Michael Perelman writes:
Orszag is of Brookings roots. On Democracy Now, Robert Fisk took note of
how many
"experts" used by the Iraq study group were Brookings boys.
One bonus for the Republicans. After tarring Pelosi as left wing
extremist, how far
will the Dems. dare to roam from the center right?
A good point since Brookings has been a refuge for CEA & OMB economists
from the Carter Admin (Schultz, Bosworth) and Clinton (Rivlin, Gale).
But I also see Orszag as illustrative of two additional trends.
In the past the economists serving in government worked in Academia/think
tanks when their party was not in office, particularly the Democrats. They
had strong roots in academic research and often saw party politics as a
only a necessary means. In contrast, after his relatively young service in
the CEA, Orszag and his brother moved directly to setting up a "consulting
agency" on the west coast and getting large "consultant" fees from the same
industries/institutions he was supposed to oversee (for example, is first
big customer was an HMO, from public funds there were the World Bank and
small central banks). He has spent very little time in Academia and not
much time in think tank work that wasn't directly linked to power politics.
In a similar vein, until 6 months ago, Orszag's work at Brookings was
really more equivalent to the special "institutes" that proliferate in
academia (part of a general trend in academia to emphasize fundraising
potential). In return for a contribution to overhead, these institutes use
the umbrella of the institution for their own special project, often
centered on a big name and a few big funders. Orszag's perch was the
Hamilton Project of Robert Rubin that we have discussed before on Pen-l.
The 2 trends come together. More and more economists are being assessed by
their ability to "network" with money and power. The lack of ethical
standards for research funding (or even disclosure rules) doesn't help.
Orszag's replacement at the Hamilton Project is Jason Furman, another ex
Clinton CEA staffer. He has a similar profile with similar policy
views. But, perhaps because he is less established and even more involved
in party politics, Furman is less openly antagonistic to the liberal wing
of his party. In the middle term, he might go further than Orszag.
Paul
