Welcome to DC, Foodies

Via Treehugger:

CBS News Hot Sheet is reporting that Neil Hamilton, an adviser to USDA head Tom Vilsack, was heard saying:

I believe that by this summer there will be a garden – another garden, a vegetable garden – on the White House lawn...I believe the Obamas are committed to that. It’s a big idea, and its gonna happen. During the campaign, going around shaking peoples’ hands, he never got sick once. He was eating well, and it could have to do with having an organic chef with him. This is someone who 'gets' nutrition.

I've got news for you--anyone hoping to garden in DC this year needs to be started already (said smugly as I've turned a majority of my garden space already). And, unless the Park Service has been tending the lawn organically, it will be years before the Obamas can have an organic garden, at least one warranting certification by USDA.

Obama and PART

Some hints of direction on PART from Government Executive:

In addition to eliminating redundant or wasteful payments and programs, the Obama administration plans to "fundamentally reconfigure" the Program Assessment Rating Tool, a questionnaire the Bush administration used to determine which federal programs were effective.

The summary said Obama will address criticisms of PART by opening up the "insular performance measurement process" to the public, Congress and outside experts. The administration pledged to eliminate "ideological performance goals and replace them with goals Americans care about and that are based on congressional intent and feedback from the people served by government programs."

A Clarification from Chris Clayton

At DTN, Chris clarifies that Obama's proposal doesn't cap payments based on Adjusted Gross Income, but on Gross Income. Most of the articles I've seen weren't that specific.

This is going to be fascinating. There's a big difference. Sen. Chambliss and Sen. Johanns (former Sec of USDA) had a go-round on this early in the 2008 farm bill fight (if I recall correctly). Let the bloodletting begin--us geezers need the entertainment (think of Imperial Rome and the gladiators).

(See here for Sen. Johann's release, per Chris.)

[Updated] I'm not sure of the logic here. Seems to me the AGI figure is better than a gross figure so the only thing going with gross gets you is the appeal of hitting the big guy, or at least someone who sounds bigger. That's not a good basis for policy making.

The Fewer the Farmers, the Bigger the Outlook Conference

Here's the fancy program for the annual Agricultural Outlook Forum now underway in DC. (I did a quick search for "organic" in the program and got no hits, but "sustainable" got 5. :-) ) It's grown much more elaborate than when it was in the Jefferson Auditorium in the South Building.

Shout out to Charles Cunningham, who keeps going though he's getting up there. (He retired long before I did and now has his own firm: Charles V. Cunningham, President,
Cunningham Associates, Mineral, Virginia. He must have 55 years in the cotton business. A nice guy.

Obama Budget on Direct Payments

From the budget, page 48:

• Reduce direct Payments. As part of an effort to transition large farms from direct
payments provided to owners of base acres to increased income from revenue derived from emerging markets for environmental services, the President’s Budget phases out direct payments over three years to farmers with sales revenue of more than $500,000 annually. Presently, direct payments are made to even large producers regardless of crop prices, losses, or whether the land is still under production. The program was introduced in the 1996 Farm Bill as a temporary payment scheduled to expire, but was included in the 2002 and 2008 Farm Bills. The President wants to maintain a strong safety net for farm families and beginning farmers while encouraging fiscal responsibility. Large farmers are well positioned to replace those payments with alternate sources of income from emerging markets for environmental services, such as carbon sequestration, renewable energy production, and providing clean air, clean water, and wildlife habitat. USDA will increase its research and analytical capabilities and conduct Government-wide coordination activities to encourage the establishment of markets for these ecosystem services

I Wonder, Was It an Error

From the President's budget, a note of an error being corrected:

The President supports the implementation of a $250,000* commodity program
payment limit, which will help ensure that payments are made only to those that most need them. To spur the development of small business and value-added agriculture in rural America, the President’s Budget provides $61 million for five Rural Development programs: the rural microentrepreneur assistance program, rural cooperative development grants, value-added producer grants, grants to minority producers, and cooperative research agreements.

* This page corrects an amount erroneously included in the printed
version of A New Era of Responsibility [Note: because the footnote "1" doesn't copy over, I replaced it with "*".

I wonder what was the figure in the print version.

The Amish and the Environment

Seeking Simplicity is a blog by a mother who has moved into a former Amish home and is living mostly as they do (no electricity, wood stoves). It's partly "back to basics", but she had an interesting post here musing on the Amish and the environment. It includes the observation that there's an impact on the forests and this:

"Although we may think of the Amish as earth friendly, it is not always the case. Many whom we have met do have the belief that the land is to use –not that we should care for and cherish the gift. Thus, as we have noticed due to snow melt, piles of garbage and unsafe environmental practices litter our land."

Bipartisan Opposition to Obama on Direct Payments

From the Washington Times:

"We'll have to see what specifically the president is talking about, but we just finished the farm bill last year, and I don't think we'll open it up," said Rep. Collin C. Peterson, Minnesota Democrat and chairman of the House Agriculture Committee.

Likewise, the ranking Republican on the Senate Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry Committee, said the farm bill, which lasts for five years, "should not be changed midstream."

"I believe it is premature to make any sweeping changes to the makeup of the farm safety net before we have even had the chance to implement the current farm bill," said Sen. Saxby Chambliss of Georgia.

Will USDA Join "Virtual USA"?

Federal Computer Week has an article on a meeting between DHS and some Southern states, looking to share geo-spatial data:

"Officials say the goal is to make local- and state-owned geospatial data interoperable and usable across jurisdictions, with non-federal authorities maintaining control over the data and deciding what data to share.

The program was inspired by the success that Alabama had in using information gathered at a local level to aid first responders. The recent meeting was hosted by Alabama’s Homeland Security Department, which created Virtual Alabama. [Google link here and Alabama link here]That is a system built on Google Earth Enterprise software that allows authorities to create data mashups by quickly pulling together information from an array of sources across the state’s 67 counties and make it available to first responders. "

As usual, I'm torn between the thought some top-down direction would be a whole lot more efficient and recognition that, in the current state of today's weak federalized government, this sort of initiative is the best we can expect.

Why Good Government Fails

Humans are self-interested. For example, the Bush Administration had some touted initiatives. One was E-government, trying to make better use of the Internet in government operations through various efforts (i.e., usa.gov, regulations.gov, etc.) Another was PART --which stands for Program Assessment Rating Tool. Both were well-intentioned, although I've had my reservations with both.

But what happens--Pres. Bush and his people at the White House have a great idea. So they call up the departments and say: "do A, B, and C".

The department says: "Sounds like a great idea, do we get any money for it?"

Bush: "No, make it happen using the funds you have available".

Department: "Uh, okay, you're the boss"

House Appropriations Committee says: "Why do you need these dollars?"

Department: "Uh, we had to devote x man-years and $y to the President's great ideas"

House Appropriations Committee says: "But that wasn't our great idea"

All of the above is triggered by this note in the House Approp. Committee's statement on the appropriations bill for 2009 covering USDA:

"There is concern that agencies are being required, after appropriations have been enacted for other purposes, to support E-Gov and PART studies. This diminishes, delays, or eliminates the implementation of the activities for which funds were provided. Thirty days prior to any centrally determined charges being applied to any USDA agency that are different from those amounts displayed in the budget justification materials, the Department must submit a detailed explanation' to the committees of the amounts assessed and the method for determining diose amounts. "