If you missed it on Friday, I
have a piece up about Ron Paul's new chairmanship of the House subcommittee
on Monetary Policy. It's the only committee fight that the Tea Party won, generally speaking, and it seems on the surface like a big libertarian win, but libertarians are of two minds about it. One of the libertarian economists I talked to, Cato's Mark Calabria,
with some disappointment that I didn't mention some of his optimism about Paul in the story.
Paul will ultimately be good for monetary policy because he will actually bring some oversight to the Fed, which has been sorely lacking. Under the current Democrat Chair Mel Watt, this subcommittee has held a total of five hearings all Congress, and none of them were actually on monetary policy. Two of these hearings weren’t even on areas under the jurisdiction of the Federal Reserve. Republicans have not done much better when they were previously in charge.
I should have quoted Calabria in full -- he made this point about the relative focus of the committee under Democrats and Republicans when we talked -- but his take informed the rest of my argument, that even Paul critics think that if he staffs the committee well and turns it on to his issues, it'll be a success.
TODAY IN SLATE
Meet the New Bosses
How the Republicans would run the Senate.
It Is Very, Very Stupid to Compare Hope Solo to Ray Rice
The U.S. Is So, So Far Behind Europe on Clean Energy
Even if You Don’t Like Batman, You Might Like Gotham
Friends Was the Last Purely Pleasurable Sitcom
This Whimsical Driverless Car Imagines Transportation in 2059
Did America Get Fat by Drinking Diet Soda?
A high-profile study points the finger at artificial sweeteners.