Transparency in USDA

I've blogged on this before, but the Environmental Working Group has an article from the Salina Journal. The issue is the extent to which FSA/NRCS information is publicly available--the 2008 farm bill inserted a prohibition on releasing data:

From the end of the article:

"When we got wind this was going to be inserted without any debate, we heard from two camps in the FSA," Cook said. "One saying they didn't agree with it, and thought we ought to know -- while another side helped draft it."

The privacy provision was inserted in conference committee, after both the House and Senate had approved different versions of the bill. Conference committees generally work out compromises between those different versions, but can also insert new provisions, which Cook said is what happened in this case.

Although I don't always like EWG's stands, I'm in favor of transparency here. (Though, inconsistently, I don't like the idea of private entities making bucks by serving as middlemen with the government.)

So Much for the Powers of the USDA Secretary

This excerpt from Chris Clayton's post on Vilsack's hearing tells all:

Southern lawmakers from Ranking Member Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga., to Sen. Blanche Lincoln, D-Ark., and Sen. Thad Cochran, R-Miss., stressed to Vilsack that he needs to understand he represents all of agriculture. To that end, these senators emphasized that USDA right now has gone too far in writing rules for the farm bill that will adversely affect southern agriculture. Lincoln said USDA's rules are "completely out of the ballpark from what our intent was."

Bread and (Breast) Milk

From a New Yorker article on breast milk (author Jill LePore will take questions at the New Yorker site):

"(A brief history of food: when the rich eat white bread and buy formula, the poor eat brown bread and breast-feed; then they trade places.)"

How Government Changes

Ezra Klein discusses the background to Cass Sunstein's new post. What's interesting is over the course of 25-30 years it's become accepted on all sides that the President's OMB should have control over regulations. It's a common practice: one party does an innovation which the other attacks. But when the roles switch, the innovation starts to become more acceptable. Soon it becomes an established practice.

A Little Love for Comerford

Tom Philpott at Grist gives a little love to the existing White House eating arrangements, and chef. Nice to see.

Outstanding Conservationist--Could Her Child Follow?

Article on the outstanding conservationist in Minnesota. She's been farming 53 years and milks 32 cows. I wonder, though, whether she's a good role model for the future. Could the next generation make their living * on 250 acres of dairy beef/calf operation?

*"living" defined as a modern life, frugal but with many mod cons, and the possibility of college for the kids.

What the article doesn't say is how many years she's been getting up at 4 a.m. to milk those cows and who's handling the milking while she's gadding about in the big city of St. Paul, MN.

Here a Scam, There a Scam, Everywhere a Scam

Though this doesn't rank with Mr. Madoff's scam, Treehugger reports at least one manufacturer of small wind turbines grossly exaggerated its potential output.

Just a reminder that people are con artists in every walk of life, from Wall Street to Green Street.

Bush's Place in History

Jacob Weisberg at Slate comes not to praise George W but to bury him, saying invading Iraq, the global war on terror, and the current financial mess are his three worst decisions but that we don't know that much about the inner workings of the administration. This isn't an outlier--there seems to be general agreement Bush is a bad President, and always will be such.

Not that, as a firm Democrat, I particularly like GWB, but I've lived too long to agree. Harry Truman left office with terrible ratings, but he's now very highly regarded, so things can change. A more recent example: Mr. Greenspan retired not so long ago with high praise from everyone, except for a few who thought he might have followed his irrational exuberance speech in the 1990's with some cold water on the high tech bubble. Now he's being blamed for the current mess.

The reputations of many of our presidents have fluctuated over the years. I'd suggest Bush's reputation will improve if:

• there is a significant terror attack on US soil (I don't think it will occur)
• Afghanistan stabilizes (in my view Bush's failure to get an exit strategy there is his worst failing)
• Iraq muddles through (the Korean "police action" was a big deal in Truman's rep as left, but now it looks okay). If 30 years from now Iraq is where South Korea is now, Bush will benefit, regardless of how flawed his administration was in (not) planning for the post-war.
• things like No Child Left Behind, the AIDS initiative in Africa, Medicare drug benefits, or other initiatives became seen as significant milestones. (Truman's integration of the armed forces seems larger today than it did then; Ike's interstate highways loom larger today than they seemed in 1960.)

Conversely, I can't imagine much which would hurt his reputation more than it is now.

Bottomline--he doesn't have anywhere to go but up.

A Kid with a Passion: Gorilla

The National Zoo welcomed a baby gorilla this weekend. The Post story included this sentence:

District resident Max Block, 10 -- who is so enamored of gorillas that he raised $2,500 at a lemonade stand this summer for a preservation group -- had been watching the drama unfold for much of the weekend. He arrived to see the baby Saturday, just a few hours after it was born

That's a lot of lemonade.

Tight Budgets

Chris Clayton at DTN has an interview with the President of the Farm Bureau predicting farm programs will face tight budgets. That, in my opinion, is bad news for the supporters of organic farming, sustainable agriculture, etc., simply because conventional ag has a stronger presence on the appropriations committees than they do.