Evidence Based

Challenges to evidence-based public policy dialogue come from many sources.  The easiest to finger are the demagogues, the crazies whose outrageous utterances are quickly refuted, though not always with the style and thoroughness of Dan Amira's entertaining takedown of a rant by Arkansas State Senator Jason Rapert that surfaced last week.  It's titled very simply Bigot is Also Liar and it's profusely illustrated with the relevant photos.

But there are other assertions that are not evidence-based that nevertheless become part of the conventional wisdom through 1)politically motivated repetition  2) inadequate refutation by the target's allies 3) mindless repetition by the media.  Because everyone assumes they are true, they influence public policy debate even though the evidence is otherwise.

One big example of that is President Obama as a big spender who is inflating the deficit and national debt, thus enslaving future generations.  That in itself is not true--federal spending during Obama's first term grew at a slower rate than any administration since Eisenhower.

But it's corollary is perhaps the most harmful--an expanding government is sapping the economy.  As Paul Krugman pointed out in this exchange, not only is government spending not expanding, public sector jobs are   declining month after month, and that's the biggest drag on the economy.  Up until now it's been felt at the state and local level, where school teachers and firefighters, etc. are losing their jobs.  Public needs are not being met and those lost incomes aren't buying stuff.  But in the fourth quarter of 2012, the economy contracted slightly (by early figures) entirely because of a large drop in federal spending.

If we accepted this evidence, we would be increasing government spending, on essential services and infrastructure at the local level, and on strengthening public health, emergency services, etc. as well as investing in the future of education and energy technology.