Comments on: How Anti-Regulation Is Obama’s New Regulatory Czar?

By: chucko

chucko — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 21:21:52 +0000

And, might I add was there was nothing wrong with Sunstein’s Abstract on how to tackle the problem of arsenic in drinking water either. He did not question the value of reducing arsenic in drinking water! You see, once you click on the links provided, the context makes the individual and highlighted quotes you cited look less questionable. Whatever happened to honest journalism?

By: chucko33

chucko33 — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 20:54:15 +0000

You guys totally took Cass Sunstein out of context with that “welfare” quote. That was NOT an anti-welfare statement. Read the WHOLE paragraph/essay, on how he thought in 2003 that government should protect its citizens (using a cost-beneift analyssis based on something called “life-years” rather than just statistical life). I don’t totally get what it all means, but ThinkProgress should be held accountable for taking Sunstein statements out of context.

He’s a great guy – he even helped shoot down a Drudge-propelled lie last year (on the heels of his Joe The Plumber encounter) that Obama in 2001 spoke of civil rights leaders wanting to redistribute change and wealth through the courts system. Obama was against that – Drudge implied he was for it and Sunstein wrote that Obama’s position was the anti-liberal, even conservative one – civil rights leaders should have not been so “court-centered” and should have pushed for change through legislation, not lawsuits. That’s enough for now.

By: Think Money

Think Money — Wed, 21 Jan 2009 10:24:47 +0000

Personal Opinion: From Obama’s speech looks like he will looking at global warming a lot more…

By: Dave

Dave — Tue, 13 Jan 2009 09:27:46 +0000

small government Republicans experienced a severe case of buyers remorse with Bush. Progressives already appear to be confronting the same problem with Obama. The rest of the country is slowly releasing its breath. We took a flyer, but it looks like maybe we will get a president that places the best interests of the country above ideology.

By: Greg

Greg — Tue, 13 Jan 2009 06:24:54 +0000

I took Cass Sunstein’s environmental law course at the University of Chicago when I was there and this piece really is unfair. He’s great on environmental issues and focused on trying to come up with creative ways to get to desired results rather than the typical command and control mandates. I’ve been an ardent environmentalist in the 20 years since leaving U of C and consider Sunstein to be hugely influential in my thinking.

By: kesabsofs

kesabsofs — Tue, 13 Jan 2009 05:37:33 +0000

I think you are thinking like sukrat, but I think you should cover the other side of the topic in the post too…

By: Sally in Georgia

Sally in Georgia — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 21:29:08 +0000

The best article I read about Obama during the campaign was written by Cass Sunstein. If each of these men makes decisions based on this degree of intelligence and insight, I am not worried about where they will take us. http://blogs.tnr.com/tnr/blogs/open_university/archive/2008/06/12/obama-the-university-of-chicago-democrat.aspx

By: MonteMontana

MonteMontana — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 18:15:35 +0000

Welcome to the New Clinton Deal on Domestic and Foreign Policy. There will be little change until the power is broken and there is a conflagracious deliverance of redistributive wealth mechanisms.

By: Tom

Tom — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 18:03:41 +0000

Professor Sunstein comes out of University of Chicago “Law and Economics” school, which is frequently seen as pro-business and a bit right-wing. However, the represents the progressive end of that school of thought, and might be a useful voice in the discussions. Ultimately, though, it’s Obama who makes the decisions; I trust his judgment enough not to need a “litmus test”.

By: Nick L.

Nick L. — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 17:47:21 +0000

Oliver’s comment is correct. There should be no litmus tests, and some benefits bear no rational relationship to their costs. Regulation is often a blunt instrument and the more we can frankly discuss its costs and benefits the better. That said, many laws contain their own imbedded cost-benefit approaches; these will remain largely unaffected by broad policy biases one way or the other.

By: stateofthedivision

stateofthedivision — Sun, 11 Jan 2009 19:56:28 +0000

The I. Lewis Libby Legal Defense Trust has taken in more than $3 million from hundreds of donors, according to a person involved with the trust. The trust advisory board is populated primarily by prominent Republicans, including an antidrug activist and former ambassador to Italy, Mel Sembler; a former president of the Public Broadcasting Service, Richard Carlson, and a former Port Authority chairman, Lewis Eisenberg. The panel also includes a former Middle East negotiator under President Clinton, Dennis Ross.

http://www.nysun.com/national/all-star-game-taking-shape-in-libbys-trial/46741/

By: stateofthedivision

stateofthedivision — Sat, 10 Jan 2009 22:07:26 +0000

For more on Dennis Ross, neocon and his appointment as Special Adviser for the Middle East and Iran:

http://mideast.blogs.time.com/2008/12/23/obama-mideast-watch-ross-vs-kurtzer/

By: stateofthedivision

stateofthedivision — Sat, 10 Jan 2009 21:39:11 +0000

Obama will appoint neocon Dennis Ross as his Special Adviser for the Middle East and Iran.

A Project for the New American Century member at the highest levels of American foreign policy?

Where’s that change I voted for?

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1054246.html

By: Oliver

Oliver — Sat, 10 Jan 2009 21:12:54 +0000

In answer to the rhetorical questions at the top, and on the evidence offered, the fact that unspecified progressives would have screamed reflects worse on them than the ascribed views do on Cass Sunstein. Is it really the case that the air should be cleaned ever more thoroughly, even if the marginal increases in cleanliness provide minimal or no benefits and cost a huge amount? If the level of arsenic in drinking water can’t be questioned, how do you ascertain what the right level is? And are there all that many grandparents who don’t consider risks to their grandchildren more urgent than risks to themselves?
Not to say Sunstein’s right. There are limits to both the helpfulness and moral standing of cost-benefit analysis, and the value a grandparent puts on his or her life should not necessarily determine the value that the state gives it. There’s no doubt that it’s important for the senate to question Sunstein closely. But the aim of that questioning should not be simply to find out whether he still holds these views. It should be to understand why he holds them, how convincingly he defends them, and how he sees them impacting on policy.

By: Bryan in Miami

Bryan in Miami — Sat, 10 Jan 2009 18:58:10 +0000

Does C.A.P. recommend an alternative selection?

By: stateofthedivision

stateofthedivision — Sat, 10 Jan 2009 17:56:18 +0000

Right wing corporate anti-regulatory think tank?

That helps explain The Carlyle Group’s David Marchick speaking on Obama’s revamping of the financial system:

http://peureport.blogspot.com/2009/01/another-prescient-carlyle-group-big-wig.html