A debate in the Big Apple
3 June
I will be participating in an Oxford-style economic policy debate this fall as part of the Intelligence Squared US series.
The debate will be held on Monday, November 16th. I believe it will be held in the Caspary Auditorium at the Rockefeller University.
The motion to be debated is “Obama’s economic policies are working effectively.”
ABC News Nightline’s John Donvan will be moderating the debate.
Speaking for the motion will be former New York Governor Eliot Spitzer.
I will be speaking against the motion, along with Dr. James Galbraith of UT-Austin and Robert Kuttner of the American Prospect. And yes, that’s an interesting mix.
Former Senator Bill Bradley and former Treasury Secretary Paul O’Neill will also be participating, although they are undecided at the moment.
I know that NPR will record it. I don’t know if they broadcast it live.
You can find more information at the Intelligence Squared US site.
I’m looking forward to the debate.
Related Posts
(best matches are listed first)
Sounds like quite an event. I hope we are able to listen in on NPR!
“Speaking for the motion will be former New York Governor Eliot Spitzer.”
You can’t lose. As a New Yorker I can tell you that what the man knows about economics might fill half a thimble. And he doesn’t particulary care about it. He showed absolutely zilch interest in the subject in all the years before his current exile.
This is part of his PR program of public appearances to rehabilitate himself as a Democrat who can get elected to something. So he’ll be saying the right things for his target Democratic audience whether he understands the economics of them or not. (Prepare by perusing his recent Slate pieces.)
Jamie Galbraith, as it happens, has an article in the current Mother Jones arguing that the response to the current recession should have been (still should be) a permanent 30% increase in Social Security benefits coupled with a suspension of the payroll tax. For people who think the Administration isn’t doing enough to run up the national debt. That’s the angle he’ll be coming from.
Usually the IS debaters never define the question well and the panelists don’t appear to have any sort of shared goal in presenting their side of the debate. A clear and witty restatement of the question repeated ad nauseum by one side should be enough to pull off a victory.
Sounds like fun! I’d love to get a look at that green room. Web cam?