What the Paulites Have Right

What the Paulites Have Right

(1) There is nothing sacred about the Fed(2) Power is overly centralized in the Executive branch and thefederal government(3) Power is overly concentrated in agencies that are not designed tobe responsive

We ought not get rid of the Fed–I would fight hard to keep it–butit’s a critical point, because once people realize the flexibility ofour federal government, they can open up their imaginations about whatis possible in response to this, or any other, crisis. We need not putall our trust in Bernanke, let alone Geithner or his replacement (if he gets replaced); Congress actually can lead on nationalizing the banks and reorganizing them.

My own hope is that we first shift power away from the executive tothe Congressional branch–this only requires that we speakdifferently, collectively. Instead of "what should Obama do…?" or"what should Geithner do…?" about the banking crisis, we oughtalways be asking, "what should Pelosi do…?" and "what should myCongressmember do…?" If we talk differently, we will start holdingdifferent people accountable. We will, and can, demand moreimagination and leadership from our Congressional representatives.

Facebook
Twitter
Email
Flipboard
Pocket

(1) There is nothing sacred about the Fed(2) Power is overly centralized in the Executive branch and thefederal government(3) Power is overly concentrated in agencies that are not designed tobe responsive

We ought not get rid of the Fed–I would fight hard to keep it–butit’s a critical point, because once people realize the flexibility ofour federal government, they can open up their imaginations about whatis possible in response to this, or any other, crisis. We need not putall our trust in Bernanke, let alone Geithner or his replacement (if he gets replaced); Congress actually can lead on nationalizing the banks and reorganizing them.

My own hope is that we first shift power away from the executive tothe Congressional branch–this only requires that we speakdifferently, collectively. Instead of "what should Obama do…?" or"what should Geithner do…?" about the banking crisis, we oughtalways be asking, "what should Pelosi do…?" and "what should myCongressmember do…?" If we talk differently, we will start holdingdifferent people accountable. We will, and can, demand moreimagination and leadership from our Congressional representatives.

Second, I hope that we increasingly shift power to local governments.Collective decisions about health care and education are best answeredon a local level. A government should not become too big tofulfill one of its most basic functions: representation.

I am very far away from libertarianism in other areas; I would like tosee more investment in education, more investment in health care, morecollective choices made about our collective societies. The only way I see it functioning (without nonresponsive agencies) is if we distribute all of these public goods via smaller state governments. More government, not less–but more of it local. Thelibertarian argument and the G20-protesters arguments share a common,and common-sense thread: we cannot design systems that are inherentlynon-responsive, either because of scale or by design, and then expectthem to be responsive to our collective needs and wisdom during a timeof crisis.

Thank you for reading The Nation!

We hope you enjoyed the story you just read. It’s just one of many examples of incisive, deeply-reported journalism we publish—journalism that shifts the needle on important issues, uncovers malfeasance and corruption, and uplifts voices and perspectives that often go unheard in mainstream media. For nearly 160 years, The Nation has spoken truth to power and shone a light on issues that would otherwise be swept under the rug.

In a critical election year as well as a time of media austerity, independent journalism needs your continued support. The best way to do this is with a recurring donation. This month, we are asking readers like you who value truth and democracy to step up and support The Nation with a monthly contribution. We call these monthly donors Sustainers, a small but mighty group of supporters who ensure our team of writers, editors, and fact-checkers have the resources they need to report on breaking news, investigative feature stories that often take weeks or months to report, and much more.

There’s a lot to talk about in the coming months, from the presidential election and Supreme Court battles to the fight for bodily autonomy. We’ll cover all these issues and more, but this is only made possible with support from sustaining donors. Donate today—any amount you can spare each month is appreciated, even just the price of a cup of coffee.

The Nation does not bow to the interests of a corporate owner or advertisers—we answer only to readers like you who make our work possible. Set up a recurring donation today and ensure we can continue to hold the powerful accountable.

Thank you for your generosity.

Ad Policy
x