Jumpstart the Discussion

Over the next several decades, the nation will be forced to alter fundamentally its fiscal policy. The aging of the baby boom generation and the continued rapid growth in health care costs will make it impossible to fulfill the commitments of the major retirement-related entitlement programs, maintain even modest levels of other current government activities, and keep tax burdens from rising significantly. Robert J. Samuelson has challenged Washington's leading "liberal" and "conservative" think tanks to spell out clearly and succinctly how they, as institutions, would recommend policymakers respond to this dilemma and explore the implications of their solutions for the government's responsibilities for the economy and the pursuit of social justice.

We are disappointed by Mr. Samuelson's ideological characterization of the Urban Institute. Institute researchers represent an ideologically diverse group of scholars, all of whom bring objectivity, creativity and sophisticated methodologies to their policy analysis. No two would come up with the same policy prescription for the challenges facing the nation. Nor would the Institute, as a nonpartisan organization, endorse a single solution to a very complex social, political, economic and ethical situation with many acceptable, if politically difficult, resolutions. We are also disappointed that Mr. Samuelson has not acknowledged the large body of existing work by Urban Institute scholars and those at the other think tanks on precisely these topics. Indeed, much of the circumstance he identifies emanates not from a lack of ideas but a lack of political will.

Notwithstanding this, a group of senior Urban Institute scholars would enthusiastically participate in the type of effort Mr. Samuelson proposes. Drawing on the extensive and objective analysis that scores of Institute researchers have contributed over the years to our understanding of the fiscal dilemma confronting the nation and the workings of the major social programs, we will be pleased to join policy analysts at the other think tanks in addressing the demanding questions that have been posed. We, like Mr. Samuelson, hope that this exercise can jumpstart a substantive and meaningful discussion among the presidential candidates -- a discussion that will inform the public of the realistic choices that cannot be avoided, spur concrete proposals from the next president, and encourage meaningful legislative action in 2009.

Robert Reischauer
President, Urban Institute