Self-Destroying Blog Post

Recursion is a way to get into trouble.  Chris Blattman offers good advice to aspiring Phd candidates, then says:

"Paradoxically, that might make all the above advice now strategically sub-optimal."

It makes me trust his judgment more.

Who Should Change the Law on Social Issues?

An excerpt from Stephen Hayward's discussion at Powerline of gay marriage:

"First, the one thing to be said in favor of the New York decision is that it was done by a vote of the legislature, a politically accountable branch of government, rather than imposed by judicial fiat through a strained construction of the “Cosmic Justice clause” “Equal Protection” clause of the 14^th Amendment.  New York’s path is how democracies ought to enact social changes of this kind, and indeed this is how most conservatives and libertarians have been saying the matter should be resolved for some time now, which explains the relative quiescence of many conservatives about New York’s vote"

 I suppose many would agree with that. It is, however, interesting to note slavery was abolished in some Northern states by court decision, not by legislative action.

Updates on Pigford II

Sustainable Ag has a post and links to a news release from the Federation of Southern Cooperatives on the progress of Pigford II.

Followup on ACRSIP

FarmWeeknow has an interview with Mr. Scuse on the streamlining of acreage reports. (ACRSIP).  Not much different than my previous post on the subject, except for this:

The streamlining project is not intended to reduce USDA offices (there currently are 2,241 nationwide) or personnel, according to Scuse. Farmers who do not embrace technology still will be able to report crop information in person at their local FSA offices.

My problem with that statement is the same I had back in 1992: how do you do a cost-benefit analysis to justify the expense of the hardware and software needed for this without cutting people and offices?  It can't be done IMHO.

Cantor and Ag

Ezra Klein has the slides Rep. Cantor used in his caucus to explain the different proposals.  He's showing $33 billion cut in ag subsidies as the status of the Biden negotiations. If the ag subsidies are $20 billion a year, that's about a 16 percent cut.

African-American Farmers

Via the Sustainable Agriculture Coalition, there's a scholarly study here which is available without restriction until July 16.  Worth reading.

Apologies

My posting has been screwy a couple times recently (an empty post and a post with no title). I ought to be able to blame Google, at least in part. I'm using their "draft" version of Blogger and it's taking time for me to adjust to it, and there might be a glitch or two in their software. As I learn things will improve.

ACRSIP and USDA

Mr. Scuse sees FSA getting acreage reports directly from the farmer's precision agriculture equipment, according to this post. The lede:

The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Acreage Crop Reporting Streamlining Initiative Project (ACRSIP) may well be the “most important thing that USDA has ever done,” according to Acting Under Secretary for Farm and Foreign Agricultural Services Michael Scuse.

 In the interview (at the link) he says the idea is first to allow producers to report acreage once from home with the data supplied to crop insurance (also NRCS and NASS as applicable I assume) and FSA.  The "ultimate" step is to get the data from the precision equipment.  Timing: a pilot this fall, partial implementation in 2012, fuller later.

My comments:

• the interviewer said he'd called it the most important initiative USDA had ever done.  Scuse didn't quite agree with that.  I'd comment again that the prerequisite for such reporting is GIS and the common land unit. (For those not affiliated with USDA, the common land unit is an attempt to identify the lowest common denominator of land/land usage recognized by everyone in USDA.  It's necessary so you can provide different totals for different purposes.)  And I'd again recognize Kevin Wickey and Carol Ernst for that.
• as usual, management plans are over-optimistic.As far as I know there's little or no existing infrastructure for developing and testing software which spans the agencies. That was being developed in the late 1990's, when I retired, but I think it became a NIH item when the Bushies came in.  Once again, the Harshaw rule: you don't do things right the first time. While the agencies have a little experience in developing software for farmer usage, I've not seen anything impressive nor have I seen evidence of an active feedback system where farmers are suggesting improvements.
• a fall pilot presumably would cover the fall-seeded small grains.  That's a good starting point, representing  the easiest and simplest set of situations to handle, no double cropping, little land tenure complexities.  But I'd question whether the experience with such reports is an adequate basis for expanding in crops and scope by spring of 2012.  Maybe it can be done, but I'm a bit leery.  (Then, when the System/36's were rolled out, I was leery then too.)
• because the acronym is new, at least to Google, I wonder how well management has laid the basis for the changes in FSA and the other agencies which will likely follow.  

It will be interesting to see how this evolves.

Why I'm an Optimist

From an article coauthored by Charles Kenny:

The World Bank did its annual assessment of poor countries last week. Low-income countries are those with average gross national incomes (GNIs) of less than $1,005 per person per year.

And there are only 35 of them remaining out of the countries and economies that the World Bank tracks. That's down from 63 in 2000.

It's hard to remember how concerned we were about the Third World, as it used to be called. (see here for the Google ngram, usage peaked around 1980 and has been falling ever since). There's still much to be concerned, but the picture is much better than it was around 1975 or so.

The "No Pledge" Pledge

I'm going to ask all the candidates running for national office to sign the following pledge (thanks to Ned Hodgman at Understanding Government for triggering the idea):

Because I believe the people's representatives are elected to use their good judgment in response to changing conditions and to serve the people, I pledge never to sign a pledge constraining my freedom to vote.

(I just finished reading Eric Foner's new book, The Fiery Trial, Abraham Lincoln and American Slavery.
Had the Republicans, as they might have, taken a pledge not to disturb slavery in the existing slave states in 1860, they would have all violated it by 1864.