Bit, you have to take a stance. And my Technical Work is in maximum analysis of the social policy, and you have to take a stance of what the right question of the analysis would be, and what the decision of the government criteria would be. And so as well as the subtleties. Let me understand that point. So there may be circumstances where the government thinks that sitit is the National Interests to respond to uncertainty by taking the action now, but there may be other circumstances where where you come to the different conclusion . Well, i have a paper that came out this this past year in the economic journal on the Infrastructure Spending. And the big uncertainty is the productivity of spending, and what implication of tax policy. And then i crank out, because i am a technical e cop mist, i crank out the solutions to the problem for the government and i see that i can support higher or lowerr Infrastructure Spending based on what the decision criteria the government is going to p be
I can add on both of those, just take that as another example and what is uncertainty. That matters a lot. You can get different results. You need to have that on the bigger issue of uncertainty and ambiguity, one of the things we havent talked about at all is what the view of the nation should be regarding uncertainty. When you move away from the standard and expected framework or even within that we have to have the government be riskaverse. Once you move into areas where there is not ambiguity and this shows up in Climate Change policy, we have to take a 0 3pvstand. My Technical Work goes in analysis of social policy. You have to take a stance of what the right answer is. Thats as well. Im interested in that point. There may be circumstances where the government is in the National Interest to respond to uncertainty by taking action now. I have a paper that came up with the journal on the effect of infrastructure. The big uncertainty is whats the effect of government spending. I cran
Varney and company is about to begin. Tom oil coming off a big rally. Right now, oil is at 50. 15. The real story is gas prices. Of to 2. 11. A big jump. Is at the beginning of more to come . It is not the beginning for a pot elliptic numbers. The market will be very volatile. I would not be surprised to see gasoline 20 0. 30 higher by aprils fools day. The tendency of momentum to trade gasoline higher this time of year. How about the strike going on in the country. Absolutely not a fact her. They do not impact gasoline production. 1. 1 billion of crude oil in the u. S. Plenty of incentive to keep refineries running. Tom that is the other part. You get into this whole question about the fact that they are cutting back on production feared walt that drive the price higher . They will not have back on production. They would like to. There is other stuff in the deep water. There is personal. Other parts of the world. Probably one and a half billion dollars a day. It will be an ugly spring
That grew up here and americans we should welcome that if we start broadening that which is exactly what he did in his 2014 executive order that essentially i would be ignoring the law in a way that i think would be very difficult to defend legally, so thats not an option. And that is why the courts struck down or stayed implementation of the 2014 executive order. Thank you mr. President. I yield the floor. Next a discussion on governance and leadership in the world from the United States to europe to asia. Its part of a conference hosted by the Rand Corporation called set politics aside. Speakers include author Francis Fukuyama and former banking regulators sheila bair. This is an hour. Hello and welcome back. I am michael rich president and ceo of the Rand Corporation. The focus of the last session of course was the middle east Foreign Policy more generally bear also the middle east of courses or region several hundred Million People. Hardly any democracies in that region. In fact, a
Somehow congress hadnt acted enough or quickly enough or expansively enough to justify the extension of his authority under the constitution. But if i can ask my friend from maine another question to drill down on her earlier point it seems to me that the senator from illinois, the distinguished minority whip, he is making some suggestion that really what we are mad at is the people who benefit from this executive action which to my mind, could not be further from the truth. We all understand the aspirations of people who want a better way of life and opportunity, but isnt it true that as you have said and ill just ask you to repeat it perhaps or expand upon it. Isnt it true that when we all take an oath to uphold the constitution laws of the United States, whether youre the president or whether youre the senator, we have a sacred obligation to make sure that no branch including the president usurps the authority of another branch or violates those constitutional limitations . Ms. Co m