Don't Trust Mid-level Bureaucrats

The power of the bureaucrat who is politically-savvy and can forge connections to Congress is shown in Eric Lipton's story this weekend.

It's a version of the "iron triangle" (which I first heard used about a North Korean/Chinese area in the Korean War) where private interests, bureaucrats in the executive, and Congress types scratch each other's backs. What's unusual in the story is that the DOD bureaucrat was lower in the bureaucracy and more enterprising than one normally encounters. But the bureaucrat got dollars appropriated for programs that mostly weren't useful, except in keeping his bit of the bureaucracy going; the private companies got money, and the Congress types (Senators) brought home the bacon for the home folks. It's the sort of thing that McCain means in his attacks on earmarks.

Pure Sentiment--Cornell Photo

See here.

It's a nice photo.

Implementation (of FArm Bill)

I've commented on how long it takes to implement programs. Of course, USDA does much better. :-) (not really, I'm doing an oranges and apples comparison). Here's their report on implementing the 2008 farm bill. It makes a difference whether you're implementing a brand new program, or just an iteration of a program you've implemented before. It also makes a difference if the agency is used to implementing new programs.

Why the Amish Aren't a Role Model

I've done a fair amount of posting on the Amish, much of it based on Donald Kraybill's work. They seem, as a commenter on an earlier post said, to be a possible model for an alternative agriculture. Possibly, but I respectfully disagree.

There are many attractive aspects to the Amish way of life. The tight-knit community, the sharing of burdens, the evocation of a slower, more peaceful way of life, a way of life close to that which I experienced before 1951 (when we convert from horses to a tractor).

But the key to the Amish is they want to be "off-the-grid", not of "this world", outside the market economy. Their way of life is part and parcel of their religion, which ironically gives them advantages in competing with capitalistic, free market-oriented farmers. Consider:

• no health insurance. They do cooperate with modern medicine; see this article in the Smithsonian magazine about a doctor and the genetic diseases to which Amish and Mennonites are susceptible due to in-breeding. If memory serves, they paid for the treatment of the children wounded in the schoolhouse shooting.
  
• no social security. They rely on the close-knit community and the large families to take care of the children
• no college tuition. They don't go to college.
• no real estate loans. Their new settlements pay cash for land.
• no utility bills (except kerosene) No cable, no electricity. Well water and septic tanks.
  

All this is in addition to the better known self-sufficiency in food, shelter, and clothing.

So, based on these facts, the Amish can afford to farm small, farm solar (in Pollan's new phraseology.) They simply don't need the cash flow of a big, industrialized farm. I remain to be convinced there's a "middle way" (to re-use a term from the early '50's for a different purpose) between John Phipps and the Amish.

My mantra: the way you farm, the way you live, and the way you eat are all intertwined.

McCain Opposes Some Farm Programs

Dan Morgan outlines his position, not just anti-ethanol, but also "market access" (trying to find export markets).

Evaluating Government

Government Executive has a piece on Bush's PART (Program Assessment Rating Tool),with comments by academics. Bottomline for me: programs are hard to evaluate, particularly because many represent an imperfect blending of different ideas and goals held by different sponsors in Congress (and the Administration). Which was/is our goal in Iraq?

And the fact that neither Congress nor the public buy in to the evaluations is critical. Bureaucrats in an agency will respond to what the appropriate Congressman wants, not to what is written on PART.

Who, Me Biased?

Not at all. We must not have the full picture of Michael Pollan's garden here. It looks rather small, certainly nothing to match his grandfather's garden, described here, in a piece I like rather better than his more recent work.

Of course, Pollan must be busy flying around the country promoting his books, too busy to maintain the year-round garden that must be possible in California. I'd hate to have his travel schedule over the next weeks, or his carbon foot-print.

Interesting Posts

As I continue to try to catch up, let me note aspects of some posts that caught my eye:

• Jennifer M in Ethicurean on an Ohio meeting about preserving farmland quotes David Kline, an Amish farmer: "Though the Amish have long been seen as old-fashioned and too low-tech to be emulated widely, their methods work: from building soil fertility through the use of manure, to promoting advances in simple but efficient technologies (European-designed plows, horse power, small-scale operations). “There is no such thing as post-agricultural society,” he warned, and farming can provide job security if we remember that the goal is “honest living” and to leave the land a better place for our children. “We’re the last people to advocate you should do it our way,” he noted, but with a twinkling, self-deprecating smile, he added, “But it works.” He rounded out his comments with a call for diversity in farming — in ideas as well as in crops — and for an emphasis on community."
• a summary of a panel in Ethicurean on the future.
  
• a reference in Ethicurean to the blueprint. (Most interesting, as it was dated in 2003 and focused on the low prices for US farm products in 1996-2003 whereas other writers more recently have focused on the high food prices of recent years. It's one problem of agriculture, indeed of economics in general, you come up with a good theory and turn your head and it's been challenged by data.)
  

A Comment on NYTimes Magazine Issue

I found this post in the Daily Yonder to be right on. [ed--even though he likes a lot of Pollan's ideas--Yes].

Bill Bishop criticizes the issue for ignoring, mostly, farmers. I don't think farmers have any direct line to wisdom, even when it comes to agriculture, but I doubt an issue on movies, or novels, or even auto-making, would so minimize the role of farmers.

(Note: I should hat-tip someone, but I moved too fast and lost the reference.)

Bureaucrats Prepare for Transition

And get advice here on handling the initial meetings with the appointees. I hope, vainly, the new President's people don't come to office suspicious of both what's happened the last 8 years and the career bureaucrats who implemented it. They've got too much to do to worry about the past.