Discovery Blog

The work of Discovery Institute and its fellows is varied, and so are the blogs that report on aspects of it—but not diverse enough to cover many of the exciting subjects encompassed in our mission to “make a positive vision of the future practical.”

You get foreign policy and defense news from John Wohlstetter’s Letter from the Capitol (letterfromthecapitol.com), technology and democracy news and commentary on Disco-Tech (disco-tech.org), media critique about evolution on EvolutionNews.org, intelligent design commentary on idthefuture.com, bioethics coverage on Second Hand Smoke (wesleyjsmith.com/blog/), and Russian and Eastern Europe reporting from the Real Russia Project at Russiablog.org.

Discoveryblog.org will cover the rest, including the views of institute officers and fellows on transportation, regionalism, economics, politics, current cultural developments, and developments of the institute itself. The writer, as is customary, is the only one responsible for the blogs written, of course.

I personally am delighted at this development because it provides an outlet for my own opinions, which extend to subjects not always embraced by DI projects. I also will be able to share news promptly about the institute, its people and events that otherwise might have to wait for the printed publication, Discovery Views. We can’t manage a thread for comments, but you all somehow find ways to reach us about the other blogs, and I’m sure the same will be true here.

Thanks, meanwhile, for noticing.

Bruce Chapman, President, Discovery Institute

An old friend whom I have known since even before we served together on the Seattle City Council three decaades ago and who went on to serve in Congress for ten years; who helped establish the Cascadia Project at DI in 1992 and served as Chairman of the Board of the institute from 1999-2002, is now about to complete his fourth outstanding and productive year at the State Department as Ambassador-at-Large for Trafficking in Persons. He has decided that that’s enough.

Americans concerned about the blight of human slavery in the 21st century and who have rallied behind Amb. Miller’s “abolition movement” will be sad to see him step down. But most ambassadorial posts last only three or so years, and this one has to be one of the most grueling—hard on the body and a trial for the soul. John has visited scores of countries personally, meeting with victims, advocacy groups and governments. He has had notable successes in helping curb the modern expression of an age-old evil that most people hardly imagine still continues.

John’s sincerity and passion, and his integrity, are unmistakable. He managed to please the President and Secretary of State—whose “vision and compassion” he praised in his resignation letter--while retaining the full confidence of leaders of both political parties in Congress. Conservatives have cheered him and Nicholas Kristof of the New York Times has saluted his valor. His annual reports to Congress and the public caused enough embarrassment to leaders in other countries that they decided to get personally involved in solving the problems John and his dedicated staff have uncovered. That’s why Discovery Institute honored Amb. Miller with its Humanitarian Award two years ago and the Wilberforce Forum (named after the great anti-slavery crusader of early 19th century Britain) gave him a similar award.

Public service in such an intense environment goes fast. John decided several months ago that he would quit after four years—a long time in such a job. He departs December 15.

Several universities have sought Amb. Miller’s services and he has just decided to accept a research professorship at the Elliott School of International Affairs at George Washington University in Washington, D.C. He also has decided to accept my offer to become the first Discovery Institute Distinguished Fellow in International Relations and Human Rights. Our office in D.C. will facilitate the relationship, but John also will appear “back home” in Seattle from time to time.

Human rights are at least as much threatened today than at any recent time, whether it is the censorship of political dissent in police states or the soft toleration of cruel institutions of coerced prostitution in supposedly advance democracies. Ambassador Miller’s service, though private now, will still have an open field in which to operate.

It is doubtful, even after last year’s gas price spike, that most Americans have much appreciation for the looming crisis in oil production. Nor do most of us even appreciate the nature of the current supply. (Pop quiz: without looking below, can you name the top four oil producing countries, in order? How about the top four oil consumers? What two producer countries do you think rank highest in U.S. oil imports?)

Click here to read this full post in PDF format.

Six years ago it was almost impossible to get the public or the media, let alone the presidential candidates, to take foreign policy seriously in the election campaign. Then, eleven months later came the 9/11 attacks and the spotlight has been on terrorism and war ever since. In the today mid-term election campaign, it is the topic of the economy that is being underplayed.

A political adviser once told me that the three permanent vote-deciding issues are always jobs, taxes and peace. If so, in the current campaign season we are suffering amnesia on items one and two. The reason is that since the 2003 tax cuts took hold the economy has been expanding handsomely. So why worry?

The valid worry, in truth, is that it won’t last. If you think the relatively conservative Congress turned out to be spendthrift, look out if a more liberal one takes over. If you think you don’t care about further tax cuts, ask yourself if you are willing to let the 2003 tax cuts lapse—as they will without Congressional action—and watch as your taxes go back UP? Even though the drop-dead date technically is not until 2010, failure to act in the next Congress will have long-term consequences for economic expectations.

President Bush is understandably exasperated. The economic downturn he inherited began (statistically) only a couple of months before he took office. Among other things it ballooned the deficit. Even by the 2004 election, a year after the supply side cuts in marginal tax rates were implemented, the recovery was still mainly a stock market phenomenon that hadn’t taken hold very impressively in the “lagging economic indicator” that is the job market. Many candidates railed against free trade and globalization as the culprit.

Today the picture is stunning in comparison with either a few years ago or, according to the polls, many people’s current perceptions. The stock market, with participants that include a majority of all Americans, is at a record high. There have been 37 months of job increases in a row, adding 6.6 million new jobs. The tax cuts themselves have benefited all taxpayers, with the average family getting to keep a couple of thousand dollars more a year, and with investment capital freed to promote not only new jobs, but higher productivity and—finally, at long last—wage increases.

Families have enjoyed an increased tax credit for children. The marriage penalty was reduced.

Home ownership is close to an all time high. Inflation remains at a near record low, which means the real cost of making major purchases is far lower than it was a generation ago. The price of existing homes finally has dropped after an unrealistic surge, though new home construction remains strong. The high energy prices of last year have abated.

Fears that we could not compete in an era of global free trade have proven to be exaggerated, despite the inevitable pains of change and adjustment. New enterprises continue our national trait of leadership in innovation. Overall, we have an economy of historic strength.

Some conservative and moderate voters are justifiably agitated that federal spending has increased thanks to Congressional earmarks and a big new Medicare entitlement program for prescription drugs. But despite the “bridge to nowhere” stories, most earmarks were for a badly under funded transportation infrastructure that deserved more support anyhow. (The only question was whether to let elected officials direct some of the money or leave it all to bureaucrats.)

Regardless, most new spending has been for defense and homeland security. As Peter Beinart of the liberal New Republic writes, “To listen to Bush’s critics, you would think that discretionary, nonsecurity-related spending has exploded on his watch. But it hasn’t…When you take account of inflation and population growth, it grew a mere 2 percent between 2001 and 2006. And, as a percentage of GDP, it actually fell.”

The reason it fell is that the tax cuts worked spectacularly well to increase economic activity and boost tax revenues. The Administration expected progress, but even it has been surprised at the extent of success. Whereas last February the Treasury predicted a $423 billion deficit, the current year deficit is now expected to come in at $250 billion. If the trend continues, the Bush Administration will eliminate the deficit altogether in the next few years.

The reason again—and the lesson for policy makers--is that the stimulus of supply side tax cuts was so powerful that it offset much of the increase of the deficit. The same national boom also has been a boon to state governments whose budgets were strapped only a few years ago.

You don’t hear a lot about this record I’ve just described, do you? More importantly, you don’t hear nearly enough about which members of Congress now demanding massive but vague change in Washington, D.C. voted against the tax cuts that made the current economic expansion possible.

In the remaining days of the Congressional elections, here is a simple question for candidates for House and Senate everywhere: Will you pledge to vote in the coming term for continuation of the lower tax rates enacted in 2003 that turned our economy around, or are you prepared to let them lapse—and effectively raise taxes?