Bryan Caplan Wrote: >I don't think we really disagree here. Less than I thought when I misinterpreted what you were saying. I thought you were implying that we were government funded and wouldn't bite the hand that feeds us. If that is not what you are saying then we are closer to agreement than I realized. >Sure, Brookings people are happy >to make marginal criticisms of the status quo. What you view as marginal a lot of people would view as fundamental and sweeping. That was why I added the qualification about "some people on this list..." ;-} >What I think is very >unlikely is that they would publish something saying things like: > >1. Let's quit worrying about "fighting poverty" >2. Let's get rid of discrimination laws >3. Let's get rid of immigration laws You are right that I can't think of anyone at Brookings who would write anything like this. Though there have been some pretty serious questions raised about some other regulatory regimes. >To take another of my favorite examples, do you recall the "Looking >Before We Leap" project you were involved in a few years ago. The basic >premise, which sounds sensible enough, is that welfare reform programs >should be based on the best available social science information, which, >it turns out, is highly inconclusive. Hence, proceed with extreme >caution. > >When I read this, I suggested that when e.g. Medicare was >first proposed, Brookings didn't publish a parallel work emphasizing the >risk that the program might get out of control. I think you agreed that >the asymmetry was real. I don't agree with your characterization of the conclusions of this project. They were much more specific (concerning potential problems with funding etc.) then your characterizations and not very different from the sorts of criticisms and comments made by Brookings folks about the Clinton health care bill (I wasn't around during the Medicare debate). However, ... >I don't think the Brookings brand of scholarship is a product of >financial incentives so much as self-selection of personnel. Moderates >of all types feel comfortable at Brookings. Others probably wouldn't. >The same is true of other think tanks for the most part. I can't argue with this. The same operates to one degree or another in nearly every organization I'm familiar with. However as John Samples has acknowledged, there is a fair amount of diversity in points of view represented on the Brookings staff. It is my impression that we have a much broader representation of views than AEI, Herritage, Cato, PPI, or EPI. Let me turn now to Johns note. -- Bill Dickens William T. Dickens The Brookings Institution 1775 Massachusetts Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20036 Phone: (202) 797-6113 FAX: (202) 797-6181 E-MAIL: [EMAIL PROTECTED] AOL IM: wtdickens
