Where's The Big Idea?
Bob Herbert in this morning’s New York Times op-ed praises both Clinton and Obama, but asks why we are not hearing transformational ideas from their campaigns. I think there is a simple explanation and it is one that the Obama campaign is trying to address. We are afraid to dream big. The period in U.S. history from 1945-1975 (which I will call The Revolution) was filled with big dreams in which the Federal Government, often working through the states sought to transform the country into the world industrial leader by investing in infrastructure and scientific R & D which would provide the basis for the productivity revolution that followed. The passage of the National Interstate and Defense Highways Act of 1956 which financed the vast network of 46,000 miles of Interstates directly led to the mobility and efficiency that distinguished our country in the 50’s and 60’s. In 1958, following the Soviet Sputnik launch, the Congress authorized the Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA). Although much of ARPA’s early work was focused on satellite technology, by 1963 they began funding Project MAC (MIT Project on Mathematics And Computation) which led directly to the first computer network (ARPANET); the basis of the Internet we use today. The basis for both of these grand projects was a sort of distributed knowledge, in which the Federal Government would fund local agencies to actually do the design, research and implementation.
The Counter-Revolution started in 1975 and lasted up until 2005. The Counter-Revolution’s roots were in an obscure memo known as The Powell Memorandum, written in 1971, just before Lewis Powell was appointed to the Supreme Court by Richard Nixon. The memo written to the Director of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce called upon big business to defend itself from “the attack on the free enterprise system.” The memo described a country that was rebelling against the power of business.
“The most disquieting voices joining the chorus of criticism came from perfectly respectable elements of society: from the college campus, the pulpit, the media, the intellectual and literary journals, the arts and sciences, and from politicians.” In the memorandum, Powell advocated “constant surveillance” of textbook and television content, as well as a purge of left-wing elements.
In an extraordinary prefiguring of the social goals of business that would be felt over the next three decades, Powell set his main goal: Changing how individuals and society think about the corporation, the government, the law, the culture, and the individual became, and would remain, a major goal of business.
Business leaders took the memo to heart and began funding advocacy groups like Heritage Foundation, American Enterprise Institute, Manhattan Institute, Cato Institute, Citizens for a Sound Economy. These organizations in turn began fighting against any attempts to regulate business. By 1976 these efforts began to show results as various environmental laws were curtailed, often under the cover of “the energy crisis” brought about by Arab oil boycotts. During the Carter administration the counter-revolution won a major victory in deregulating the airline industry, leaving us with the mess we now have.
When Reagan won the 1980 election the forces of the Counter-Revolution ascended to power, which they held tightly until the election of 2006, when the first signs of the end of their reign began to appear. But more importantly, which Obama tried to point out, their philosophy of government permeated the vision of the world put forth in the media, academia and in the statehouses of our country. At its core was Reagan’s belief that “government is not the solution, it is the problem”. The central notion was that if you just get government out of the way (by cutting regulation and lowering taxes on capital), the “invisible hand” of the marketplace will supply all the goods and services needed for a successful society.
But this has not happened because their are some “public goods” like highways, hospitals, schools and communications systems that the private enterprise system does not account for. It is not a stretch to say that we have market failure in quite a few aspects of our economy. Our health care system costs 40% more per capita than most developed nations for inferior service. Our 12th grade science and math scores are 26th in the world. We are 28th in the world in energy efficiency (BTU/GDP) and 16th in the world in Broadband diffusion. Our mobile phone system is a full generation behind those of Europe and Asia, where government coordination helped foster common standards and innovation.
So as we slowly fall into what I think will be a rather severe recession there will be a moment for us to Dream Big again. I have been writing about some of those dreams having to do with building an alternative energy industry and the transition to a savings/investment economy. As Bill Gross and I have pointed out, we are not going to get out of this mess with the Counter-Revolution’s Supply-Side toolkit. The key big idea that now has to be advanced is how to use the coordination power of the digital revolution to enable the states and cities to take on the task of rebuilding our country in a post war economy that can both mirror the huge gains for the middle class during the revolution of 1945-1975, while shrinking the Federal bureaucracy. Every successful corporation has had to confront this task in the Internet Age; shrink the corporate staff and push power to the edges of the organization. Obviously, California is somewhat of a laboratory for this New Federalism Movement. In the next couple of weeks I will try to expand on these ideas.
I support Obama, but I wish along with his inspirational rhetoric he had inspirational ideas. It’s not a negative–none of the candidates have any fresh ideas–but I can’t help wishing.
I’m not convinced the reason Obama isn’t offering a new ideology is because America is afraid to dream big. It’s a reason, but probably not the only reason. I can think of a lot more explanations:
1. Maybe he’s just not that type of thinker. He’s shown flashes of unconventional thinking, like at his Google talk, but maybe he and his advisers just aren’t”big idea” people.
2. Big ideas are difficult to condense into a sound byte and sell to the public. Especially *good* big ideas. For example, how would you condense your idea in the last paragraph into a short sentence or two?
3. The invasion of Iraq is perhaps the largest example of a big idea gone bad in American history. (I haven’t read Fred Kaplan’s book on this, but it sounds very interesting). Ideas can be both exciting and very dangerous. He might have a natural suspicion of ideology.
4. His campaign doesn’t need a big idea. He has a great story and a very strong message. Running on a big idea or ideas could get in the way of that message.
What I do think he could do is toss out some small ideas. For example, why aren’t the stimulus refund checks being transferred electronically to people’s bank accounts, today, at least to the people who filed electronically last year? Or they could use it as an incentive to file e-file this year: do so and get your check two weeks after you file, instead of in mid May.
I’m looking forward to seeing your expand your ideas in the next few weeks.
Jason- If I had to vote, I’d vote for your explanations #2 & 4. Big ideas are hard to explain and the press has become so cynical that they work hard to knock them down. Eventually you end up like Tom Wolfe and want to go back to the 19th Century.
As to your suggestion that Barack’s campaign itself is the big idea–I tend to agree. Bottom up politics 2008 style.
The simple idea of a 1945-75 revolution and a 1975-05 counter-revolution resonates with me. But…
* How could a 1956 highway bill influence much of our mobility in the 60s, let alone the 50s? When did all those highways get built?
* Are there any stats about the state of health care and education in the 60s and 70s to back up your points there? Our current inefficiency is obvious, but can we only blame business and the conservative leaders of the era? What about our lazy, entertained selves?
* Do you credit Reagan-era policies with the fall of the Soviet bloc, at least in part? To good or bad effect?
Your research is amazing. I am highly impressed by this article. American politics is controlled by lobbyists and special interest groups, supported by giant corporations having petty self-interests, and not to forget the military-industrial complex, that Reagen talked about.
I am a Ron Paul supporter. Unfortunately, this country is not yet ready for a revolution.
Dan- The highways got built from 1956 on. Thjey definitely added to the productivity (moving goods easier) in the next few decades.
The relative decline of our educational and Healthcare systems began with things like Prop. 13 in California which cut property taxes that went to finance schools. in 1946 we were #1 in the world for both male and female life expectancy. Today we are #21. A good bit of this fall is due to our “lazy entertained selves” as you most trenchantly put it. Obviously the obesity epidemic and the fall in reading ability has got to be pinne4d on that donkey.
My sense on the fall of the Soviet Union is that in a globalized world, where Western rock and roll and movies penetrated the “iron curtain’ with ease, it was impossible to keep those people from embracing freedom. The Wall came down without a shot being fired and Vaclev Havel, one of the great dissidents, invited Frank Zappa as his first guest to the Presidential Palace.
I think perhaps another difficulty with the ‘big idea,’ is that it can take a lot of time, effort, and resources to implement.
If the Democrats get in, it’s not like they will be starting with a clean slate. There will be a lot of Bush legacy infrastructure that needs to be dealt with.There will be messes to clean up, and bells to un-ring.
If big ideas are put forth, and big promises made they could easily set themselves up for what would like failure.
I guess the question in my mind is:
Can the Democrats stay in power long enough to clean up 30 years of counter-revolution, THEN implement the required big ideas?
Just- That of course is the biggest question. It will take at least three years to extricate ourselves form Iraq. The recession may be more severe than we think, carrying into the new term. It won’t be easy.
[...] but real rates keep rising. Roach’s solution to the problem is pretty much in line with what I’ve been saying for the past few months. Government aid is being aimed, mistakenly, at maintaining unsustainably high rates of personal [...]