A48 Endnotes- These figures are hypothetical. In reality, under the Monetary
Control Act (MCA) of 1980, the reserve requirement can
range from 8 percent to 14 percent for all demand deposits
greater than $25 million. In the original law, banks with
demand deposits under $25 million had to have a reserve
of only 3 percent. The amount that is subject to the lower
reserve requirement is increased every year to reflect overall
money supply and currently is about $71 million. See Board
of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, “Reserve
Requirement,” http://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/
reservereq.htm#table1 (accessed 2/7/12). - In December 2002, the discount rate was effectively
discontinued as an active policy tool and was pegged to 1 percent
above the targeted FFR (which means that the “discount rate”
is oddly named—it really should be called the premium rate).
In the economic crisis of 2008–2009, the Fed temporarily
dropped the difference between the FFR and the discount rate
to .25 percent and then to .50 percent, where it remains today;
see Federal Reserve Bulletin, December 2002, pp. 482–83. See
also “Frequently Asked Questions—Discount Window Lending
Programs,” Federal Reserve, http://www.frbdiscountwindow.org/
en/Frequently Asked Questions.aspx (accessed 6/3/16). - Brian W. Cashell, “The Federal Government Debt: Its Size and
Economic Significance,” Report RL31590 (Washington, DC:
Congressional Research Service, March 1, 2005), p. 9. - William Greider, Secrets of the Temple: How the Federal Reserve Runs
the Country (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1987), pp. 295–98. - Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, Credit
and Liquidity Programs and Balance Sheets, Recent Balance
Sheet Trends, http://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/
bst_recenttrends.htm (accessed 6/3/16). - John B. Taylor, Economics, 4th ed. (New York: Houghton Mifflin,
2003), Chapter 10. Some economics textbooks also define
regulation of externalities, such as pollution, as economic
regulation. - United States v. Microsoft, 87 F. Supp. 2d 30 (D.D.C. 2000). For
a detailed discussion of the case, see Alan Reynolds, Microsoft
Antitrust Appeal: Judge Jackson’s “Findings of Fact” Revisited
(Washington, DC: Hudson Institute, 2002). - Michael Birnbaum and Brian Fung, “E.U. Fines Google a
Record $2.7 Billion in Antitrust Case over Search Results,”
Washington Post, June 27, 2017, http://www.washingtonpost.com/
world/eu-announces-record-27-billion-antitrust-fine-on-
google-over-search-results/2017/06/27/1f7c475e-5b20-11e7-
8e2f-ef443171f6bd_story.html?utm_term=.f433adf6664f
(accessed 4/24/18). - “U.S. Patent Statistics Chart Calendar Years 1963–2015,” U.S.
Patent and Trademark Office, http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/ac/
ido/oeip/taf/us_stat.htm (accessed 6/3/16). - Daniel Carpenter and David A. Moss, eds., Preventing
Regulatory Capture: Special Interest Influence and How to Limit
It (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2014). - For a running list of changes to environmental regulations, see
Michael Greshko, Laura Parker, and Brian Clark Howard, “A
Running List of How Trump Is Changing the Environment,”
National Geographic, April 24, 2018, https://news.
nationalgeographic.com/2017/03/how-trump-is-changing-
science-environment/; also see Nadja Popovich, Livia Albeck-
Ripka, and Kendra Pierre-Louis, “76 Environmental Rules on
the Way Out under Trump,” New York Times, January 31, 2018,
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/10/05/climate/trump-
environment-rules-reversed.html. The $1 billion in savings
was cited in Juana Summers and Boris Sanchez, “EPA’s Pruitt
Fulfilling Trump’s Anti-regulatory Agenda,” CNN, April 3,
2018, http://www.cnn.com/2018/04/03/politics/scott-pruitt-donald-
trump-environment-policy/index.html (all accessed 4/25/18).
59. Michael Hiltzik, “No Longer Termed a ‘Failure,’ California’s
Cap-and-Trade Program Faces a New Critique: Is It Too
S uccessf u l?,” Los Angeles Times, January 12, 2018, http://www.latimes.
com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-hiltzik-captrade-20180111-story.
html (accessed 4/25/18).
60. Bureau of Labor Statistics, “Measuring Green Jobs,” http://www.bls.
gov/green/#faqs (accessed 4/25/18).
61. Environmental and Energy Study Institute, “Fact Sheet—Jobs in
Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency (2017),” February 15,
2017, http://www.eesi.org/papers/view/fact-sheet-jobs-in-renewable-
energy-and-energy-efficiency-2017 (accessed 4/25/18).
62. U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis,
“International Services and International Investment Position
Tables,” http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/international/intinv/
intinvnewsrelease.htm (accessed 11/13/16).
63. Kimberly Amadeo, “Who Owns the U.S. National Debt?” The
Balance, August 21, 2018, http://www.thebalance.com/who-owns
-the-u-s-national-debt-3306124 (accessed 8/27/18).
64. Kimberly Amadeo, “Who Owns the U.S. National Debt?” The
Balance, August 21, 2018, http://www.thebalance.com/who-owns
-the-u-s-national-debt-3306124 (accessed 8/27/18).
65. Mark J. Perry, “Trump Is Completely Wrong about the U.S.
Trade Deficit,” Los Angeles Times, March 18, 2016, http://www.
latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-0316-perry-trade-benefits-
20160316-story.html (accessed 6/4/16).
66. David Ricardo, The Principles of Political Economy and Taxation
(1817). Robert Torrens actually developed the point first in an
1815 essay on the corn trade, but Ricardo usually gets the credit
because he explained it more fully.
67. This argument ignores transportation costs and the costs of
shifting labor from one industry to another, but its logic is quite
powerful. More intuitive, perhaps, is what happens when one
nation has a large absolute advantage in the cost of production
over another. In these situations, if there is free trade most
production of that good will shift to the country that can
produce it more cheaply.
68. James McBride and Mohammed Aly Sergie, “NAFTA’s
Economic Impact,” Council on Foreign Relations, October 4,
2017, http://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/naftas-economic-impact
(accessed 4/25/18).
69. Suketu Mehta, “A Passage from India,” New York Times, July 12,
2005, p. A21.
70. See Ronald Rogowski, Commerce and Coalitions (Princeton,
NJ: Princeton University Press, 1986), for the constituency
view. James Shoch, Trading Blows: Party Competition and
U.S. Trade Policy in a Globalizing Era (Chapel Hill: University
of North Carolina Press, 2001), pp. 13–19, reviews both
explanations.
71. Judith Goldstein, Ideas, Interests, and American Trade (Ithaca,
NY: Cornell University Press, 1993).
Take a Stand
a. The comment was in response to the takeover of a federal
wildlife refuge in Oregon. Rubio called for the occupiers to
lay down their arms but showed sympathy for their central
demand that the federal government cede control over
much of the Bureau of Land Management land. “Marco
Rubio on Oregon Federal Land Business,” Des Moines
Register editorial board interview, January 6, 2 016, http://www.
desmoinesregister.com/videos/news/elections/presidential/
caucus/2016/01/06/78384514/ (accessed 6/4/16).
b. John Tierney, “The Sagebrush Solution,” New York Times, July
26, 2005, p. A19. Additional information was drawn from http://www.
hcn.org (accessed 7/31/18).Full_20_APT_64431_END_A23-A54.indd 48 15/11/18 2:38 PM