Farm Bill Time Again

The House and Senate conferees will meet next week on the farm bill. The Rural Blog passes on speculation about possible effects on FSA offices.

I wonder whether FSA employees are comparing the rollout of MIDAS (which seems to have had problems, though not very visible outside the walls of FSA) with the rollout of ACA. 

Software Problems

There seem to be many experts who are diagnosing the problems with the ACA online system.  I'm not going to join their ranks--I'm no expert.  I expect only those on the inside, and only some of those, know really what has gone wrong and how hard or easy it will be to fix.

The one thing I will say (immediately contradicting the paragraph above) is that they shouldn't have changed the design to put establishing an account first, instead of putting it at the end.  The problem seems likely to have been the change.  It apparently was too late in the day to make it; they should have kept on with the general design they started with.  That raises the question of whether they had buy-in on the system design from everyone, by which I mean Tavenner, Sebelius, OMB, and the President, well in advance.  

The closest I've ever come to this sort of problem was the 1983 payment-in-kind program, in which the Reagan administration strongarmed the lawyers into a tricky device to swap CCC-owned grain for acreage reductions, a program which I remember as being slapped together in about 2 weeks (though memory is probably fallible).  The Secretary had the Under Secretary ramrodding the implementation, because it was a high risk endeavor, and he had regular (daily?) meetings with the peons who were doing the scutwork. 

Found--an Honest Blogger

Diogenes may still be looking for an honest man, but I've found an honest blogger--Kevin Drum, in a post on post-shutdown polls:

I don't want to beat a dead horse, but — oh, who am I kidding? I love beating this particular dead horse.

(Returned from a 5-day trip to NY which explains the hiatus.)

Ranchers' Problems

I may have occasionally voiced the opinion that dairy farmers have a worse job than others, but here's a nice post on ranchers' problems.  Hat tip: Northview Dairy.

I wonder if the ranchers have considered pushing for federal subsidies for the cattle insurance that's available?

I Live in a Rut, But I'm Not Alone

An excerpt from an interview with Nobelist Robert Shiller, the economist:

"What was discovered by some of the behavioral finance research is people are inertial. They don’t do anything. If they have to sign up for the plan, they won’t do it. If they do sign up, they'll put their money in whatever asset seems to be recommended and leave it there the rest of their lives. You would think it’s kind of obvious, that some people aren't that interested in managing their portfolios."

The Right Stuff and Bureaucratic Reports

Was Chuck Yeager a "bureaucrat"?  I guess I'd go too far to call the exemplar of the "right stuff" such, but this laconic bureaucrat's report of his breaking of Mach 1 is worth noting.

(Incidentally, I'm not sure why the National Archives website is still up.)

AGI on Crop Insurance

Chris Clayton at DTN reports both Houses are generally in agreement on limiting crop insurance subsidies for high income insureds:

"On Friday evening, House Budget Chairman Paul Ryan, R-Wis., saw his resolution tightening income eligibility pass the House on a voice vote. The language was comparable to the Senate provisions. While a voice vote doesn't get everyone on record, the resolution does show GOP House leaders support the provision.

Conferees will have to begrudgingly keep the income cap or find some way to pivot around the issue."

Wonder how USDA would administer this?  Conceivably through FSA, I suppose, so USDA hits IRS only once.  But that assumes the rules for determining a person between crop insurance and USDA are the same, doesn't it?  (As time goes by I"m more and more aware that what I used to know is getting obsolete.)  Given how long it took for RMA and FSA to coordinate on acreage reporting dates, I wouldn't hold my breath for that result.  Might be simpler (remember KISS?) to leave the two operations completely separate and put up with complaints from farmers and Congress about the duplicate paperwork and discrepancies in rules. 

Outed: the Secrets of the Obamas and Their Garden

Found 5.5 inches of rain in our garden plot over the last few days; actually more because the rain gauge only goes to 5.5.

Assuming the White House garden got equivalent amounts, the situation described in this long Obamafoodorama post from yesterday is even worse than the pictures show.  The point of the post is that the government shutdown means very little work done in the garden by staff, so it's quickly become overgrown and unharvested.

The garden evolved from a family project in the spring of 2009, where the girls were supposed to get their hands dirty, into a showcase project for gardening.  The post reveals explicitly for the first time that the plants growing in the White House garden were transplanted from an offsite greenhouse location.  Lots of other details about the garden in the post, [edit] including the fox now prowling the grounds.

"Actively Engaged" in Farming Revisited

You'd think we'd know what a farmer is; after all people have been farming for thousands of years.

But, here, via FarmPolicy at Sen. Grassley's website, is the latest GAO report on FSA enforcement of the rules.

I remember the people (WP and SN) originally developing the rules after the 1985 farm bill.  Amazing to realize that they might well be grandparents by now.  If I remember, the first crack at implementing the provisions got overridden by Congress.  That sort of history is probably why FSA is saying they won't change rules now without having Congress act.  Part of the problem is, once provisions are in the farm bill and passed, members' attention shifts elsewhere, so the members who are more responsive to their farmer constituents gain in influence.
 

What the Past Was Like--59 Years Ago

I stumbled across the program for the 12th Youth Forum, held in NYC in 1954.  The first pages are the text for a speech delivered by Mayor Robert Wagner.  Beginning at page 11 is the actual program.  Panel subjects were:

• How can the United Nations be improved to deal with the problems of international peace?
• How can the United States strengthen her policy toward her friends, her foes and neutralist nations?
• How can the United States best protect itself against the dangers of subversion and still maintain civil liberties? (The panel chairman was a 15 year old Martin Peretz, I assume the Peretz who went on to fame as owner of New Republic.)
• Do current educational practices prepare youth for effective participation in American democracy?
• How can youth and adults meet the challenge of juvenile delinquency?

The panel chairs and co-chairs were balanced by sex, and the panel leaders seem to have been as well (though some unisex names).

Among the speakers and guests were the Philippines envoy to the UN, Wagner, the heads of NYC police, education, and schools, Sam Levenson, a comic, and representatives of three of the NYC sports teams (Jackie Robinson, Whitey Ford(!), and Kyle Rote, plus media types. There were delegates from youth organizations (Scouts, Boys Club, CYO, PAL) and religious organizations, and delegations from high schools in the city.

What struck me?  The seemingly inclusive nature, at least for 1954, more inclusive than I think the time is given credit for.  The prominence of religious organizations.  The seriousness of the subjects--I doubt there's any comparable youth level discussions today.  The dominance of a "communitarian" agenda and the absence of any libertarian one.