The New York Times has provided an exciting opportunity for Peter Orszag, who has been a guest columnist producing at least four articles about the economy from September 2010. Each subject matter, which aimed to inform the paper’s readers about a different matter that the government was facing, showed the expert’s perspective on what Congress should do to ensure economic prosperity for the nation as a whole.

In the first article, published at the beginning of September, Orszag focused on the dangers of the deficit, and why it was important to reinforce tax cuts from the Obama’s predecessor, George W Bush, for a further two years. He also discussed the advantages to this passionately and in more detail, saying: "Higher taxes now would crimp consumer spending, further depressing the already inadequate demand for what firms are capable of producing at full tilt."

Thanks to Orszag’s expertise as the Director for the Office of Management and Budget in the Obama administration, it’s hard to find an expert better-placed for such cutting analysis than Orszag.

The second article in The New York Times, which was also published in September, instead focused on how increasing healthcare costs were affecting the level of investment that state government were placing into higher education. This meant that many parents were not realizing how the quality of their children’s future in colleges and universities were being affected by the spiraling costs of Medicaid. The article was called ‘A Health Care Plan for Colleges’, and also uncovered exclusive research that was conducted in association with Tom Kane.

In the article, he said: "Governments’ general support for higher education 25 years ago was nearly 50 percent greater than state spending on Medicaid. That relationship has now flipped: Medicaid spending is about 50 percent greater than support for higher education."

The third article focused on medical malpractice, and how a golden opportunity to reform the laws that currently make doctors susceptible to lawsuits had been missed. Explaining why this was important, Peter Orszag explained in his guest column: "Too many doctors order unnecessary tests and treatments only because they believe it will protect them from a lawsuit."

To conclude, the last article mainly endeavored to talk about how the Republicans were against part of the healthcare reform measures that actually had the opportunity to save money – reducing the level of impact that initiatives such as Medicare had on the deficit.