Maggie Gallagher

In all fairness, Maggie Gallagher was not "on the take" or if she was, so is Paul Krugman and every economist I know, including myself. I will guarantee you that almost every academic economist who writes an op-ed gets National Science Foundation grants. I wrote a letter to the editor on Social Security a few days ago. I did not disclose that several years ago I had received an NSF grant to research how much Social Security affects when people retire. It never occurred to me that this would be a conflict of interest. Because it isn't, for one thing. I wasn't being paid to write the op-ed, but to conduct research. Likewise, unlike Armstrong Williams, Gallagher was not being paid to write op-eds. She was paid to do work for the Bush Administration. That shouldn't preclude her ability to write op-eds. As for "she should have disclosed it," then that is holding her to a standard that no one is ever held to. As Gallagher writes

My first instinct is to say, no, Howard, I had no special obligation to disclose this information. I'm a marriage expert. I get paid to write, edit, research and educate on marriage. If a scholar or expert gets paid to do some work for the government, should he or she disclose that if he writes a paper, essay or op-ed on the same or similar subject? If this is the ethical standard, it is an entirely new standard.

I was not paid to promote marriage. I was paid to produce particular research and writing products (articles, brochures, presentations), which I produced. My lifelong experience in marriage research, public education and advocacy is the reason HHS hired me.

But the real truth is that it never occurred to me. On reflection, I think Howard is right. I should have disclosed a government contract when I later wrote about the Bush marriage initiative. I would have, if I had remembered it. My apologies to my readers.

This seems right on to me, except for the apology part. I just don't see the need to apologize.