Skip Navigation
Megan McArdle

Megan McArdle - Megan McArdle is a senior editor for The Atlantic who writes about business and economics. She has worked at three start-ups, a consulting firm, an investment bank, a disaster recovery firm at Ground Zero, and The Economist. More

Megan was born and raised on the Upper West Side of Manhattan, and yes, she does enjoy her lattes, as well as the occasional extra-dry skim-milk cappuccino. Her checkered work history includes three start-ups, four years as a technology project manager for a boutique consulting firm, a summer as an associate at an investment bank, and a year spent as sort of an executive copy girl for one of the disaster-recovery firms at Ground Zero … all before the age of 30.

While working at Ground Zero, Megan started Live From the WTC, a blog focused on economics, business, and cooking. She may or may not have been the first major economics blogger, depending on whether we are allowed to throw outlying variables such as Brad Delong out of the set. From there it was but a few steps down the slippery slope to freelance journalism. She has worked in various capacities for The Economist, where she wrote about economics and oversaw the founding of Free Exchange, the magazine's economics blog. She has also maintained her own blog, Asymmetrical Information, which moved to The Atlantic, along with its owner, in August 2007.

Megan holds a bachelor's degree in English literature from the University of Pennsylvania and an M.B.A. from the University of Chicago. After a lifetime as a New Yorker, she now resides in northwest Washington, D.C., where she is still trying to figure out what one does with an apartment larger than 400 square feet.

Health Care: What's the Big Rush?

By Megan McArdle
Oct 7 2009, 10:12 AM ET Comment

Centrist Democrats are asking Reid for more time:

A group of centrist Democratic senators, who could determine the fate of the major health care legislation, sent a letter Tuesday to the majority leader, Harry Reid, Democrat of Nevada, urging that the public be given at least 72 hours to review the legislation before debate begins on the Senate floor.

The group of centrists, led by Senator Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas, who is a member of the Finance Committee, told Mr. Reid that they were echoing complaints from constituents -- "many are frustrated and lacking accurate information on the emerging proposals in Congress," they wrote.

Jonathan Zasloff's interpretation:

Blanche Lincoln and anti-health reform Dems (and Joe) to Harry Reid:

Please give the insurance and Pharma lobbyists more time to tear down the Senate health care bill.

Because you know what's deeply problematic in a democracy?  Allowing opposing sides time to make their views known to voters.  What a principaled politician would be doing is ramming this bill through before constituents have any time to absorb the contents, since they might find out they don't support it.  Let's keep our eyes on the greater good here. 

At least when Republicans did this, they argued that Saddam Hussein might develop WMD any day.  They were completely and totally wrong, of course.  But military threats actually can be urgent.  We're talking about a bill that doesn't take effect until 2013, the better to game the CBO's scoring rules, and evade any negative electoral consequences for Obama.  There's really no excuse for running it through the congress at breakneck speed--except that you believe that if voters have time to consider it, they maybe won't like it.

The voters will, of course, have plenty of time to act on any dislike of the new program.  So what the advocates of speed at any cost are seem to be trying to do is shield moderate politicians from the possible knowledge that their constituents hate it--to keep them from acting in the best interests of the people who elected them.  The moderate politicians know this, and aren't willing to [betray their constituents/risk their own political necks on this bill].

Deliberation is how democracy is supposed to work.  No matter how pressingly awesome you hope your bill is, there is really no excuse for demanding that the Senate vote on it before the public has a chance to find out what's in it.  No matter how you couch it in complaints about insidious lobbyists, it isn't the lobbyists who are making a naked grab for undemocratic power here.


Presented by

More at The Atlantic

Rick Santorum Wants Your Sex Life to Be 'Special' Rick Santorum Wants Your Sex Life to Be 'Special'
Adulthood, Delayed: What Has the Recession Done to Millennials? Adulthood, Delayed: The Recession and Millennials
Tiger Woods Should See a Psychiatrist Tiger Should See a Psychiatrist
The 'Wow!' Signal: One Man's Search for SETI's Most Tantalizing Trace of Alien Life The 'Wow!' Signal
An Aging African Leader Whose Time Has Ended Senegal's Persistant President

Join the Discussion

After you comment, click Post. If you’re not already logged in you will be asked to log in or register.
blog comments powered by Disqus
Special Report
Beyond the BRICs Reuters Beyond the BRICs
A look at the next big global economies—and the rise of a global middle class. Read more ›
View All Correspondents

The Biggest Story in Photos

World Press Photo Contest 2012

Feb 15, 2012

Subscribe Now

SAVE 59%! 10 issues JUST $2.45 PER COPY

Facebook

Newsletters

Sign up to receive our free newsletters

(sample)

(sample)

(sample)

(sample)

Megan McArdle
from the Magazine

Why Companies Fail

GM’s stock price has sunk by a third since its IPO. Why is corporate turnaround so difficult…

The Graduates

Busted banking careers, crashed consultants, and shrunken incomes: the author attends her 10-year…

Romney’s Business

The Republican contender touts his business experience—but does it really matter?