A Rush To Regulate

Eric Lipton at the Times writes about the Trump administration's rush to get their last (I fervently hope) regulations through the process and published in the Federal Register.  It's not a new process, but as the Obama administration learned to its regret the Congressional Review Act puts regs issued now in jeopardy.   I hope the Biden/Harris transition team has studied their history and is ready to apply the same medicine to these regs.

The Importance of Weather and Farming in the Civil War

 John Fea at Way of Improvement posts an interview with Kenneth Noe, author of a book on how weather impacted the Civil War, both directly and through its impact on farming. Seems interesting. Likely a similar book could be written on any war of years, for example the American Revolution. 

The Problems of Hemp

 The Rural Blog has a post on the problems of hemp farmers--no good crop insurance or disaster payments.

We Voted

My wife and I voted today, in Fairfax county's second day of widely available advance voting. A beautiful day, it wasn't too bad to spend 2 hours in line and voting.

 This is about 10 minutes after we got into line.

This is maybe an hour into the day.

This is the Democrats notice to voters--four languages (English, Spanish, Vietnamese, Korean). Because Fairfax is part of 3 Congressional districts, it got a bit complicated.

As the second day of voting at this site things went reasonably well but I'm glad we waited until day 2.  (Harshaw rule).

2020 Election Predictions

I screwed up my 2016 election prediction but that doesn't prevent me from predicting again.  Because I feel optimistic today I think Biden/Harris will win a solid victory, north of 350 electoral votes, the Democrats will control the Senate 52-48, and they'll gain 5 seats in the House. These results will come after all the votes are counted, maybe by the end of the month, but most importantly the presidential outcome will be apparent the evening of Nov. 3.

 Trump will bluster for a bit, but will find he's a lame duck and has no support in the Party to fight the outcome.

Those Were the Days (of Dashed Math Dreams)

Andrew Gelman posts some memories of fellow competitors in the Math Olympiad program. 

I was never on that level, but I did have contact with Prof. Nura Turner, who seems to have ramrodded the program in its early years.  In 1957-8 school year some of us Chenango Forks students took a math test, I think sponsored by some math society--maybe John Turna our math teacher pushed it. Anyhow, IIRC I got into the top ranks in the region--which may have been upstate NY, don't remember.  Anyhow I must have been one of these because Prof Turner included me in the people she tried to track.  

I write "tried" because I wasn't too cooperative.  IIRC my scores in my senior year were lower, an omen of what happened in college.  I was placed in the calculus course for math majors, not the one for math geniuses.  The teacher had a thick accent, I forget from where, and I never got into it. So after one term any interest in pursuing math was gone--government and American history were much more interesting.

1619 Project and the Birth of the Nation

 Bret Stephens writes about the 1619 Project  Actually, he focuses on only a few sentences of it, but the sentences have become controversial.  In a nutshell, the original writeup in the Times said two things: the Revolution was fought to preserve slavery and the nation was born with the arrival of slaves in 1619.  The writeup has been changed and softened since its original publication.  IMHO the Revolution was well underway in the hearts and minds of Americans well before 1775 and had little to do with slavery.  It's true that slaveowners were alarmed by British attempts to woe slaves to support the Loyalist cause, but that was late in the process.  If the preservation of slavery in the face of the Somerset decision in the UK had been a major factor, one would have expected the British sugar colonies in the Caribbean to have joined the 13 colonies because they were even more dependent on slavery than were the mainland colonies.

The question I really want to consider is: what constitutes the "birth" of a country, a nation?  How do we know? Was Canada born with the French in the the 17th century or when the British conquered it in the 18th century, or with the 1867 Act?  When was the UK born, and did it die with the loss of Eire, or will it die if Scotland secedes?  

Was France born with the First Republic, or the Second, Third, Fourth or Fifth?  Was Germany born before Bismarck?  

Lloyd Wright in Fortune

 Mr. Wright has a Fortune magazine piece on black farmers and USDA discrimination in loans. 

"Even today, plainly racist policies at the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) frequently deny Black farmers the resources they need to keep their businesses afloat.

Creating a more equitable agriculture system will be impossible unless Black farmers have control over their own financial destinies. That goal will require a new credit and financing institution, owned and controlled by Black farmers and aimed squarely at supporting Black farmers, landowners, and their cooperatively owned businesses.

He asks that Congress waive loan repayments by farmers who got Pigford settlements and establish the new financing institution.  

Perdue's No-No

 Violating the Hatch Act.

Rich Democrats

I'm unsettled by the trends noted in this Bloomberg piece: specifically Democrats are becoming richer.  It's good that we've been giving money through ActBlue to the various campaigns and party organizations, but I became a Democrat back in the day when the party was a coalition of unions, ethnic groupts, and a smallish group of "eggheads", as they were famously known in the 1950's.

Now Democrats are a bit richer than Republicans, at least by some measures.  Apparently the Republicans still have the business class, the car dealers, insurance agents, small business types, but the Democrats are supported by the eggheads' grandchildren, college-educated and many with graduate degrees, plus minority groups.  A couple of my concerns: 

• there can be a disconnect in interests between the two.  For example, the rich Dems in the Northeast want to remove the limit on deductibility of state and local taxes which was part of Trump's tax cut law. 
• And all too often there's a lot of NIMBYism among the rich, when additional development would increase the supply of affordable housing.