What can the AALS do for New Orleans?

My colleague Richard McAdams has a suggestion I agree with and wanted to broadcast.  The AALS has a convention scheduled for early January, 2006 in N.O.  Right now it is still planning to go ahead there. Since this seems quite optimistic based on current forecasts, I assume they're contemplating another site.

One vital thing that would help New Orleans get on its feet, and get jobs for those who most need them, is to get its convention business restarted.  So Richard and I want to suggest to the AALS that the convention be delayed to such time as it can be held in New Orleans rather than relocated. I don't think that the fabric of time and space will be frayed in any way if law professors do their schmoozing in late spring or summer rather than January. 

My personal favorite time would be April 28-May 7 during the New Orleans Jazz & Heritage Festival (I hope the "nojazzfest" in the web address is not a prediction). What better way to welcome this city back?

If a 2006 meeting is not feasible in N.O. until very late in the year, so it would crowd the 2007 meeting, then Richard suggests holding the 2007 convention in N.O.  I agree with this too.

But then what about the 2006 meeting?  Richard suggests that the AALS cancel the convention and that all member schools donate the resources that would have supported the 2006 convention to Katrina relief. 

I'm all for donating to Katrina relief, but when I first heard this suggestion the economist in me rebelled at what I saw as a framing device -- i.e., the decision to donate rationally shouldn't turn on convention expenses.  But, practically, framing does happen. So if this results in more hurricane relief than would otherwise happen without foregoing better uses of the money, then the idea makes sense.

Comments?

Comments

[Kate Litvak]

The problem with the donate-your-AALS-expenses proposal is not just the randomness of the amount, but the identity of givers. Law schools are in the excellent position to provide in-kind disaster relief (by admitting displaced law students), but they surely have no competitive advantage over individuals in providing in-cash relief. If the faculties, students, and alums want to donate money, they can well do so without first channeling their donations through their law schools and incurring significant transaction costs in the process.

And if law schools can painlessly pay the expenses of the AALS convention while not attending it, perhaps we should hold conventions less often and spend the money on research and teaching.

[Larry Ribstein]

I just wasn't clear enough -- I agree that the irrationality goes to who is giving and how much. In a perfect world, in your view (I'm not taking a position on this here), there would be no AALS conference. Then law schools would spend their resources on research, and law professors would donate to hurricane relief. In our real world, which takes the politics of large organizations into account, without this proposal resources might be spent on a convention. In this same real world, under our proposal, these resources, which ideally might be better spent on research, will instead be spent on hurricane relief, which would still be better than a conference, in all of our views.

[Kate Litvak]

The politics of large organizations is exactly why I *don’t* want to allow schools to spend research/teaching funds on someone’s pet projects – especially the kind of pet projects where schools have no competitive advantage over individuals.

If a school values the AALS conference more than the next best *academic* use of the conference costs, it should participate in the conference. But if it values non-academic use of the marginal dollar more than its academic use, perhaps it should stop asking for a taxpayer/alum subsidies – until it gets down to the point where the marginal dollar has a higher academic than non-academic value.

By the way, endless love to the AALS conference. Since I was invited to speak there, how could it not be great?