Faustine says:
There's no reason you can't keep your hardcore beliefs to yourself while doing the most rigorous and objective analysis you can.
This is an attractive, but, alas, naive plan. So your closeted-libertarian-analyst presents a "rigorous and objective analysis" saying raising the minimum wage will put people out of work? Your opponents will present someone who argues otherwise. Your analyst says that gun control saves lives? Opponents will ring up Handgun Control. Your analyst says that his interpretation of the Commerce Clause is the correct one? Someone else will cite chapter and verse otherwise. That's even assuming you get equal time, which naturally doesn't happen. DC is a two-party town, and GOP leaders like the size of government just about where it is now. Oh, they might argue it should be reduced five percent at the margins, but the big-government fans still are griping about ONE minor federal agency (OTA) getting axed years ago, so you won't get very far. Look what happened to the 1994 "Republican revolution." Let's not even talk about what some of the expansionist Dems (and some GOPers) would do. Paging Sen. Feinstein... The reality is that sober arguments have little traction in DC. (If they did, we wouldn't be where we are now.) The currencies are votes, money, celebrity. If you can't spend any of those in massive amounts, don't bother showing up.
Sadly enough, you're probably right. But isn't it about time somebody started trying? I think so.
Again, you're naive. Cato, CEI, IHS, IJ, have tried. Victory is not exactly expected anytime soon. Might as well write code, as someone once said. -Declan ----- End forwarded message -----