And I thought it was because of those two big guys down on the blocks

George Mason.jpgAlex Tabarrok of Marginal Revolution blog fame and colleague Peter Boettke author this Slate.com piece that places the unlikely NCAA Basketball Tournament Final Four appearance by George Mason University in the context of an overall renaissance that is occurring at the university as it copes with competition in the marketplace of ideas:

What’s remarkable is that GMU’s freewheeling basketball team and its free-market academic teams owe their successes to very similar, market-beating strategies. GMU has excelled on the court and in the classroom by daring to be different. . . .
GMU remains an underdog in both basketball and economics. But Coach Larranaga has a plan to succeed in the long term and so do GMU’s professors. Click here to read about how GMU is seeking out different new kinds of undiscovered geniuses.

Are you listening, University of Houston?

Cap Weinberger, R.I.P.

weinberger150.jpgReagan Administration Secretary of Defense Casper Weinberger died Monday at the age of 88 after a short illness. Weinberger is best remembered for a combative style that likely had something to do with his indictment in the Iran-contra affair (for which he was later pardoned), but his impact on the American armed services is his far more important legacy.
At the time that Weinberger took over the Defense Department in 1980, the Pentagon was still in its post-Vietnam War funk that was exacerbated by the malaise of the Carter Administration. Although the Pentagon is a notoriously tradition-bound institution where new ideas that do not come through the normal chain of command are viewed by top Pentagon brass with skepticism, Weinberger developed a culture at the Defense Deparment that increasingly embraced intellectual ideas from non-conventional sources.
For example, Andrew Marshall in the late 1970’s and early 80’s argued from an obscure Pentagon office that wars could be revolutionized by precision bombs, unmanned planes and wireless communications that would allow the American military to destroy enemies from a distance. Similarly, the work of the late Pentagon iconoclast John Boyd and his acolytes in revolutioning the way in which the American military approaches war in the late 20th and early 21st century has been well-chronicled in Robert Coram’s book, Boyd: The Fighter Pilot Who Changed the Art of War (Little, Brown 2002).
The Pentagon brass often fought tooth and nail against the innovative ideas of people such as Boyd and Marshall — and continues to do so today with regard to Donald Rumsfeld’s ongoing reorganization of the Defense Department — primarily because those new ideas often ran contrary to the sacred cow military appropriations that the Pentagon brass traditionally protect. However, Weinberger was instrumental in instituting the cultural changes at the Pentagon that altered that institutional mentality, and leaders such as Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney, and Colin Powell over the past two decades opened up and accepted recommendations from non-traditional Pentagon sources that have revolutionized and dramatically improved America’s ability to conduct war in places such as Afghanistan and Iraq.
But for Cap Weinberger’s leadership, the traditional Pentagon brass would have likely squelched those innovative ideas before they would have ever seen the light of day. That is not what you will read about in the traditional obituaries of Weinberger, but it may be his most important contribution as a governmental servant.

GM’s Enronesque slide continues

gm11.gifGeez, talk about a bad day at the office.
Embattled General Motors (prior posts here) conceded in its delayed regulatory filings filed yesterday that it had found “material weaknesses” or “significant deficiencies” in the company’s accounting controls, and that the company’s financial statements for 2002-2004 and for the first three quarters of 2005 “should no longer be relied upon” because of accounting errors. The company filed corrected statements for those periods with the SEC yesterday.
In addition, the company announced that it may have a bit of trouble peddling its valuable financing unit because of the complexity involved in arranging such a deal and, oh by the way, several years worth of results for that unit need to be restated, too. Then, this NY Times article questions whether GM current management has what it takes to pull the company out of its tailspin.
But to top it all off, GM announced that it had received a subpoena from a federal grand jury investigating its handling of payments or “credits” from suppliers, and that it had received a subpoena from the Securities and Exchange Commission in connection with a previously disclosed investigation of GM’s transactions in precious-metal raw materials. That makes six subpoenas from the SEC and two subpoenas from federal grand over the past six months.

Continue reading