Articles by David Kirby
David is currently Senior Director of Academic Programs at the Institute for Humane Studies, where he manages programs for aspiring academics in the humane and social sciences. He is also an associate policy analyst with the Cato Institute, where he researches libertarian voting preferences. Before joining IHS, David was executive director of America’s Future Foundation. Under David’s leadership, AFF became the premier organization for young conservative and libertarian leaders and expanded to include chapters in five states.
David’s writing has appeared in the National Review Online, Tech Central Station, Human Events, and other publications. His research has been cited in the New York Times, Economist, Wall Street Journal, Washington Times, National Review, and National Journal. In his misspent youth, David interned for Senator Ted Kennedy.
David holds an MPP from Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government. A college debater, he also has a BA in rhetoric from Bates College. David is a native of Fairfax, VA. In his spare time, he practices Krav Maga, a mixed martial art.
Technology in Higher Education
I’ve pre-ordered a copy of Anya Karmenez’s new book, DIY U, addressing the hot topic in higher education these days–whether technology will change the higher education marketplace much as blogs and Craigslist have changed the media marketplace. The Chronicle has a interview where she speculates:
Technology accelerates disaggregation or unbundling of services. For the newspaper industry, it meant the stock scores went to one place and the classifieds went to Craigslist, so all of a sudden the features of the newspaper were being provided by a bunch of different places. And I see the same type of thing happening much more easily in education, through technology. So now at MIT the best physicists in the world provide free lectures, but you might still need one-on-one tutoring.
This is not exactly a bold prediction. And based on Kerry Howley’s review of Karmenez’s previous book, Generation Debt, I suspect that her reporting will be on firmer ground than her advocacy. Nonetheless, looking forward to reading.
More on academic entrepreneurship at Washington Post and AEI.
Losing Independents in Virginia
I don’t get the political logic of Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli picking a fight on gay-rights with the states’ colleges and universities. This is quickly becoming a national story, as even John Stewart devoted a segment to the issue last night.
| The Daily Show With Jon Stewart | Mon – Thurs 11p / 10c | |||
| Gaywatch – Virginia Edition | ||||
|
||||
After an election cycle where Republicans in Virginia found a way to win more libertarian-leaning independents by emphasizing spending and anger towards Washington, why pick an issue so alienating to this new, hard-won constituency? Why now? I don’t get it.
Boring as political strategy
Obama and the Dems seem to have (perhaps inadvertently) arrived at an effective messaging strategy on health care–boring.
I tried to watch the health care summit, but found it painfully boring. Many others did too. Even this weekend’s Saturday Night Live skit mocking the president on health care was boring.
Makes me wonder whether all this boring isn’t strategic. In grad school, I used to marvel at David Gergen’s ability to be strategically boring. If he was confronted with a tough or controversial question, he’d just talk boring at it until people would give up. Boring is perhaps the best defense against angry. And angry is definitely what the Dem’s don’t want as they make a final push to pass health care.
Tea party as “radically anticonservative”
Every once in awhile, David Brooks just nails it:
But the Tea Partiers are closer to the New Left. They don’t seek to form a counter-establishment because they don’t believe in establishments or in authority structures… For this reason, both the New Left and the Tea Party movement are radically anticonservative. Conservatism is built on the idea of original sin — on the assumption of human fallibility and uncertainty. To remedy our fallen condition, conservatives believe in civilization — in social structures, permanent institutions and just authorities, which embody the accumulated wisdom of the ages and structure individual longings.
I think this helps explain why it makes more sense to call the Tea Party movement libertarian than conservative.
This is my favorite Brooks column since “Ward Three Morality”, on the new social code for the rich set by the Obama aides, Democratic staffers, regulators, and senior civil servants who live in Washington, DC’s Ward 3. Still a good read.
Rangeling
Pardon my cynicism. But I suspect that much of the Democrats’ anger over Rangel’s ethical mishaps is just faux indignation designed to, er, wrangle the gavel away from the 79 year old. Ways and Means chairmanships don’t change hands very often. Might as well use whatever excuse you can. Because the Ethics Committee reprimand that Rangel’s staffers knew that American Airlines paid for his plane flight to a conference–seems to me to be the weakest ethics charge of the bunch.
Could Republicans win 10 Seats in the Senate?
Evidence at Pollster. But six or seven seems more likely, at least according to Intrade.
Paul Ryan Actively Discouraged Co-Sponsors
Over at Newsweek, Peter Suderman explains why the GOP is ignoring Paul Ryan’s comprehensive health care plan, Roadmap for America’s Future. He notes
“To date, his proposal, which is actually an update of a plan he initially put forth in 2008, has a mere nine cosponsors—mostly conservative stalwarts.”
But I think Suderman is missing the top reason why. Paul Ryan himself actively discouraged co-sponsors of the bill. In June 2008, Ryan spoke to a group of young leaders at the Youth Entitlement Summit, where he freely admitted that the point of the bill was never about getting co-sponsorships or political feasibility. To Ryan, the bill was always about ideas. So he advised his colleagues not to co-sponsor and to stay away.
In many ways, Paul Ryan crusade with the Roadmap is a feat of political courage similar to that of John Sununu and Liddy Dole in 2002. In the 2002 election cycle, national Republicans urged candidates to steer well clear of Social Security. But Sununu and Dole, both in tight races, decided to address Social Security, betting that voters would give them credit for dealing with a tough issue honestly and forthrightly. They both won. This showed other Republicans that you can win on Social Security reform.
I think Ryan’s up to the same thing with the Roadmap. Look past 2010 to 2012. Ryan is trying to show that you can talk about the nation’s dire fiscal situation and present the tough choices on health care entitlements clearly and logically and voters will understand. We should evaluate his success on whether or not Republican presidential candidates pick up the issue and run with it in 2012.
