Imagining a scenario where the Dredge Act is repealed and EA plays a noticeable role in this seems rather optimistic. That said, I don’t imagine the political blowback from such an event would be significant unless something goes horrendously wrong optics-wise for a few reasons.
Economic issues tend to be less controversial in the current political climate than culture war issues
Wonkish economic reforms that require some technical understanding are usually ignored by the general public and thus even less politicized, especially if they pertain to a specific industry out of public view
Left-leaning organizations advocate for specific market-friendly reforms frequently with little audience pushback. (Eg. Vox has repeatedlyadvocated for the repeal of the Jones Act, taking the same side as CATO and Heritage.)
That said, focusing on the deleterious environmental effects of the Foreign Dredge Act of 1906 is a smart move to help onboard liberals. Another angle worth investigation would be to examine to what extent, if at all, the act unfairly impacts people on racial or class lines.
At the moment we have a situation where the congressional primary race with the highest funding levels is funded mostly by EA money. It’s a kind of situation that will lead sooner or later to more media coverage.
Left-leaning organizations advocate for specific market-friendly reforms frequently with little audience pushback. (Eg. Vox has repeatedlyadvocated for the repeal of the Jones Act, taking the same side as CATO and Heritage.)
Taking a public position in an article like that is one thing. It’s another to actually organize together with pro-corporate lobby groups how to get legal change.
Even when the actual policy reform is wonkish and hard to write about, the story of cooperating with pro-corporate think tanks can be told in the media.
Imagining a scenario where the Dredge Act is repealed and EA plays a noticeable role in this seems rather optimistic. That said, I don’t imagine the political blowback from such an event would be significant unless something goes horrendously wrong optics-wise for a few reasons.
Economic issues tend to be less controversial in the current political climate than culture war issues
Wonkish economic reforms that require some technical understanding are usually ignored by the general public and thus even less politicized, especially if they pertain to a specific industry out of public view
Left-leaning organizations advocate for specific market-friendly reforms frequently with little audience pushback. (Eg. Vox has repeatedly advocated for the repeal of the Jones Act, taking the same side as CATO and Heritage.)
That said, focusing on the deleterious environmental effects of the Foreign Dredge Act of 1906 is a smart move to help onboard liberals. Another angle worth investigation would be to examine to what extent, if at all, the act unfairly impacts people on racial or class lines.
At the moment we have a situation where the congressional primary race with the highest funding levels is funded mostly by EA money. It’s a kind of situation that will lead sooner or later to more media coverage.
Taking a public position in an article like that is one thing. It’s another to actually organize together with pro-corporate lobby groups how to get legal change.
Even when the actual policy reform is wonkish and hard to write about, the story of cooperating with pro-corporate think tanks can be told in the media.