4 Comments
User's avatar
Carl Van Ness's avatar

This is the first I've heard of the Roosevelt Institute and the Good Life Agenda. Thank you for this synopsis. I intend to read the report in its entirety.

So much emphasis is given to macroeconomic programs, but we should not neglect microeconomic programs. Small scale projects inject funds where they can do the most good and in a timely fashion. They also strengthen political support. I thought it odd and somewhat ironic that one of the first casualties of the Tea Party revolt were earmarks. Yes, earmarks were prone to corruption, but they often served vital local needs. With proper supervision and a review process, they could play an important role in economic revitalization.

Jordan Zakarin's avatar

I definitely agree, those small projects create faith in government and show that it can deliver — so long as they’re subject to real competition and not just just contracts for donors and powerbrokers. I think the Tea Party went after earmarks because it wasn’t really, or at least initially, an organic movement; it was instead an astroturf job by the Koch libertarian right, which hates government spending as a rule (unless they benefit, of course).

Nina Tatlock's avatar

Always worth reading. Thank you.

David Durkee's avatar

Thoughtful commentary here in every attempt.