Knowing Is Half the Battle

Ned Lamont's philosophy of governance has much to recommend it on the surface: First, the idea of an entreprenurial lawmaker is an attractive one; in fact, the notion of an MBA President is one of the dynamics that elected Mr Bush. I suspect most folks want the government to be accountable and responsible (although not enough to actually hold politicians accountable and make them responsible). Second, the conviction that something new can be done in Iraq is a welcome one. A recent poll cited that a majority of persons polled wanted the Iraq War to be handled differently--which is different than saying they want a pull-out. So Mr Lamont's assurance that taking a new tack is neither "extreme" nor "weak" is helpful.

But Mr Lamont doesn't answer two questions that are begged by his piece: First, how does a resurgence of the Democrats' desire to raise the minimum wage reconcile with his vision of an entreprenurial leadership? Raising the minimum wage either increases prices or reduces productivity (with the latter being the more likely). With increased prices or diminished output, there is a suppression on the economy which affects the Treasury's revenue streams. It is difficult to think of an entreprenurial Senator making a solid case for policy which is bad for business and bad for the public. Second, what does he propose to do in Iraq? Even if we support his plea for a change in course, that is only half the argument. The other half is what we change course toward. Does Mr Lamont want a full withdrawal? Partial withdrawal? Timetable? More troops in exchange for an earlier pullout guarantee? A switch to mobile Special Forces instead of entrenched infantry? It little helps the crew to steer from Scylla into Charybdis. In order to bring his vision to fruition, Mr Lamont will need to tell us a little more than what he wants to do. He'll have to tell us how he plans to do it.