Look for Volume 5 Issue 1 of the Review, which our editors packaged and mailed out last Friday. Other articles in this issue are: “In Defense of Circular Reasoning: The Affordable Care Act and the Resilience of Law and Self-Reference” by Christina S. Ho, “Reforming the National Practitioner Data Bank to Promote Fair Med-Mal Outcomes” by Gabriel H. Teninbaum, and “Economists are from Mercury, Policymakers are from Saturn: the Tax Policy Implications of Failure” by Roberta Mann. As a preview, here is the abstract from the Mann article:
It is curious how often you humans manage to obtain that which you do not want.
Policymaking lawyers and economists are different types of people who come together in the policymaking realm. Sometimes policymakers rely on economic analysis to make decisions. Sometimes policymakers use economic analysis to support decisions already made. In particular, economic analysis has played a large role in the formation of tax and budgetary policy. However, there is a problem. Not only do economists and lawyers communicate differently, they think, perceive, react, and respond differently. They almost seem to be from different planets, speaking different languages. While both lawyers and economists use stories to persuade, economic analysis cloaks the story in a complex mathematical model, opaque to those without training in economic theory. The results of economic modeling can obscure the decisions that policymakers and the public need to make — about the direction of the tax system, the nation, and the economy. This article examines the roles economists and lawyers play in the development and implementation of the income tax system.
In addition to the print version, the full issue can be found online through major academic journal databases.