ĢAV

What Were We Thinking? Selected Schar School of Policy and Government Op-Eds (August 2022)

Body

From the Washington Post:

The Congressional Budget Office estimates that, over the next two years, the Inflation Reduction Act is likely to change the inflation rate by less than one tenth of one percent — but it isn’t sure whether the change would be up or down.

—Steven Pearlstein

From the Washington Post:

Where the loyalties of the fastest-growing segment of any population group in America go and how long they stay there are impossible to predict. But candidates and parties that do not ardently engage Latino communities do so at their considerable peril.

—Mark J. Rozell

From the Hill:

She could run for president as an independent, split the Republican vote in key swing states and throw the election to the Democrat.

—Bill Schneider

From the National Interest:

Wars, however, do not necessarily end with one side militarily defeating the other.

—Mark N. Katz

From American City and County:

Climate change has become a growing threat and technology in all sectors will need to step up and play a greater role in both mitigation and strategic planning. Here are just a few examples.

—Alan Shark

From International Business Times:

Unfortunately, a group of American state and local governments impedes that effort. They are engaging in a litigation crusade to hold the fossil fuels industry responsible for climate change.

—Richard Kauzlarich

From Homeland Security Today:

Al-Qaeda’s near-enemy strategy (i.e., the targeting of local regimes) and far-enemy strategy (i.e., the targeting of countries in the Western world), which it adopted after the 9/11 attacks on the United States, prioritize fighting against local governments that oppose jihadist ideologies.

—Mahmut Cengiz

From the Washington Post:

What he’s doing is akin to what he did a year ago when he campaigned on local issues with deep resonance in the state’s Democratic-voting regions in cities and suburbs as well as conservative rural areas: public safety and public education.

—Mark J. Rozell

From La Opinión:

Those who imprecisely and dishonestly use the internationally accepted definitions of terrorism and apply them to the concept of "el narco" or "organized crime" without any rigor, do enormous damage to Mexico and Mexicans, since they would be supporting an eventual armed intervention in this country with all the consequences that this entails.

—Guadalupe Correa-Cabrera

From Taiwan Insight:

The main conclusion of the episode is that it was crucial that Speaker Pelosi stood her ground and pushed through her plans for a visit to Taiwan. It is a win for democracy and a major milestone in Taiwan’s relations with the rest of the world.

—Gerrit van der Wees

From the Hill:

Differences based on religion, race, and education are not simply differences of interest, like business versus labor. They are differences of values and identity. Differences of interest can be negotiated and compromised. Differences of values and identity cannot.

—Bill Schneider

From the Washington Post:

Luria was calm and methodical, acquitting herself well before nearly 18 million Americans who viewed the panel’ssecond prime-time hearing. What she presented was memorable and chilling.

—Mark J. Rozell

From the Washington Examiner:

While Democrats are falling behind in their quest to fight climate change, Republicans are just getting started in their new era of introducing extraordinary energy solutions that will strengthen our country for generations to come.

—Sophomore Jorge Velasco

From Cyber Security Intelligence:

We need to develop more classes that bridge that Middle Management gap—creating understanding of cyber needs and structure in both a policy way and a tech way.

—Ronald Marks

From the Diplomat:

With all of this in mind, can the visit by Pelosi be labeled “provocative” or “unwise,”as described in a number of U.S. publications? The answer is negative.

—Gerrit van der Wees

From the Hill:

The Trump document fiasco points to one of the greatest intelligence failures since the Cold War. We need a presidential commission to review the circumstances and propose laws to prevent a recurrence. This ensures future good will come from this debacle.

—Mark J. Rozell and Paul Goldman