most organizing resolutions (including the one passed in 2007) contain no mechanism for the senate to switch control, even if the majority party actually becomes the minority party. This actually happened in the 83rd congress in 1953-1954. Though the Democrats at times had a majority, LBJ remained minority leader. (Read more about it here.)

The only way that the senate leadership and committee chairmanships can actually change control is if such a mechanism is actually written into the organizing resolution, as it was in 2001, which was subsequently used when then VT. Sen Jim Jeffords switched parties. For the same to happen this year, the new Republican majority would have to pass a new organizing resolution, which of course could be filibustered by the 50 Democratic senators. This may have PR consequences, but it likely will be only for the final few months of this congress' term.

Now - why have I finally given up on Lieberman? I actually like him - I like who he is - I like the fact that there's an observant Jew in congress - I like his positions on most issues. I remember the moment in 2000 when Al Gore picked him - I was never prouder to be an American Jew. Furthermore, I lived in Connecticut for 4 years after that, and thought that Lieberman was all in all an excellent advocate for the state.

Furthermore, in 2006, I had a relatively strong aversion to Ned Lamont. Primarily, I think Lamont's opposition to the war in Iraq came far too late. Unlike Senators Jack Reed and Russ Feingold, or then State Sen. Barack Obama, Lamont waited until it was politically easy to oppose the war. I have a hard time giving him much credit with that. So, had I voted in CT that year, I would have voted for Lieberman in the primary, and likely still voted for him in the general election.

However, now is different. Refusing to endorse a presidential candidate is one thing (a la Sen. Chuck Hagel). Endorsing a candidate from the other party whom you agree with is one thing (a la former Sen. Linc Chaffee). But attacking your own party's candidate is another (a la former Sen. Zell Miller). We'll see what Lieberman's speech is like next week. But if he specifically attacks Senator Obama as unfit to lead this country, Reid should boot him out.

Joementum can carry him somewhere he's wanted.

Obama/Biden and Hillary Clinton

Continuing my previous post about Bill Richardson, Hillary Clinton's stock has also gone up.

Ignore that fact that Clinton was not picked to be Obama's running mate; this was never going to happen. Clinton's stock has gone up Obama has gone with the Cheney model: a vice president who won't be eyeing running for president in eight years.

Biden will be 73 in 2016, too old to run for a first term (remember the political cartoons in '96 about Dole choosing which set of teeth to wear that day?). Clinton, on the other hand, will be 68, which, in most cases is young enough to run, especially for a woman (given that women on average live longer than men). A Tim Kaine or Evan Bayh pick would have made it very difficult for Clinton to run in 2016. Joe Biden means that the 2016 race could be Clinton's for the taking.

Obama/Biden and Bill Richardson

There's another ex-presidential candidate whose stock just went up: NM Gov. Bill Richardson. There has been an open question since Richardson endorsed IL Sen. Barack Obama (which caused former/perenial Clinton strategist James Carville to call him Judas, since Richardson had served in two capacities in then-President Bill Clinton's cabinet): what did Richardson want?

Richardson is savvy enough to know that there was no chance that Obama would put him on the ticket. Having an African American nominee is incredible. Having him pick a Hispanic VP candidate is too much. Richardson knew that the best he could hope for would be Secretary of State.

Richardson's main rival for that position was none other than DE Sen. Joe Biden. So, Richardson must have breathed a sigh of relief on Saturday morning when Obama took Biden out of running for State. In some ways, this is a better allocation than the other way around. Richardson may have spent a decade in the house, but he's more of a negotiator and an executive than a legislative mastermind. Furthermore, Richardson did not prove to be the best campaigner or debater last year. Biden, on the other hand, knows the legislative process better than almost all active politicians.

This must all be very exciting for Richardson, as he just became the front runner to be the first Hispanic Secretary of State and the highest ranking Hispanic in American history.

Lower the drinking age

In today's Chicago Tribune, Steve Chapman argues that the drinking age should stay at 21.

Chapman is wrong. Chapman fails to understand what a draconian drinking age does to binge drinking for 16-20 year olds. Underage drinkers, unable to buy alcohol in a safe commerical setting (with a sober bar tenders who cannot serve them if they are visibly impaired), instead consume in private, unsafe settings.

Furthermore, especially on college campuses, binge drinkers are loathe to seek medical attention, since they rightly fear disciplinary action. This compounds the situation above, where underage drinkers are incentivized to drink quickly and privately, and then not seek medicial attention if needed. Surely public safety is not best being serve.

Chapman makes the argument that a higher drinking age lowers drunk driving deaths. This is not the best way to prevent drunk driving. Drunk driving requires not just a drunk individual, but also a car. The answer to drunk driving is therefore to have more police patrols late at night, and more draconian punishments for drunk driving (long time license suspensions, car confiscation, jail time), rather than less alcohol. If society is serious about preventing drunk driving, then a DUI should be treated as a very serious crime with very serious consequences.

One final idea: Perhaps those between the ages of 18 and 21 should be able to drink legally under certain circumstances. Perhaps one must have a high school degree or GED to drink legally. Or, one must have to pass an alcohol awareness course. Regardless, our current law should be changed.

Republican VP Prediction

Senator John McCain will pick: Former MA Gov. Mitt Romney.

Romney has:

• Economic experience - former CEO of Bain & Company, founder of Bain Capital, savior of the Olympics, Havard JD/MBA. To get wonkier than this you'll have to get into Ben Bernanke territory
• Vigor. Romney may not be much younger than McCain, but he looks much younger, and so provided youthful looks without looking inexperienced.
• Money. Romney's personal fortune could come in handy if McCain and his public financing wind up way behind Obama's machine.
• Vetting. The country's seen Romney, and the most scandalous thing was that he once tied the family dog to the roof of the car. That's it.
• Michigan. Romney's family has deep roots there, which could help McCain win the state.
• Mormons. While Romney's religion may hurt McCain with evangelicals, many of them were unhappy with him as it is. On the other hand, adding Romney to the ticket insures Mormon financial and political support, which could help in swing states like Nevada and Colorado.

While AK Gov. Sarah Palin or LA Gov. Bobby Jindal would be exciting picks, McCain is not going to give up his experience argument with a neophyte pick. It'll be Romney.

Democratic VP Prediction

Senator Barack Obama's VP pick will be Indiana Senator Evan Bayh.

Bayh is (in no particular order);

• Young
• From a red state
• An experienced executive (as governor of Indiana)
• A foreign policy wonk on the hill for almost a decade
• An early and fervent Clinton supporter

Way back in the fall of 2006, Bayh had some of the most sensible rhetoric on Iraq. Furthermore, there's nothing like an Obama/Bayh ticket to make McCain look old and out of date. Bayh is the best possible mix of youth, bipartisanship, change, and experience (both executive and foreign policy) that Obama needs. It's time to put him on the ticket.