Over at the Freakonomics blog, Stephen Dubner says my recent NY Times piece is "super-compelling" (thank you) and then adds:I don't blame Steve Dubner, though. As a fellow New Yorker, it's hard not to operate out of a default cynicism.I applaud Mankiw, the Times, and Romney for having the courage to produce what is essentially a position paper on taxation in the pages of the Times. As long as everyone’s cards are on the table, which they are here, I see no harm. But I sure would have liked to see the e-mails back and forth between the Mankiw and the Romney camp as the Times piece was being edited.Okay, since he asked, here are all the emails between me and the Romney camp about the Times piece:
Yes, that's it. No emails. No phone calls. No smoke signals.
I am not an employee of the campaign. I am a Harvard professor, expressing my own views, sometimes publicly, sometimes privately to a candidate for President. After listening to a variety of advisers with various perspectives, Romney decides on his own what positions to take. Not surprisingly, sometimes we disagree. But I do not vet what I write with the Romney campaign, and my opinion pieces should most definitely not be construed as position papers for the campaign.
Tuesday, July 17, 2007
Mankiw's integrity a surprise to Dubner?
Greg Mankiw self-discloses:
Posted by Caveat Bettor at 9:08 AM