Trends in NBER Working Papers

I received an email from Jim Poterba this morning on the occasion of the 30,000th NBER working paper. Excerpting, it said:

The NBER reached a milestone this morning with the distribution of our 30,000th working paper.  The series was launched in 1973 by labor economist Robert Michael to disseminate research prior to journal publication and to facilitate distribution of data appendices and related supplemental material.  Working paper number 1 was Education, Information, and Efficiency by Finis Welch.

The series began on a modest scale, reflecting the small number of NBER affiliates at the time.  There were 41 working papers in the first year, and it took 12 years to reach the 1000 paper mark.  Originally, working papers were printed and had bright yellow covers. Packets of papers were mailed occasionally to libraries, leading economics departments, and research institutes. As the number of NBER researchers expanded, the volume of working papers rose.  Eventually, a shift to digital distribution became essential for accommodating the expanding number of studies.

In 2020, when many economists ratcheted up their research output to address the many new questions posed by the COVID-19 pandemic, a record 1,713 working papers were distributed.  The annual average for the last five years was 1,322. More than 25,000 subscribers receive the “New This Week” email each Monday, and there were more than 2.9 million paper downloads in 2021. Twitter has become an increasingly important channel for calling attention to working paper content. 

The NBER working papers provide some insights on the changing structure of economic research. For example, 60 percent of the papers distributed during the series’ first decade had a single author, while 35 percent were coauthored and 5 percent had more than two authors.  In the last decade, only 11 percent had a single author; 56 percent had three or more.  The number of working papers per NBER affiliate per year, which was more than 1.7 in 1980, has trended down.  It averaged about 0.95 at the turn of the century, and was 0.78 in most recent five years excluding 2020.

In the image at the top of this post, you can see that there exist some older retrospectives on NBER working papers.

The most interesting trend is that people seem to be involved in about as many papers per year as they were before, but with more coauthors, so that papers on CV has not had a big trend, but if only fractional credit were given for papers with coauthors, it would look like productivity had gone down. But I think that papers are more ambitious than they used to be, in rough proportion to the increased number of coauthors. (In the cross-section, I think the number of citations goes up roughly with the square root of the number of coauthors, but the time-series trends would be different from that.)


The Federalist Papers #53: The Wide Knowledge Required for Federal Legislation Makes Biennial Elections to the House of Representatives Better than Annual Elections

The Federalist Papers #53, authored by either Alexander Hamilton or James Madison, continues the argument of #52 that elections to the House of Representatives every two years strikes a reasonable balance.

First, after pointing out that the exact period between elections is somewhat arbitrary—

No man will subject himself to the ridicule of pretending that any natural connection subsists between the sun or the seasons, and the period within which human virtue can bear the temptations of power.

—the author argues that the maxim “where annual elections end, tyranny begins" arose where constitutions were unwritten and more mutable than the difficult-to-amend, written Constitution being proposed for the US. In those contexts, the year as a salient length of time had to make up for lesser tensile strength of the relevant constitutions:

The important distinction so well understood in America, between a Constitution established by the people and unalterable by the government, and a law established by the government and alterable by the government, seems to have been little understood and less observed in any other country. … An attention to these dangerous practices has produced a very natural alarm in the votaries of free government, of which frequency of elections is the corner-stone; and has led them to seek for some security to liberty, against the danger to which it is exposed. … Some other security, therefore, was to be sought for; and what better security would the case admit, than that of selecting and appealing to some simple and familiar portion of time, as a standard for measuring the danger of innovations, for fixing the national sentiment, and for uniting the patriotic exertions?

That argument only says that two years between elections to the federal House of Representatives is not a danger to liberty. But why would it be superior to annual elections? Here, the argument is that being a member of the US House of Representatives is more difficult than being in a state legislature (for which annual elections were common), and so benefits more from experience:

No man can be a competent legislator who does not add to an upright intention and a sound judgment a certain degree of knowledge of the subjects on which he is to legislate. … The period of service, ought, therefore, in all such cases, to bear some proportion to the extent of practical knowledge requisite to the due performance of the service. The period of legislative service established in most of the States for the more numerous branch is, as we have seen, one year. The question then may be put into this simple form: does the period of two years bear no greater proportion to the knowledge requisite for federal legislation than one year does to the knowledge requisite for State legislation?

Most of the rest of the Federalist Papers #53 elaborates on these arguments. In addition, there is some consideration of how a high probability of reelection or reappointment can make shorter formal terms of office consistent with having the requisite experience and how on the other hand slow resolution of election disputes makes short terms problematic.

Below is the full text of the Federalist Papers #53.

FEDERALIST NO. 53

The Same Subject Continued: The House of Representatives

From the New York Packet
Tuesday, February 12, 1788.

Author: Alexander Hamilton or James Madison

To the People of the State of New York:

I SHALL here, perhaps, be reminded of a current observation, "that where annual elections end, tyranny begins. " If it be true, as has often been remarked, that sayings which become proverbial are generally founded in reason, it is not less true, that when once established, they are often applied to cases to which the reason of them does not extend. I need not look for a proof beyond the case before us. What is the reason on which this proverbial observation is founded? No man will subject himself to the ridicule of pretending that any natural connection subsists between the sun or the seasons, and the period within which human virtue can bear the temptations of power. Happily for mankind, liberty is not, in this respect, confined to any single point of time; but lies within extremes, which afford sufficient latitude for all the variations which may be required by the various situations and circumstances of civil society. The election of magistrates might be, if it were found expedient, as in some instances it actually has been, daily, weekly, or monthly, as well as annual; and if circumstances may require a deviation from the rule on one side, why not also on the other side? Turning our attention to the periods established among ourselves, for the election of the most numerous branches of the State legislatures, we find them by no means coinciding any more in this instance, than in the elections of other civil magistrates. In Connecticut and Rhode Island, the periods are half-yearly. In the other States, South Carolina excepted, they are annual. In South Carolina they are biennial as is proposed in the federal government. Here is a difference, as four to one, between the longest and shortest periods; and yet it would be not easy to show, that Connecticut or Rhode Island is better governed, or enjoys a greater share of rational liberty, than South Carolina; or that either the one or the other of these States is distinguished in these respects, and by these causes, from the States whose elections are different from both. In searching for the grounds of this doctrine, I can discover but one, and that is wholly inapplicable to our case. The important distinction so well understood in America, between a Constitution established by the people and unalterable by the government, and a law established by the government and alterable by the government, seems to have been little understood and less observed in any other country. Wherever the supreme power of legislation has resided, has been supposed to reside also a full power to change the form of the government. Even in Great Britain, where the principles of political and civil liberty have been most discussed, and where we hear most of the rights of the Constitution, it is maintained that the authority of the Parliament is transcendent and uncontrollable, as well with regard to the Constitution, as the ordinary objects of legislative provision. They have accordingly, in several instances, actually changed, by legislative acts, some of the most fundamental articles of the government. They have in particular, on several occasions, changed the period of election; and, on the last occasion, not only introduced septennial in place of triennial elections, but by the same act, continued themselves in place four years beyond the term for which they were elected by the people. An attention to these dangerous practices has produced a very natural alarm in the votaries of free government, of which frequency of elections is the corner-stone; and has led them to seek for some security to liberty, against the danger to which it is exposed. Where no Constitution, paramount to the government, either existed or could be obtained, no constitutional security, similar to that established in the United States, was to be attempted. Some other security, therefore, was to be sought for; and what better security would the case admit, than that of selecting and appealing to some simple and familiar portion of time, as a standard for measuring the danger of innovations, for fixing the national sentiment, and for uniting the patriotic exertions? The most simple and familiar portion of time, applicable to the subject was that of a year; and hence the doctrine has been inculcated by a laudable zeal, to erect some barrier against the gradual innovations of an unlimited government, that the advance towards tyranny was to be calculated by the distance of departure from the fixed point of annual elections. But what necessity can there be of applying this expedient to a government limited, as the federal government will be, by the authority of a paramount Constitution? Or who will pretend that the liberties of the people of America will not be more secure under biennial elections, unalterably fixed by such a Constitution, than those of any other nation would be, where elections were annual, or even more frequent, but subject to alterations by the ordinary power of the government? The second question stated is, whether biennial elections be necessary or useful. The propriety of answering this question in the affirmative will appear from several very obvious considerations. No man can be a competent legislator who does not add to an upright intention and a sound judgment a certain degree of knowledge of the subjects on which he is to legislate. A part of this knowledge may be acquired by means of information which lie within the compass of men in private as well as public stations. Another part can only be attained, or at least thoroughly attained, by actual experience in the station which requires the use of it. The period of service, ought, therefore, in all such cases, to bear some proportion to the extent of practical knowledge requisite to the due performance of the service. The period of legislative service established in most of the States for the more numerous branch is, as we have seen, one year. The question then may be put into this simple form: does the period of two years bear no greater proportion to the knowledge requisite for federal legislation than one year does to the knowledge requisite for State legislation? The very statement of the question, in this form, suggests the answer that ought to be given to it. In a single State, the requisite knowledge relates to the existing laws which are uniform throughout the State, and with which all the citizens are more or less conversant; and to the general affairs of the State, which lie within a small compass, are not very diversified, and occupy much of the attention and conversation of every class of people. The great theatre of the United States presents a very different scene. The laws are so far from being uniform, that they vary in every State; whilst the public affairs of the Union are spread throughout a very extensive region, and are extremely diversified by the local affairs connected with them, and can with difficulty be correctly learnt in any other place than in the central councils to which a knowledge of them will be brought by the representatives of every part of the empire. Yet some knowledge of the affairs, and even of the laws, of all the States, ought to be possessed by the members from each of the States. How can foreign trade be properly regulated by uniform laws, without some acquaintance with the commerce, the ports, the usages, and the regulations of the different States? How can the trade between the different States be duly regulated, without some knowledge of their relative situations in these and other respects? How can taxes be judiciously imposed and effectually collected, if they be not accommodated to the different laws and local circumstances relating to these objects in the different States? How can uniform regulations for the militia be duly provided, without a similar knowledge of many internal circumstances by which the States are distinguished from each other? These are the principal objects of federal legislation, and suggest most forcibly the extensive information which the representatives ought to acquire. The other interior objects will require a proportional degree of information with regard to them. It is true that all these difficulties will, by degrees, be very much diminished. The most laborious task will be the proper inauguration of the government and the primeval formation of a federal code. Improvements on the first draughts will every year become both easier and fewer. Past transactions of the government will be a ready and accurate source of information to new members. The affairs of the Union will become more and more objects of curiosity and conversation among the citizens at large. And the increased intercourse among those of different States will contribute not a little to diffuse a mutual knowledge of their affairs, as this again will contribute to a general assimilation of their manners and laws. But with all these abatements, the business of federal legislation must continue so far to exceed, both in novelty and difficulty, the legislative business of a single State, as to justify the longer period of service assigned to those who are to transact it. A branch of knowledge which belongs to the acquirements of a federal representative, and which has not been mentioned is that of foreign affairs. In regulating our own commerce he ought to be not only acquainted with the treaties between the United States and other nations, but also with the commercial policy and laws of other nations. He ought not to be altogether ignorant of the law of nations; for that, as far as it is a proper object of municipal legislation, is submitted to the federal government.

And although the House of Representatives is not immediately to participate in foreign negotiations and arrangements, yet from the necessary connection between the several branches of public affairs, those particular branches will frequently deserve attention in the ordinary course of legislation, and will sometimes demand particular legislative sanction and co-operation. Some portion of this knowledge may, no doubt, be acquired in a man's closet; but some of it also can only be derived from the public sources of information; and all of it will be acquired to best effect by a practical attention to the subject during the period of actual service in the legislature.

There are other considerations, of less importance, perhaps, but which are not unworthy of notice. The distance which many of the representatives will be obliged to travel, and the arrangements rendered necessary by that circumstance, might be much more serious objections with fit men to this service, if limited to a single year, than if extended to two years. No argument can be drawn on this subject, from the case of the delegates to the existing Congress. They are elected annually, it is true; but their re-election is considered by the legislative assemblies almost as a matter of course. The election of the representatives by the people would not be governed by the same principle. A few of the members, as happens in all such assemblies, will possess superior talents; will, by frequent reelections, become members of long standing; will be thoroughly masters of the public business, and perhaps not unwilling to avail themselves of those advantages. The greater the proportion of new members, and the less the information of the bulk of the members the more apt will they be to fall into the snares that may be laid for them. This remark is no less applicable to the relation which will subsist between the House of Representatives and the Senate. It is an inconvenience mingled with the advantages of our frequent elections even in single States, where they are large, and hold but one legislative session in a year, that spurious elections cannot be investigated and annulled in time for the decision to have its due effect. If a return can be obtained, no matter by what unlawful means, the irregular member, who takes his seat of course, is sure of holding it a sufficient time to answer his purposes. Hence, a very pernicious encouragement is given to the use of unlawful means, for obtaining irregular returns. Were elections for the federal legislature to be annual, this practice might become a very serious abuse, particularly in the more distant States. Each house is, as it necessarily must be, the judge of the elections, qualifications, and returns of its members; and whatever improvements may be suggested by experience, for simplifying and accelerating the process in disputed cases, so great a portion of a year would unavoidably elapse, before an illegitimate member could be dispossessed of his seat, that the prospect of such an event would be little check to unfair and illicit means of obtaining a seat. All these considerations taken together warrant us in affirming, that biennial elections will be as useful to the affairs of the public as we have seen that they will be safe to the liberty of the people.

PUBLIUS.

Links to my other posts on The Federalist Papers so far:

Squatting: A Radical and Effective Calf Stretch

I have been inspired by pictures like the one above to use squatting as a radical and effective calf stretch. When I have time, I take 10 minutes before a walk to use a meditation app (in my case “10% Happier”) or read texts, while squatting with my back to the wall so I don’t fall over. As you can see, unlike the Hadza shown above, my heels don’t touch the ground, making it harder to balance without leaning against something. I hope to someday have my heels touch the ground, but it will probably take me years.

I should be clear that I am relaxing everything while doing this stretch. My heels are off the floor because the relevant calf muscles and tendons are still shorter than they should be, taking the Hadza as an indication of the original human design.

Doing mindfulness meditation goes well with doing this stretch because there is some mild discomfort. One part of mindfulness meditation is accepting mild discomfort; I would rather that the mild discomfort I am learning to accept is something useful like stretching my calves than something not particularly useful, like an itch.

You will want to start with much less than 10 minutes. To begin with, I did only a few minutes. Then I worked up to longer when it seemed a shorter time wasn’t challenging enough and I could go further.

I can really feel the difference after doing this stretch, which is much more conducive to multitasking than alternative, much less effective stretches.

Postscript: You can see that I have a goal of wearing out old clothes by wearing them on days I am not going up to campus :)

For annotated links to other posts on diet and health, see:

Analyzing the Great Depression Using Supply and Demand for the Monetary Base

This is a pair of videos I made for my “Intermediate Macro” students in the early days of the pandemic in 2020. They proved to me that teaching the money multiplier is 100% unnecessary. Indeed, on rereading Mankiw’s Macroeconomics Chapter 4 this 2022 Spring Semester, I realized I can cut it from the reading list entirely.

These two videos build on “Supply and Demand for the Monetary Base: How the Fed Currently Determines Interest Rates.” If you find that and these videos interesting, see also “Supply and Demand for the Monetary Base with a Cap on Reserves, a Zero Interest Rate on Reserves and a Negative Reverse Repo Rate.”

Sight: Enjoying Our 7-Dimensional Visual World

This post has many photos. But it is not about photography. It is about encouraging you to delight in all the sights we can see, even in a typical day.

One powerful Zen koan is the question “Who Am I?” In the Zen training I got from my Waking Up app, an answer I really like is “I am everything I see, hear and otherwise experience.” (See “Zen Koan Practice with Miles Kimball: 'I Don't Know What All This Is'.”) This is quite literally true in the sense that everything we experience directly has already been highly processed by the sensory parts of our brain (with inputs from other parts). It is also metaphorically true in the sense that evolution designed us to be connected to the world and to each other. Or as Max Ehrmann’s poem “Desiderata” has it, “You are a child of the universe no less than the trees and the stars.” Here is the full poem, which was extremely popular when I was young:

Go placidly amid the noise and the haste, and remember what peace there may be in silence. As far as possible, without surrender, be on good terms with all persons. Speak your truth quietly and clearly; and listen to others, even to the dull and the ignorant; they too have their story. Avoid loud and aggressive persons; they are vexatious to the spirit. If you compare yourself with others, you may become vain or bitter, for always there will be greater and lesser persons than yourself. Enjoy your achievements as well as your plans. Keep interested in your own career, however humble; it is a real possession in the changing fortunes of time. Exercise caution in your business affairs, for the world is full of trickery. But let this not blind you to what virtue there is; many persons strive for high ideals, and everywhere life is full of heroism. Be yourself. Especially do not feign affection. Neither be cynical about love; for in the face of all aridity and disenchantment, it is as perennial as the grass. Take kindly the counsel of the years, gracefully surrendering the things of youth. Nurture strength of spirit to shield you in sudden misfortune. But do not distress yourself with dark imaginings. Many fears are born of fatigue and loneliness. Beyond a wholesome discipline, be gentle with yourself. You are a child of the universe no less than the trees and the stars; you have a right to be here. And whether or not it is clear to you, no doubt the universe is unfolding as it should. Therefore be at peace with God, whatever you conceive Him to be. And whatever your labors and aspirations, in the noisy confusion of life, keep peace in your soul. With all its sham, drudgery and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be cheerful. Strive to be happy.

How do I get to 7 dimensions? The first is time, represented by the one photo at the top. This is a view out of my bedroom window in the “blue hour” between when it gets light and sunrise. Things look very different at that time of day than when the sun is up. And a whole new set of wonders becomes visible at night.

The next 3 dimensions, to give their local names, are north/south, east/west and high/low. That gives your position—your standpoint. Then there are two dimensions for the spherical angle in which you are looking. Finally narrow/wide focus gives a very different visual experience. That makes 7. And I am not even counting other dimensions such as color, which are less straight forward, but still possible to focus on or not.

The point is that there are riches of visual experience to be had—here the blessing of dimensionality rather than the curse of dimensionality.

In what follows, I’ll dump in the photos I took yesterday on a single walk. At 4 or 5 locations I looked in a set of 4 horizontal directions at 90-degree angles from each other and straight up and straight down at wide focus and at narrow focus. (Straight up was similar enough at the different locations I sometimes skipped that.) I think the high dimensionality of visual potential is clear from these photos. And even though I used an iphone to document these views, seeing them doesn’t require any technology at all.



(Note: This post is still under construction. More photos to come.)

Supply and Demand for the Monetary Base with a Cap on Reserves, a Zero Interest Rate on Reserves and a Negative Reverse Repo Rate

This post assumes you have read “Supply and Demand for the Monetary Base: How the Fed Currently Determines Interest Rates” and “How the Fed Could Use Capped Reserves and a Negative Reverse Repo Rate Instead of Negative Interest on Reserves.” This diagram combines the argument of those two posts. Note that in the situation diagrammed above the interest rate is negative (say an annual rate of -2%) even though the interest rate on reserves is zero.

In the graph above, the vertical portion of the demand for the monetary base is at the cap, which technically is on reserves, but is effectively on reserves plus currency because the cap on reserves declines 1 for 1 with any increase in currency and rises with any reduction in currency.

Two Terminological Issues

What is the Monetary Base in this Situation? In this system, it would make sense to measure the monetary base not as currency + reserves, but as currency + reserves + reverse repo-based loans to the Fed. If one insists on measuring the monetary base as currency + reserves, then the monetary base would be much larger in the daytime when reverse repo balances have turned back into reserves. (There is no cap on reserves in the daytime. Only at night.) So measuring the monetary base as currency + reserves + reverse repo-based loans to the Fed is equivalent to a daytime measure of currency + reserves.

By the way, I would like to get clear whether, currently, the monetary base is measured by its daytime value or its nighttime value. Reverse repo balances are already substantial.

What Should We Call Reserves Over the Cap? I have found myself tempted to call reserves over the cap “excess reserves,” which of course won’t do because “excess reserves” is already in use for reserves beyond required reserves. I propose “overcap reserves” for reserves beyond the cap that get routinely swept into the reverse-repo-based overnight facility every evening. “Overcap reserves” is short and pithy and gets the job done.

How People Differ from One Another Psychologically: IQ and the Big 5—Jordan Peterson

This particular class is a great introduction to IQ and to personality theory in psychology. Also, Jordan Peterson does a great job of skewering the twisting of psychology to tell people what they want to hear. In particular, (a) IQ is a very well-defined measure (with such strong correlations between different problem-solving skills that it looks to be dominated by one factor), (b) IQ does a great job of predicting important things and (c) very few psychological trait concepts add anything beyond IQ and the Big 5 personality traits or IQ and the Big 10 that come from splitting each of the Big 5 into 2 (although showing how things with other names relate to IQ and the Big 5 or Big 10 can be quite illuminating).

Highly recommended for economists who want to quickly learn key concepts from an area of psychology quite relevant to economics, but different from the social psychology that is most similar to experimental economics.

One conjecture: I suspect that measures of economic preference parameters do tend to be distinct from IQ and the Big 5. But if not, the way preference parameters could be predicted by IQ and the Big 5 would be quite interesting.

In Praise of Sildenafil

I’ll turn 62 in a few months. So I don’t feel too embarrassed about having mild erectile dysfunction. Fortunately, Sildenafil—better known under one of its marketing names, Viagra—works like a charm. Or more precisely, I should say it is like clockwork. (For me, Tadalafil—better known under its marketing name Cialis—does almost nothing. I’m sure it works great for many others.)

The reason I am saying this is that mentioning it out in the open might help you get over resistance to looking into some chemical help if you are beginning to need it. Everyone is different, but for many men, erectile dysfunction is a concomitant of aging, just like needing reading glasses. Others run into this relatively easily fixable trouble earlier.

When I teach financial theory, I compare diversifiable risk to a malady that can easily be cured. For many men, this is in that category. Don’t suffer needlessly. Try available potential remedies to see if they work for you.

One thing that led me to delay trying Sildenafil was the fear that it would interact badly with my low blood pressure. That turned out not to be a problem at all.

By the way, looking for an image to put at the top of this post revealed that a lot of research is being done to see if sildenafil can be useful in dealing with other maladies. Those research efforts make sense because it expands blood vessels, leading to more blood flow throughout the body, something that could be useful in many situation.

I’m glad for progress. Sildenafil was approved for treatment of erectile dysfunction only in 1998. So as an approved drug, it is less than a quarter century old. It’s good not to live in the bad old days.

For annotated links to other posts on diet and health, see:

The Federalist Papers #52: On the Franchise + Elections to the House of Representatives Every Two Years are Frequent Enough to Preserve Liberty

The Federalist Papers #52, written by either Alexander Hamilton or James Madison, only tries to accomplish two things. First, it argues it frames the constitutional requirement of having the same franchise in any state for the US House of Representatives as for the corresponding part of the state’s legislature as prevention against excessive strategic game-playing through manipulation of the franchise for the US House of Representatives by either the federal or state governments. There is a hint that reducing state power further than that by specifying the franchise did not seem feasible in 1787:

To have reduced the different qualifications in the different States to one uniform rule, would probably have been as dissatisfactory to some of the States as it would have been difficult to the convention.

Of course, later amendments to the US Constitution did specify the franchise more tightly (bullets added):

  • The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude— [from the 15th amendment]

  • The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex. [from the 19th amendment]

  • The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President or Vice President, for electors for President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of failure to pay poll tax or other tax. [from the 24th amendment]

  • The right of citizens of the United States, who are eighteen years of age or older, to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of age. [from the 26th amendment]

In addition, Section 2 of the 14th amendment imposes a penalty for limiting the franchise in other ways, such as by wealth:

… when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice-President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age,* and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State. [from the 14th amendment]

I think a constitutional amendment modernizing this idea would be very interesting. Suppose that instead of the number of representatives a state gets being determined by a population count, it was determined by the number of people who voted in the last few federal elections. Then every state has an incentive to increase voter participation. As a good complementary idea that might make this idea more appealing to Republicans, this could be coupled with regular audits of the people who voted to make sure that ineligible voters were not counted. Even if such an amendment couldn’t pass, I think those opposing it would look bad.

The second thing the Federalist Papers #52 tries to accomplish is to argue that every 2 years is often enough for elections to the US House of Representatives. The argument boils down to citing examples of many other governments in which the corresponding legislative body is subject to elections less often or equally often, and claiming that, by and large, these showed real concern for the opinions of the people. That brief summary captures the essence of this part of the Federalist Papers #52. The full text is below.

FEDERALIST NO. 52

The House of Representatives

From the New York Packet
Friday, February 8, 1788.

Author: Alexander Hamilton or James Madison

To the People of the State of New York:

FROM the more general inquiries pursued in the four last papers, I pass on to a more particular examination of the several parts of the government. I shall begin with the House of Representatives. The first view to be taken of this part of the government relates to the qualifications of the electors and the elected. Those of the former are to be the same with those of the electors of the most numerous branch of the State legislatures.

The definition of the right of suffrage is very justly regarded as a fundamental article of republican government. It was incumbent on the convention, therefore, to define and establish this right in the Constitution. To have left it open for the occasional regulation of the Congress, would have been improper for the reason just mentioned. To have submitted it to the legislative discretion of the States, would have been improper for the same reason; and for the additional reason that it would have rendered too dependent on the State governments that branch of the federal government which ought to be dependent on the people alone. To have reduced the different qualifications in the different States to one uniform rule, would probably have been as dissatisfactory to some of the States as it would have been difficult to the convention. The provision made by the convention appears, therefore, to be the best that lay within their option.

It must be satisfactory to every State, because it is conformable to the standard already established, or which may be established, by the State itself. It will be safe to the United States, because, being fixed by the State constitutions, it is not alterable by the State governments, and it cannot be feared that the people of the States will alter this part of their constitutions in such a manner as to abridge the rights secured to them by the federal Constitution. The qualifications of the elected, being less carefully and properly defined by the State constitutions, and being at the same time more susceptible of uniformity, have been very properly considered and regulated by the convention. A representative of the United States must be of the age of twenty-five years; must have been seven years a citizen of the United States; must, at the time of his election, be an inhabitant of the State he is to represent; and, during the time of his service, must be in no office under the United States. Under these reasonable limitations, the door of this part of the federal government is open to merit of every description, whether native or adoptive, whether young or old, and without regard to poverty or wealth, or to any particular profession of religious faith. The term for which the representatives are to be elected falls under a second view which may be taken of this branch. In order to decide on the propriety of this article, two questions must be considered: first, whether biennial elections will, in this case, be safe; secondly, whether they be necessary or useful. First. As it is essential to liberty that the government in general should have a common interest with the people, so it is particularly essential that the branch of it under consideration should have an immediate dependence on, and an intimate sympathy with, the people. Frequent elections are unquestionably the only policy by which this dependence and sympathy can be effectually secured. But what particular degree of frequency may be absolutely necessary for the purpose, does not appear to be susceptible of any precise calculation, and must depend on a variety of circumstances with which it may be connected. Let us consult experience, the guide that ought always to be followed whenever it can be found. The scheme of representation, as a substitute for a meeting of the citizens in person, being at most but very imperfectly known to ancient polity, it is in more modern times only that we are to expect instructive examples. And even here, in order to avoid a research too vague and diffusive, it will be proper to confine ourselves to the few examples which are best known, and which bear the greatest analogy to our particular case. The first to which this character ought to be applied, is the House of Commons in Great Britain. The history of this branch of the English Constitution, anterior to the date of Magna Charta, is too obscure to yield instruction. The very existence of it has been made a question among political antiquaries. The earliest records of subsequent date prove that parliaments were to SIT only every year; not that they were to be ELECTED every year. And even these annual sessions were left so much at the discretion of the monarch, that, under various pretexts, very long and dangerous intermissions were often contrived by royal ambition. To remedy this grievance, it was provided by a statute in the reign of Charles II. , that the intermissions should not be protracted beyond a period of three years. On the accession of William III. , when a revolution took place in the government, the subject was still more seriously resumed, and it was declared to be among the fundamental rights of the people that parliaments ought to be held FREQUENTLY. By another statute, which passed a few years later in the same reign, the term "frequently," which had alluded to the triennial period settled in the time of Charles II. , is reduced to a precise meaning, it being expressly enacted that a new parliament shall be called within three years after the termination of the former. The last change, from three to seven years, is well known to have been introduced pretty early in the present century, under on alarm for the Hanoverian succession. From these facts it appears that the greatest frequency of elections which has been deemed necessary in that kingdom, for binding the representatives to their constituents, does not exceed a triennial return of them. And if we may argue from the degree of liberty retained even under septennial elections, and all the other vicious ingredients in the parliamentary constitution, we cannot doubt that a reduction of the period from seven to three years, with the other necessary reforms, would so far extend the influence of the people over their representatives as to satisfy us that biennial elections, under the federal system, cannot possibly be dangerous to the requisite dependence of the House of Representatives on their constituents. Elections in Ireland, till of late, were regulated entirely by the discretion of the crown, and were seldom repeated, except on the accession of a new prince, or some other contingent event. The parliament which commenced with George II. was continued throughout his whole reign, a period of about thirty-five years. The only dependence of the representatives on the people consisted in the right of the latter to supply occasional vacancies by the election of new members, and in the chance of some event which might produce a general new election.

The ability also of the Irish parliament to maintain the rights of their constituents, so far as the disposition might exist, was extremely shackled by the control of the crown over the subjects of their deliberation. Of late these shackles, if I mistake not, have been broken; and octennial parliaments have besides been established. What effect may be produced by this partial reform, must be left to further experience. The example of Ireland, from this view of it, can throw but little light on the subject. As far as we can draw any conclusion from it, it must be that if the people of that country have been able under all these disadvantages to retain any liberty whatever, the advantage of biennial elections would secure to them every degree of liberty, which might depend on a due connection between their representatives and themselves. Let us bring our inquiries nearer home. The example of these States, when British colonies, claims particular attention, at the same time that it is so well known as to require little to be said on it. The principle of representation, in one branch of the legislature at least, was established in all of them. But the periods of election were different. They varied from one to seven years. Have we any reason to infer, from the spirit and conduct of the representatives of the people, prior to the Revolution, that biennial elections would have been dangerous to the public liberties? The spirit which everywhere displayed itself at the commencement of the struggle, and which vanquished the obstacles to independence, is the best of proofs that a sufficient portion of liberty had been everywhere enjoyed to inspire both a sense of its worth and a zeal for its proper enlargement This remark holds good, as well with regard to the then colonies whose elections were least frequent, as to those whose elections were most frequent Virginia was the colony which stood first in resisting the parliamentary usurpations of Great Britain; it was the first also in espousing, by public act, the resolution of independence.

In Virginia, nevertheless, if I have not been misinformed, elections under the former government were septennial. This particular example is brought into view, not as a proof of any peculiar merit, for the priority in those instances was probably accidental; and still less of any advantage in SEPTENNIAL elections, for when compared with a greater frequency they are inadmissible; but merely as a proof, and I conceive it to be a very substantial proof, that the liberties of the people can be in no danger from BIENNIAL elections. The conclusion resulting from these examples will be not a little strengthened by recollecting three circumstances. The first is, that the federal legislature will possess a part only of that supreme legislative authority which is vested completely in the British Parliament; and which, with a few exceptions, was exercised by the colonial assemblies and the Irish legislature. It is a received and well-founded maxim, that where no other circumstances affect the case, the greater the power is, the shorter ought to be its duration; and, conversely, the smaller the power, the more safely may its duration be protracted. In the second place, it has, on another occasion, been shown that the federal legislature will not only be restrained by its dependence on its people, as other legislative bodies are, but that it will be, moreover, watched and controlled by the several collateral legislatures, which other legislative bodies are not. And in the third place, no comparison can be made between the means that will be possessed by the more permanent branches of the federal government for seducing, if they should be disposed to seduce, the House of Representatives from their duty to the people, and the means of influence over the popular branch possessed by the other branches of the government above cited. With less power, therefore, to abuse, the federal representatives can be less tempted on one side, and will be doubly watched on the other.

PUBLIUS.

Links to my other posts on The Federalist Papers so far:

Ruchir Agarwal and Miles Kimball on Negative Interest Rates and Inflation—IMF Podcasts

Here is the summary for the podcast shown above:

Everyone feels the pinch when inflation is on the rise and so the pressure on central banks to manage inflation rates has grown exponentially in recent weeks. In this first podcast of a two-part series on inflation, distinguished economists Miles Kimball and Ruchir Agarwal discuss how a robust negative interest rate policy can help central banks better control inflation and stabilize the economy.

Here are other ways you can listen to this podcast:

Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/miles-kimball-ruchir-agarwal-on-inflation-part-1-negative/id1029134681?i=1000556697465Libsyn: https://imfpodcast.libsyn.com/miles-kimball-ruchir-agarwal-on-inflation-part-1-negative-interest-rates

Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/episode/5JPi2ZPcp8lJAdTWiguaol?si=be381b1b43bd419d

Amazon Music: https://music.amazon.com/podcasts/36c8cd65-f126-407c-be90-2cbf7d89c334/episodes/c0de9ddc-c79b-4d86-b209-791e40a5404b/imf-podcasts-miles-kimball-ruchir-agarwal-on-inflation-part-1-negative-interest-rates

SoundCloud: https://soundcloud.com/imf-podcasts/miles-kimball-ruchir-agarwal

Google Podcasts: https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cDovL2ltZnBvZGNhc3QuaW1mcG9kY2FzdHMubGlic3lucHJvLmNvbS9yc3M

IMF.org (the link on the image above): https://www.imf.org/en/News/Podcasts/All-Podcasts/2022/04/08/kimball-agarwal-inflation-part-1


The summary for Part 2 is:

Most people and virtually all businesses now use electronic money for their transactions, yet central banks are still dealing with what's known among economists as the paper currency problem, which limits central banks' ability to use deep negative rates to fight recessions. In this second episode of a two-part series on inflation, economists Miles Kimball and Ruchir Agarwal discuss how fully committing to an electronic money standard would allow central banks to break the zero lower bound associated with paper currency and help them to fight both inflation and recessions more effectively, including by lowering the inflation target.

Here are the links for Part 2:

Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/ruchir-agarwal-and-miles-kimball-on-electronic-money/id1029134681?i=1000557514550

Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/episode/2MlYrqXAsJK9aiJj2gENoS?si=03b118c8d3ba4c10

Libsyn: https://imfpodcast.libsyn.com/ruchir-agarwal-and-miles-kimball-on-electronic-money-and-inflation

SoundCloud: https://soundcloud.com/imf-podcasts/ruchir-agarwal-and-miles

Google Podcasts: https://bit.ly/3uEJACU

IMF.org: https://www.imf.org/en/News/Podcasts/All-Podcasts/2022/04/13/inflation-part-2

The Future Promise of Heirloom Fruit

Link to the “Peach Varieties Guide” shown above. There are a large number of known varieties of peaches.

One of my students asked me, partly in jest, if I had any entrepreneurial ideas for getting rich. I said I thought I had one. Our culture is gradually getting clear that sugar is very, very bad for you. And at some point people will realize that the sugar in fruit is a problem, too. My prediction is that, 20 years from now, low-sugar varieties of fruit will be a thing, and that getting in early in growing and distributing low-sugar varieties of fruit could be a good business move.

My quick summary about fruit is that the sugar in it is quite bad, and the other stuff in fruit is really good for you. So for health, what we need is low-sugar fruit. And it is easy for a grower to both select low-sugar varieties and to breed fruit to have even lower levels of sugar.

Because, commercially, only a few varieties of fruit dominate the market, everything else, by count almost all varieties of edible fruit, count as “heirloom fruit.” Because the market so far has selected for and bred varieties of fruit with high levels of sugar, and made those varieties especially common in stores, many heirloom varieties have lower levels of sugar than the varieties in the store. (Of course, the most popular heirloom varieties could be exactly those that have even higher levels of sugar than those in the store, but say are harder to grow.)

Even among varieties that are easily available commercially, there can be big differences in sugar content. For an example, see “Nutritionally, Not All Apple Varieties Are Alike.”

People not only should start caring about the sugar in fruit, I think that they will. Right now, the myth is that sugar in fruit is innocent. That is a pleasant illusion that will persist for a while, but is bound to crumple under the weight of its implausibility within a few years. Then interest in low-sugar fruit will pick up.

For annotated links to other posts on diet and health, see: