DC Press Corps Spins Itself Silly Over Sanders’ Specifics
April 7, 2016
The Washington press corps has gone into one of its great feeding frenzies over Bernie Sanders interview with New York Daily News. Sanders avoided specific answers to many of the questions posed, which the DC gang are convinced shows a lack of the knowledge necessary to be president.
Among the frenzied were the Washington Posts Chris Cillizza, The Atlantics David Graham and Vanity Fairs Tina Nguyen, with CNNs Dylan Byers telling about it all. Having read the transcript of the interview, I would say that I certainly would have liked to see more specificity in Sanders answers, but Im an economist. And some of the complaints are just silly.
When asked how he would break up the big banks, Sanders said he would leave that up to the banks. Thats exactly the right answer. The government doesnt know the most efficient way to break up JP Morgan; JP Morgan does. If the point is to downsize the banks, the way to do it is to give them a size cap and let them figure out the best way to reconfigure themselves to get under it.
The same applies to Sanders not knowing the specific statute for prosecuting banks for their actions in the housing bubble. Knowingly passing off fraudulent mortgages in a mortgage-backed security is fraud. Could the Justice Department prove this case against high-level bank executives? Who knows, but they obviously didnt try.
And the fact that Sanders didnt know the specific statutewho cares? How many people know the specific statute for someone who puts a bullet in someones head? Thats murder, and if a candidate for office doesnt know the exact title and specifics of her state murder statute, it hardly seems like a big issue.
There is a very interesting contrast in media coverage of House Speaker Paul Ryan. In Washington policy circles, Ryan is treated as a serious budget wonk. How many reporters have written about the fact this serious budget wonk has repeatedly proposed eliminating most of the federal government? This was not an offhand gaffe that Ryan made when caught in a bad moment; this was in his budgets that he pushed through as chair of the House Budget Committee.
This fact can be found in the Congressional Budget Offices (CBO) analysis of Ryans budget (page 16, Table 2). The analysis shows Ryans budget shrinking everything other than Social Security and Medicare and other healthcare programs to 3.5 percent of GDP by 2050. This is roughly the current size of the military budget, which Ryan has indicated he wants to increase. That leaves zero for everything else.
Included in everything else is the Justice Department, the National Park System, the State Department, the Department of Education, the Food and Drug Administration, Food Stamps, the National Institutes of Health and just about everything else that the government does. Just to be clear, CBO did this analysis under Ryans supervision. He never indicated any displeasure with its assessment. In fact, he boasted about the fact that CBO showed his budget paying off the national debt.
So there you have it. The DC press corps that goes nuts because Bernie Sanders doesnt know the name of the statute under which he would prosecute bank fraud thinks a guy who calls for eliminating most of the federal government is a great budget wonk.
Economist Dean Baker is co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research in Washington, DC. A version of this post originally appeared on CEPRs blog Beat the Press (4/5/16).
http://fair.org/home/dc-press-corps-spins-itself-silly-over-sanders-specifics/
safeinOhio
(32,685 posts)as I just sent another donation to counter help counter the bought and paid for press.
Nitram
(22,802 posts)I don't think we can blame the press for faulting Sanders on failing to do so himself. Bernie really does need to show that he is not proposing enormous economic changes that have not been thoroughly thought through and detailed.
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)this OP has reviewed..yes. No one is above criticism and I have differences with Sanders
too..but I don't appreciate faux outrage. As the OP points out about Ryan, they're not
interested in doing their job, which in the end hurts everyone who reads their publications.