FSA and American Rescue Plan Act Provisions

 Looks to be a couple provisions of the American Rescue Plan  which impact FSA:

• a provision for paying 120 percent of outstanding indebtedness for loans made or guaranteed by USDA to socially disadvantaged farmers or ranchers.  My guess is it might be easy to administer, assuming FSA records currently record a farmer's status as disadvantaged or not.  The problem will be with those with outstanding loans who aren't disadvantaged, and will yell at the counter clerk  program tech.  Need to have the numbers of the local offices of the Congressional representatives handy.
• the other provision provides $1 billion for things which seem to be outlined in the Sen. Booker and Sen. Warnock "Justice for Black Farmers" bill.  

There is provision for $47.5 million for expenses (which won't all be FSA, but some might be.

Interest Rates Are Rising

I don't know how many more billions of dollars taxpayers might have to pay because the 10-year note rate has jumped up recently.  Probably just rounding errors now, but as someone who lived through the inflation of the late 60's through early 80's it's a bit disturbing. 

Am I Getting More Conservative?

 Maybe I am.

Consider these issues:

• I'd prefer to see bipartisan support for big initiatives, like the child allowance in the new stimulus bill, which Noah Smith describes as the most important feature of the bill. What I'm afraid is the Republicans get control of Congress in 2022 and undo what Biden's doing now, leading to more loss of faith in the capacity of government to do good things.
• I've some reservations about various changes made or proposed in the student loan program.  There's inequity there when people, like my wife, paid off her student loans and others may get breaks of various kinds. (Looking back, I think we'd have been better off if we expanded the number and maximum amounts of Pell grants.)
• I don't like "defund the police".  I'd rather see a boost in police funding paired with a program to move some responses to 911 calls to social services. IMHO you won't get police cooperation and buy-in without some sweetening for them.
• I'm not really on board with trans-women competing with cis-women (hope I have the terminology right), at least not when they're able to win.  Again I'm concerned for the tone of society, more than the philosophical approach to rights. 

Mobility in the Past

 Just finished "Kindred: Neanderthal Life, Love, Death and Art".  As I've written before, it's more technical and detailed than I needed, but interesting.  I come away from it, as I did from an earlier book on DNA results from testing homo sapiens from various archaeological sites, knowing the images I grew up with are wrong. 

Among the differences what stands out is the variety and mobility of past humans. In the case of Neanderthals they moved a lot, being hunter-gatherers and therefore following the game.  Lots of new science in the field, both DNA and other. Tracing tools back to the beds of rock where the stones originated from shows a lot of movement.  Looking at the isotopes of minerals in teeth which record diets and locations also show movement.

One of the things harder for me to grasp is the idea that 2 percent of Euro-Asian genes are Neanderthal.  I take the scientist word for it, but my mind skitters away from trying to figuring out the steps of the analysis which would reveal that.

Interesting--a footnote reminds that African genomes are richer in variety than Euro-Asian genomes, because of a bottleneck we experienced during the exodus from Africa. 

On an unrelated note, except it's mobility, Tom Ricks in a NYTimes book review notes that a Roman captain served both in the Middle East and in England.

Basic Income Test

 Annie Lowrey has a piece in TheAtlantic about a basic income experiment in Stockton, CA. Using private donations, some individuals got $500 a month to spend as they wished.  She asserts it worked out well.

"Stockton has now proved this [a hand up is better than a handout] false. An exclusive new analysis of data from the demonstration project shows that a lack of resources is its own miserable trap. The best way to get people out of poverty is just to get them out of poverty; the best way to offer families more resources is just to offer them more resources."

I like the idea of experiments, but it's hard for government to run them. I like this one and the result, but I'm put off by the first two sentences:

Two years ago, the city of Stockton, California, did something remarkable: It brought back welfare.

Having lived through Reagan's demonizing of welfare queens, and the attacks on ADC for disrupting parental relations, I've a knee-jerk reaction to "welfare".  Similarly, when Sen. Romney proposed his Family Plan I had an initial positive reaction, but then when I saw someone comparing it to welfare I grew concerned. My mind's still open on the issue, but judging by my gut I fear for the viability of such proposals.

Neanderthals Weren't Dumb

 Reading the book "Kindred: Neanderthal Life, Love, Death and Art".  I've some reservations about the level of detail and the rather literary preludes to each chapter, but the gist is eye-opening.  Science has learned so much more about Neanderthals than I realized.  Modern technology has enabled very detailed reconstructions.

The bottom line is the species knew what they were doing. 

That doesn't mean that Gov. Abbott knows what he's doing.

Signs of Spring

 Crocus blooming along Reston parkway, school buses on the roads, hints of buds on trees, onion sets planted in garden.  Sun streaming into my windows (which are really patio doors used as windows. 

Maybe Trump Was Right?

Right about unnecessary government regulations, that is. 

My wife and I had to set up a new account with our bank this week. The number of questions one has to answer has gone up (like are you closely related to any corrupt foreign leader?) and the number of pages of legalese which one has to ignore has expanded.  No doubt this keeps a number of lawyers in full employment, but it seems foolish. It seems as though there should be an easier way.

Having vented my frustration, I realize what we have here is an arms war between competing sets of attorneys--both sets aiming to obtain the most money they can for themselves and their clients, with one set on the side of right and the public interest and the other set on the side of enterprise. 

And no, Trump wasn't right. He represents the extreme of one side of the arms war.

Election Reforms from the Past

 Thanks to someone (on the right but I forget the name) I looked up the Carter-Baker Federal election commission.

A blast from the past is this paragraph on the commission's homepage:

Full Report PDF (7.6MB) or Text Only
(Download will take approximately 20 minutes on a dial-up connection, 4 minutes on a cable or dsl connection, and under 30 seconds on a LAN.)

Apparently the report failed to attract support, perhaps for reasons indicated by the dissent.  Personally I like the idea of standard photo ID for voting, but that's my nerd/bureaucrat coming out.  I'd spend a few billion to get those IDs into the hands of everyone (including the majority of Native Americans (or possibly only Navaho members) who don't have individual mail service.)) and the very old, and then phase in use of the requirement.  I know liberals don't like this, and it's reasonable to say it's not cost-effective: the amount of electoral fraud due to identity fraud is small. 

 But, and it's a big but, many on the right don't trust the system. Republicans have lost the popular vote in seven of the last eight elections, and that trend is likely to continue, meaning the distrust will only increase.  

So my grand bargain (which I've posted about before) is phase in photo-id of everyone, along with basic data (i.e., citizen/non citizen, age) to be used for election verification and for employment verification (E=Verify).  The right get assurance about election validity and strong immigration enforcement; the left gets voting eligibility for everyone in national elections.  I think it's a reasonable deal but I'm not optimistic.

Belief in Democracy and Steven Muller

 Kevin Drum posted  concerning Republican belief in democracy, taking the position that Republicans believe in democracy, just that many do not believe in the integrity of the election process.

I commented on it, but didn't mention that it triggered a memory of a government course in my freshman year (I think--it was taught by a professor who later became head of Johns Hopkins--Steven Muller--I did not know he had a movie career.)

Professor Muller taught a course in political thought, which included Rousseau's theory of the "general will", with his rather vague, IMO, ideas on how society determines the general will. I didn't know Muller's background (Jewish refugee from prewar Germany) before today, so I don't really know whether I'm stating my own conclusions or was influenced by his take on Rousseau.  

There's the contrast between the European take on democracy, following Rousseau, and the Anglo-Saxon (that's probably not a politically correct term these days) take of Locke et.al. who emphasize process and the protection of individual rights by means of institutional arrangements. 

It seems that Republicans now are drifting away from the Lockean position, losing faith in institutions, and relying more on the comforting idea that they are the party of the real America.