Not Surprising, Republican Judges See White Collar Crime as Less Serious

The Post reports on a study of how judges from different parties analyze crimes and sentence criminals here-- NOTED WITH INTEREST:

"Federal judges appointed by Republicans give tougher sentences on street crime, whereas Democratic appointees take a stricter view of white-collar offenses."

The summary could be reversed, as I did in the title. It's the usual problem with many two-sided issues: do you say boys are doing worse in school or girls are doing better in school? It's a reminder of the importance of context and framing.

FEMA and DHS

George Buddy asked about FEMA's proper role, specifically its relation to DHS. I think a part of the problems we saw with Katrina were caused by the DHS reorganization. There's no doubt that reporting lines got confused--Brown felt loyalty to the people who bumped him up from FEMA deputy director to DHS undersecretary, not to Chertoff who arrived later. When Brown had a hot potato, he turned to his friends, not to his new boss. Chertoff, who was relying on Brown to alert him to problems, had his focus elsewhere. Just as we didn't realize before 9/11 that bin Laden could mount an attack much deadlier than any previous one, he (and we) didn't realize that Mother Nature could also mount an attack more devastating than prior hurricanes.

It also seems clear that the Bush administration after Sept. 11 said that the "war" on terrorism was more important than disaster preparations. Congress agreed and pushed the DHS reorg. There was a smokescreen of rhetoric whereby the policymakers tried to convince themselves that DHS would be a more efficient use of resources. There's some logic to this--the response to a natural disaster and an attack will often be similar and the coordination with state and local first responders must use the same infrastructure. But the reality, as any experienced bureaucrat knew, was that creating DHS would cause us to be less prepared over the next few years, both for disaster and terror, than the alternative. The truth is any reorganization uses so much bureaucratic energy that the sum is significantly less than the whole for several years. So we won't know for another 10 or 20 years whether there's a net improvement or not.

Suppose Mr. Negroponte came to the President and said: "Sir, our enemy has dispatched a team that has the capability of killing a thousand people and destroying 50 billion dollars worth of property. Current intelligence shows that the team is likely headed for New Orleans and has a 50 percent chance of carrying out their mission." What would Bush do? He certainly wouldn't do what he did the end of August. (Or maybe I should say--he would do something, not nothing.)

The First Amendment Doesn't Apply Everywhere

This was an amazing story in this morning's Post--read the whole thing.

Policing Porn Is Not Part of Job Description:

"Two uniformed men strolled into the main room of the Little Falls library in Bethesda one day last week and demanded the attention of all patrons using the computers. Then they made their announcement: The viewing of Internet pornography was forbidden.

The men looked stern and wore baseball caps emblazoned with the words 'Homeland Security.' "

...[further on] The sexual harassment policy forbids the "display of offensive or obscene printed or visual material." But in a library, which is both a public arena and a county workplace, the U.S. Constitution trumps Montgomery's rules.

I was struck by the implication in the last sentence that the Constitution doesn't always and everywhere trump Montgomery County's rules. But I guess it's true--any employer can impose some restrictions not applicable in a public area.

[The men were employees of the Montgomery county Homeland Security Department trying to enforce a ban on accessing porn through government owned equipment.]

Participation in Organizations--Hirschman

I've previously blogged on Albert Hirschman's "Exit, Voice, and Loyalty : Responses to Decline in Firms, Organizations, and States". I just got through commenting on Caleb McDaniel's blog
using Hirschman's schema in connection with the abolitionists.

There's another aspect, particularly with voluntary organizations, like alumni associations/college trustee elections and homeowner's associations: how many people have to participate to make the election/vote binding on the whole? I just got a package from the Reston Association (the closest thing Reston has to a government) changing the quorum requirement to 30 percent. My cluster association has been unable to get 10 percent participation in the annual meeting. I think Dartmouth is trying to reduce its quorum percentage. Hirschman would interpret all of these as saying "voice" is silent because the members are satisfied.

The Boomers Want Immortality

At least, that's how this web site strikes me, although one could say the same thing of this blog.
FAQ - MemoryWiki:

"Think of the Future

Your experiences are the stuff of history, literally. You may think 'Who would be interested in my experiences of this or that? Lots of people were there, and everyone knows about what happened.' Well, that's true, for now. But all the people, like you, who are alive today and who bore witness to the significant events of our age, will pass on. Our collective memory -- yours, mine, all of ours -- will go into the great beyond with us, vanishing forever. Over the coming decade, century, and millenium, your experiences will slowly dissappear. The past, they say, is a foreign country -- distant, strange, often unknowable. Unless you have a map. Your memoirs, recorded and shared at MemoryWiki, are that map for future generations. Go ahead. Tell the future how it was to be alive now. Your children, childrens' children and all who follow will want to know. You've got a story. Make it history."

Ah, the Romance of the Past is Fading

From a comment to a Joel Achenbach posts--Achenblog: Daily Humor and Observations from Joel Achenbach: "The biggest cross-generational shock when my son became a Boy Scout was the ubiquity of propane camp stoves. It seems so few places allow open fires for cooking, that it has become a necessity."

I remember from childhood the romantic pictures of people around campfires, faces highlighted with the light from the fire. Not that I ever experienced that, although we did cook marshmallows once on sticks over a small fire in the yard. And it was standard practice to burn our paper trash (we lived in the country).

What's the romance in a propane stove?

The Collapsing Bubble

There seems to be agreement that the real estate bubble is collapsing. Here's an interesting site:
How Much Real Estate Can a Salary Buy? - New York Times

Factoids--in the DC area the percentage of income went from 17 to 24 from the late 90's to now. In upstate New York cities the percentage is still around 10 percent.

Tip of Hat to Rep. Tom Davis

I do my best not to compliment Republicans, but Rep. Davis (who once was my representative, before some redistricting) has done a good job as chair of the House Government Reform Committee, particularly in its report on Katrina. The Dems boycotted, saying it would be a partisan whitewash and the White House wasn't particularly cooperative, but the report has gotten respect in the mainstream media. It's perhaps noteworthy that the NYTimes didn't mention Davis' name in its discussion of the report. If I were a Rep, I'd cite it as bias. As a Dem, I'd say it's proof that Davis didn't grandstand.

Handling Future Katrinas--Ideas

As a bureaucrat and experienced Monday morning quarterback, I've some ideas on how FEMA/DHS should handle future disasters. First, I'd acquire ID packages--consisting of a digital camera and laptop with software to work with RFID ID bracelets. Each operative in the field would, as soon as possible (ideally when they first rescue people, etc.) snap digital pictures of the person, provide them with a RFID ID bracelet, and record a conversation with them (hopefully giving name, address, and similar info). The software would associate the ID bracelet to the picture and to the location, such data to be uploaded to a central database when wireless data communications are available.

[updated--published too fast] The recorded conversations could be transcribed into a database that could be matched against public information.

The bottomline is that as the bureaucracy kicks into gear with the provision of emergency help: grants, loans, shelter, whatever, the processing center can read the ID bracelet and match the person to the data in the database. This has many benefits:

1. Finding lost children and reuniting families--because everyone is in the database with some sort of identification (even if only 1-year infant found near X), people could be speedily reunited. That would save much effort and more emotional strain.
2. Avoiding fraud--while there could still be fraud it would remove the biggest causes of abuse in Katrina.
3. Providing information--you'd have a much faster flow of more accurate information as to the extent of the disaster and its impact. That means much better management of relief efforts.

Given the spread of digital equipment, the biggest problem is probably getting people together to agree on the standards for the bracelets, the picture, the recorded conversation, and the database.

1. 
   

The Gang That Couldn't Shoot Straight?

Sorry, I couldn't resist the Cheney story [the title is a reference to an old Jimmy Breslin book]. For a more sober reaction, read the Stephen Hunter take in the Post.