Mr. Popular

This article from the Boston Globe concerning liberal activist US District Judge Nancy Gertner and her blogging hobby is notable not for its discussion of Gertner but rather for its quotation of Professor Doug Kmiec. Kmiec thinks it's a fine idea for Gertner publicly (she blogs on Slate with Kmiec and others) to call into question the efficacy of the laws she is charged with enforcing. Quoth the former Reagan-administration-official-turned-law-prof:

It's one thing for us pontificators to speak grandly about how we'd like to see the law arranged. It's another for someone who bears the burden of that responsibility and has identified a . . . shortcoming in the law to be able to say, "I've seen the consequences of this, and the consequences are worrisome."

Right. It is another thing altogether. Several adjectives comes to mind: unseemly, inappropriate, partisan, dangerous. Public confidence in the judiciary and the rule of law depends in part on the confidence that judges demonstrate for the laws they must apply. When judges actively undermine confidence in the law, they undermine confidence in their rulings. If Judge Gertner thinks the federal sentencing guidelines and federal exercises of prosecutorial discretion are unjust, she should resign and do everything in her power as a private citizen to reform the law.

That much is old news. Waddya know? Another Clinton appointee on a federal bench actively undermining both the rule of law and confidence in it. We're shocked, right?

The truly befuddling aspect of this story is Kmiec's role. Since the former conservative endorsed Barack Obama and dissed John McCain he has been the liberal media's favorite "conservative." That is fine and dandy if he is still committed to conservative principles; I do not begrudge him his newfound popularity. But I am increasingly skeptical that he is still one of us.

Liberals launch "rapid response policy blog"

The liberal self-described policy wonks over at John Podesta's Center for American Progress have launched a new website: The Wonk Room. The Politico reports:

“When issues pop up on the radar screen, we want to be the first with policy analysis and not let the sound bites go,” said John D. Podesta, president of the Center for American Progress.

“For the last several years, we’ve been trying to serve up policy ideas and analyses of where the country needs to go. Now, the public’s really paying attention.”

...“We want to get these ideas injected into the political dialogue,” Podesta said. “I’m sure the conservative think tanks will take issue with what progressive candidates are putting forward, and we’ll defend those ideas.”

I like the idea behind the blog but am under no allusions that objective policy study will trump pre-ordained liberal outcomes. Nevertheless, the model here is worth looking at.

Conservatives employed a similar strategy in the late 70's and early 80's. Before that time Think Tanks were nothing more than ivory towers for academic discussion. This discussion always occurred after the fact. Policy makers and conservatives staffers began to see the need for sound conservative policy analysis before the fact. After all, what good was a stellar policy paper about the disastrous consequences of the Carter Administration's energy policies if no legislator can read it before he casts his vote?

From this realization the Heritage Foundation was formed (in the years to come many other Think Tanks emulating the new model popped up). Heritage churned out white papers on important policy matters of the day. Most importantly, their white papers were in the hands of legislators well before the vote. You can thank Heritage and this model for many of the conservative victories over the last two and a half decades.

But today, a new model is needed as a supplement to the timely white paper strategy. That new model looks a lot like what the liberals at CAP are trying to do. They are right, we live in a sound bite world. Sound bites and winning the PR war on the 24 hour cable news channels is just as important as filling legislators' heads with sound policy analysis. Frankly, it might be more important given the fact that our Congress is increasingly made up of members who care more for their next election than they do for sound policy.

To win in this world, rapid response is indeed paramount. We need to be able to bring all the facts to bare as quickly as we can, and that cannot happen on dead trees. It must happen in real time on the internet which trickles onto live cable news.

Fortunately, conservatives are making headway in this arena as well. The folks at Heritage have launched The Foundry which for my money is running circles around the Wonk Room. Their average four posts a day are chock full of info that is relevant to what is happening at the moment in Congress. Check it out sometime and see if you agree.

The libertarians at CATO are no slouches either. Cato at Liberty is more bloggy than The Foundry, but it is still providing real time valuable info from the libertarian perspective.

Both of these blogs are a good start, but I can't help but think we need something even bigger.