Tuesday, May 4, 2010
|
Marc Ambinder is the politics editor of The Atlantic. He has covered Washington for ABC News and the Hotline, and he is chief political consultant to CBS News. Follow him on Twitter @marcambinder
America faces the twin threats of nuclear proliferation and terrorism. Warning signs abound, whether they be the failed attacks in an airplane on Christmas Day or in a parked car in Times Square. The goal in both instances was to take many innocent lives. Yet with each close encounter, my fear is that the country goes on heightened alert only so long as the media covers it. All too often that means hours and days rather than permanently. Equally concerning is that the administration and other elected officials tend to give these warnings due attention only in limited spurts. Many of the same critics who groused about how we failed to connect the dots prior to 9-11 are today repeating the same pattern. As a result, America is at risk of slipping into the type of false sense of security which prevailed before that September morning.The White House will announce the winner of its Race To The Top high school commencement challenge at 11:00 a.m. ET Tuesday.
For our allies around the world, it's decision time. Can they rely on America to keep them safe? Or should they develop their own nuclear weapons, or start to cozy up to Iran, China and Russia out of fear they will be attacked? So we have arrived at a critical crossroads, with America's long-term security interests hanging in the balance. My message to you today is this: Now should be the time for America to rededicate itself to the strategy of: ONE) peace through strength, and TWO) recommitting ourselves to standing up for democratic and peaceful allies.
The bill also creates a dynamic cycle of market-driven innovation in professional training and cybersecurity products and services. Companies that excel will be recognized for their excellence, and companies that fall short will implement a remediation plan driven by the market and facilitated by the government. I know some groups have had concerns about these proposals.But here's the truth: the government will not be choosing winners and losers, nor will it be laying down arbitrary standards from on high Instead, we want to empower the private sector, to develop the standards of excellence that best suit your business or sector. Once you set those standards, we will hold you to them. That's not regulation; it's a 21st century imperative - both for markets and for national security.Some have criticized our proposed independent audit process as inflexible and burdensome. And yes, we do recognize that "compliance" is not always the same thing as security, and that audits can be costly and time-consuming. However, I think we can all agree that effective cybersecurity simply is not possible without a reliable mechanism to evaluate performance. We have yet to be presented with a viable alternative.So, we have built on the audit-based framework already used by many in the private sector. We expect that if the private sector takes the lead as laid out in our bill, the standards and certification will be flexible and dynamic, not bureaucratic and burdensome. For those who are still unhappy with our proposal, I welcome your ideas and alternatives.
You must know genuine accountability is non-negotiable - and for the system to work, any standards must be credible.
This is a morally unsatisfying proposal for those who blame the food companies for doing their part to create and encourage the crisis. But if it works, it works. And reducing obesity, not satisfying one's craving for emotional revenge, is a better goal. How this would all work is something Cardello addresses in his book.One initiative I am advancing is the "20 by '20" program, designed to reduce the supply of calories 20 percent by the year 2020. It would offer all packaged food marketers and restaurant chains a straightforward quid pro quo: keep your tax deductions for advertising in exchange for lowering the number of calories per serving you sell. Specifically, food manufacturers and restaurant chains must lower their calories sold by 2 percent each year for 10 years in order to retain their deductions for advertising. And those deductions are formidable, with $15 billion spent annually. So if the makers of items like Pepsi, Lunchables, and Monster Thickburgers lower their calories by 2 percent per year, they get to keep their deductions. If they lower them by 10 percent or more in a given year, they receive a 25-percent bonus on deductions. But do less or spew more calories on the consuming public, and companies will see a reduction in their precious deductions.
So if Ambinder wanted to argue that the most prominent right-wing criticisms of this White House have sometimes been cynical and less-than-persuasive, I'd say fair enough. (Tellingly, that's where his follow-up post ends up going, via a critique of Newt Gingrich.) But in the post quoted above, he's talking about the world of columnists and bloggers as well as talking heads, and here I will happily pit any roster of "trenchant" liberals that Ambinder wants to draw up, from Klein and Cohn on down, against the work of Manzi, Tyler Cowen, Reihan Salam, Ramesh Ponnuru, Tim Carney, James Capretta, David Frum, Yuval Levin, Arnold Kling, Will Wilkinson, Nicole Gelinas, Stephen Spruiell and (ahem!) Ambinder's own Atlantic colleague Megan McArdle. And that's just a top-of-my-head reading list ...
Actually, I'm arguing something slightly different than what Douthat has me arguing and/or wants me to argue: I'm saying that the party itself prizes the untethered voices. The elite media may, or may not be party to the decisions to cover the loudest, most repeated voices, but who can blame them? Manzi, McArdle, Carney, Ponnuru, Frum and the rest often offer very salient criticism, but it is not the type of criticism that is valued within their party, and it almost never rises above the din.
To repeat myself, the incentive structure favors illogical and often ridiculous arguments and rhetoric. There are plenty of silly voices in the Democratic Party, but the party's incentive structure right now provides an unprecedented opportunity for activists with a cause to make their arguments heard and see their arguments change the way that the party's leaders act. Yes, the Democrats are the party in power, but there's no reason why Ross's roster of conservatives can't be the go-to thinkers for 2012 candidates, Tea Party leaders, and top members of Congress. They aren't.
When I say that Keith Olbermann was effective in changing (elite) minds on health care, I mean it: his show, whatever else you think about it, helped to keep the public option debate alive (he lost that one) and helped to keep the reconciliation possibility open (he won that one). It worked; it was effective. The White House listened; Democrats listened; policy was changed. What follows from this observation is that the LEFT is keeping the Obama administration on its toes.
My media diet consists of reading as many if not more conservative thinkers than even Ross (!), but if no one in their own party's leadership structure values their ideas, if their presidential candidates constantly shrink from the responsibility to lead, if reactionary forces -- the forces of unreality -- continue to triumph, it's not my fault that James Capretta isn't on the phone daily with Republican leaders.
Recent posts from our network of expert outside Correspondents
Daniel AkstJournalist, novelist | Andrew CohenLegal analyst | Mickey EdwardsFormer congressman | Richard FloridaCreativity expert |
Alex GibneyDocumentary filmmaker | William HaseltineScientist, entrepreneur | Ben W. Heineman Jr.Policy expert | Phillip K. HowardLawyer, civic leader |
Hua HsuWriter on music and culture | Wendy KaminerLawyer, civil libertarian | Zachary KarabellExpert on economic trends | Ed KochFormer mayor, film buff |
Lisa MargonelliEnergy & environment writer | Peter OsnosJournalist, publisher | Richard A. PosnerFederal appeals court judge | Christine RussellScience and health writer |
Harry ShearerActor, director, musician | Ellen Ruppel ShellScience journalist | David ShenkScience & culture writer | Erik TarloffNovelist, screenwriter |
Edward TennerCulture-and-tech historian | Brian TillWriter on foreign policy | Abraham VergheseAuthor and physician | Lane WallacePilot, entrepreneur, writer |
James WarrenPolitical analyst | Graeme WoodWriter and traveler |
Sign up to receive our two free newsletters
By 2015, four out of 10 Americans may be obese. Until last year, the author was one of them. The…