Actually there were three chapters dropped,
according to my spies.  I don't know what
the other two were on.



-----Original Message-----
From: PEN-L list [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Paul
Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2005 9:16 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [PEN-L] harvey rosen


Michael P. writes:
>I just looked up about Mankiw's replacement.  I have never read any of his
>articles.
>They don't seem that interesting.  Am I missing something?

Its the REPORT that seems to be missing something.  (see below)

[Seriously, this must have hurt.  Not entirely candid comments from the
Democrats either: one hears Stiglitz was stifled quite a bit more than
that.  Surprised we haven't heard more of the 'insider' retrospectives from
the Dems (Stiglitz's own memoir was almost mum).]



>Dropping Report's Iraq Chapter Was Unusual, Economists Say
>Concern About Impact on White House's Credibility Cited
>
>By Jonathan Weisman
>Washington Post Staff Writer
>Wednesday, February 23, 2005; Page A17
>
>At the National Security Council's request, the White House excised a full
>chapter on Iraq's economy from last week's Economic Report of the
>President, reasoning in part that the "feel good" tone of the writing
>would ring hollow against the backdrop of continuing violence, according
>to White House officials.
>
>The decision to delete an entire chapter from the Council of Economic
>Advisers' annual report was highly unusual. Council members -- recruited
>from the top ranks of economic academia -- have long prided themselves on
>independence and intellectual integrity, and the Economic Report of the
>President is the council's primary showcase.
>
>  The withholding of a completed chapter struck some economists from both
> political parties as evidence of the council's waning influence.
>
>"This is extraordinary," said William A. Niskanen, a CEA member in the
>Reagan White House and the chairman of the libertarian Cato Institute.
>"The council has been unfortunately weakened."
>
>Outgoing CEA Chairman N. Gregory Mankiw declined to comment.
>
>White House spokeswoman Dana Perino dismissed the excision as
>insignificant, saying the chapter may still be published in some form in
>the future. The piece dealt with the development of the Iraqi banking
>system, financial markets and other economic institutions after the end of
>Saddam Hussein's rule. It painted a positive portrait of Iraq's emergence
>as a potential free-market bulwark in the Arab world.
>
>Perino said the chapter did not belong in the Economic Report of the
>President. "A decision was made not to include a chapter on Iraq's economy
>in the report, as the Economic Report of the President is an analysis of
>the American economy," she said.
>
>Administration officials and economists who read the chapter said that was
>only part of the story. Against a steady drumbeat of suicide bombings,
>assassinations, sabotage and mile-long gasoline lines, some White House
>staff members believed that such a positive take on the Iraqi
>reconstruction would undermine the White House's credibility.
>
>There was also a basic turf battle. The National Security Council believed
>the Council of Economic Advisers strayed too far from its domain,
>according to officials who spoke on the condition of anonymity to avoid
>the appearance of dissent within the White House.
>
>In fact, the Economic Report of the President almost always addresses
>international trade issues and has often dealt with the economic policies
>of other countries. The 2001 report, the Clinton White House's last,
>contained two sections on raising the economic performance of other
>countries and bolstering incomes in the developing world. The 2003 report,
>a product of the Bush administration, contained a section on economic
>"Developments in the Rest of the World." A section on "Economic Freedoms"
>discussed at length economic policymaking from Chile to Austria, from
>India to Cote d'Ivoire.
>
>Past administrations had their share of disputes with their economic
>councils. After Chairman Martin Feldstein's comments on rising budget
>deficits, the Reagan White House told council members "to shut up,"
>Niskanen said. But officials never interfered with the economic report.
>
>In the Clinton years, Chairman Joseph E. Stiglitz had fights with the
>White House over his desire to question the use of trade laws to sanction
>the emerging economies of the former Soviet Union, said Laura D'Andrea
>Tyson, a former council chairman who is now dean of the London Business
School.
>
>During the writing of the 1997 report, council members and the White House
>argued heatedly over a chapter on Social Security, but in the end, the
>chapter did appear, with some changes extracted by White House and
>Treasury staff members.
>
>"We had a general sense that while we would not ever say something we did
>not think to be correct, there were some issues we would choose not to
>deal with," Tyson said.
>
>But the removal of a completed chapter, "that one's extreme," she added.
>"I've never heard of anything quite like that."
>
>Suspicions about this year's report emerged even before the volume was
>released last Thursday. The release was later than usual, and it did not
>occur on the morning of Feb. 14 as initially planned.
>
>The 188-page analytical section was 76 pages shorter than last year's and
>85 pages shorter than the average since 1990, according to Bruce Bartlett,
>a conservative economic commentator.
>
>Council members said they were striving for brevity even before the Iraq
>chapter was removed. But the White House intervention heightened concern
>among some economists that the Bush administration does not value lengthy,
>reasoned analyses of its policies.
>
>"They just don't seem to show that serious study is an important part of
>politics," Bartlett said. "It's a very casual, hands-off, almost
>lackadaisical approach to the policy process."
>
>At the White House, Perino disputed that characterization, saying: "The
>annual report to the president is only one the many things [council
>members] do to help the president monitor the economy and make economic
>policy."

Reply via email to