Over
the next few days there was a burst of coverage focusing on Republican
suppression of uncomfortable realities, but it was overwhelmed by the election
coverage.
George
Washington Law School Professor Jonathan Turley characterized
the sequence of events as " the GOP
attempting to suppress a non-partisan tax study that debunked their entire Ayn
Rand/neoconservative taxation mythology that catering to the wealthy creates
jobs ". It also raises some interesting questions about
political culpability and consequences."
The Professionals Stood by Their Work
Challenging
the Times' assertion that CRS pulled
the study "on their own," Turley scoffed:
Sure they did. That's why the report's author stands by his
work and the report was withdrawn over the objections of the CRS' economic team
leadership".
When manifest attempts like this to lie to
the public are discovered, the political question becomes what should be done
about it and who should be punished for abusing the public trust in the name of
political expediency (and greed as in this particular case)?
The
question of who should be punished -- and how -- matters, but not as much as some
other questions:
- How can we insulate
non-partisan institutions like the Congressional Research Service from overt or
covert political manipulation?
- Why were the media so
indifferent to the report when it came out in September and rebutted the Romney
economic argument?
- Why were non-Republican
political campaigns not all over the report when it was first released?
- How is it that a false
economic theory, discredited for years, is still treated as if it was
credible?
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
1
1
1
