Friday, June 26, 2020

Lying for Our Own Good?

Back in the day Pierre Salinger, JFK's press secretary, got into a controversy over whether it was ever appropriate to lie to the American public. That's the way I remember it, though this Daily Beast article seems to say it was Arthur Sylvester, another aide.  Anyway, it was in the context of the Cuba Missile crisis.  I thought I remembered Salinger telling the press that Kennedy had a cold which caused him to cancel a campaign trip to Chicago, when in fact the missiles had been discovered and the administration was figuring out what to do.

Anyhow, people were shocked that the government could and would lie to the public.  Again today it seems we're shocked to find out that Dr. Fauci was lying to us back in February.  He was saying don't bother with masks, they don't do much good, when the fact was the US didn't have masks enough for health professionals and the public.

As an ex-bureaucrat I often side with the bureaucracy more than most, and I do here.

Democrats may claim the people are mature and will react well to being told the truth, but I think conservatives with their suspicion of people are closer to the mark in some cases, as here.

Wednesday, June 24, 2020

McArdle's Question--Drawing the Line

Megan McArdle has a post which raises the question of drawing lines on statues.

It's interesting.  I'd add a question: when you evaluate a statue do you consider the intent of those who originally funded and created the statue, do you look at the current meaning of the life of the subject (if only one), or do you use the popular understanding of the subject?  How about artistic worth--is that a consideration?

Who decides--is it majority rule or what's offensive to a minority?

Are all statues fair game, or are some excluded?  For example, religious statues; statues from antiquity?

Another issue is how?  Must representatives of the original erecting body agree to removal, whoever currently has jurisdiction over the land on which it is erected? Or can an informal group, of protesters or a mob, depending on your affinity for the members, tear it down?  How about a symbolic defacing, temporary or permanent?

Did we have a problem in the Iraq War when Baghdad's residents first attacked the statue of Sadam Hussein, later to be assisted by a Marine.?  Do we have a problem with those members of the Revolution who tore down George IIi?

How about memorials--those which comprise multiple statues plus additional elements, particularly ones which commemorate events over persons? 

Personally, statues don't do much for me,

Tuesday, June 23, 2020

In Partial Defense of Andy Jackson

Protesters tried to take down the statue of Andrew Jackson in Lafayette Park last night.

Jackson's reputation has suffered a great decline since his salad days.  Even as late as 2007 Iowa Democrats were holding Jefferson-Jackson day dinners, and Obama made the speech which was key to winning the primary in 2008.

Let me quote a paragraph from near the closing of the speech--why is Obama running?
Because I will never forget that the only reason that I’m standing here today is because somebody, somewhere stood up for me when it was risky. Stood up when it was hard. Stood up when it wasn’t popular. And because that somebody stood up, a few more stood up. And then a few thousand stood up. And then a few million stood up. And standing up, with courage and clear purpose, they somehow managed to change the world.
 Implicitly this ties back to his acknowledgement of the occasion near the beginning of the speech:
This party -- the party of Jefferson and Jackson, of Roosevelt and Kennedy -- has always made the biggest difference in the lives of the American people when we led, not by polls, but by principle; not by calculation, but by conviction; when we summoned the entire nation to a common purpose -- a higher purpose. And I run for the Presidency of the United States of America because that’s the party America needs us to be right now.
That's my partial defense of Andrew Jackson. According to the way I was taught, the progression of America has been from:

"all men are created equal" where the definition of "men" is implicitly:

  •  white men owning property, 
  • almost all white men (except felons and Native Americans?)
  • almost all men (except felons and Native Americans?)
  • almost all adults (except felons)
Jefferson represents the first step, Jackson the second step, Lincoln the third.
Yes, I know Jackson was a slaveowner, a mean man, a bigot. Worst of all, he's the embodiment of America's first original sin (first in my mind if not in popular usage)--its mistreatment of Native Americans.

I don't mind taking down statues of whomever, but it shouldn't cloud our view of history, with all its complexities.

[Updated:  the discussions of Jackson I've seen have focused on the Trail of Tears and his populism/democratic stands, as I did above.  What we all miss is his preservation of the Union, resisting Calhoun and South Carolina over the nullification issue.. Had Jackson allowed SC to prevail, the union might have dissolved.  Definitely the advantages over the South the North had in population and industry in 1860 which allowed it to prevailed in the Civil War were not there.]

Monday, June 22, 2020

How Easily We Panic

I should say, how easily I panic,though I suspect it's true of most humans

Woke during the night with a fever, convinced myself I had covid-19,and panicked over the steps to take next--how to self-quarantine in the house, etc.

In light of day I'm 99 percent convinced it was false alarm--no other symptoms, fever possibly linked to a bit of gastritis (thank you Dr. Google) which happens now and again. 

But it dented my self-image as thoughtful, etc. 

I'm sure I'll forget/deny this episode in a few days.

Sunday, June 21, 2020

Loren Becker Is Happy

As I've said, I've been lurking in the FSA Facebook group, watching the exchanges of hints, encouragements, etc. as the field offices struggle through CFAP (along with their regular work, all working from home or with restricted access to the offices].

One facet of the implementation effort is the use of Excel worksheets.  Back in the day, Loren Becker worked in KCMO. He became very proficient in Lotus 1-2-3, the dominant spreadsheet software of the day, and strongly urged us to use Lotus to develop test data, modeling what the results of System/36 software programs should be.  FSA isn't doing exactly that, but Loren would be happy, maybe is happy but I don't know, to see the extensive use of spreadsheets.

Saturday, June 20, 2020

The Statue of King George III

I'm reminded that the American revolutionaries pulled down the statue of King George III in New York City and, I believe, turned it into bullets.

See this article.

Friday, June 19, 2020

The Tale of Two Graphs?

What's going on with the pandemic in the US?

From the NYTimes page, the graph of the new cases has been reasonably steady for a while, before taking an upturn in the last days.  (Might be the effect of protests, or the effect of reopenings.)

But the graph of deaths has been trending down steadily, and that continues.  So either more testing is finding more of the less serious cases, or the virus is becoming less virulent, or something else.

I'd guess the first,

{Update:I've seen a discussion that the increased testing is more and more of younger people, who aren't as susceptible to covid-19.  It makes sense that generally we focused our limited tests on the worse cases--i.e., assisted living/nursing homes, etc. and now the drive-through testing spots are getting active adults.]

Thursday, June 18, 2020

What Should We Have Done?

Based on what we know about the pandemic and Covid-19 now, what should we have done back in time, say on Mar. 1.  Obviously, I think, we should have been ordering supplies, PPE, ventilators, whatever.  But given that we lacked sufficient tests, supplies, and contact tracers, what should we have done?

To me the answer is we should have focused on the areas and facilities which resulted in the most human contact--the dense areas of NY, NJ, MA, etc., the assisted living facilities, the prisons, the meat packing facilities.  For those areas we might have been stuck with the tactics we ended up using, social distancing, lockdowns, quarantines.

For the other areas I think we should have tried to leap to our current Phase II/III strategies, more distancing and lots of contact tracing. 

This two-part strategy might have been a tough sell; in an emergency we like to think everyone is treated the same.  But we've seen the problems in maintaining a uniform strategy across states, and the nation.

Scalia Says a Strong Economy--Not So

The Secretary of Labor, Mr. Scalia, says we have a strong economy. 

He's wrong.  We had a strong economy in January 2020; one which well by many of the usual criteria and under the conditions existing at the beginning of the year.  But those conditions changed; covid-19 emerged and suddenly our economic activity had to deal with a new world, one to which it was poorly adapted. 

We won't have a strong economy until we can adjust to these new conditions.

Wednesday, June 17, 2020

A Bit of Cynicism

I think a portion, very small perhaps, of the attendance at the protest rallies currently going on is affected by pervasive "cabin fever".  People who have been shutdown because of the pandemic are antsy, and the rallies provide a socially acceptable reason to go out and mingle.

What Will Change After Pandemic and BLM and Election?

I think we may err in expecting a lot of change after 2020 ends. My sketchy thoughts:

  • yes, if Biden wins  there will be a lot of change in government, but mostly it will be reversion to the norm.  Even if Biden carries in a solid majority in the Senate, I don't expect changes on order of LBJ's Great Society in 1965-68.  Or even Reagan's changes.  I'd add a qualifier--there may be a lot of changes on the international front, which will force more changes than we can see now.
  • full recovery from the pandemic will take years. I'd expect the major changes to be the result of people getting more used to online everything. But otherwise I'd expect reversion to the norm generally.
  • the current BLM protests will result in some moderately important changes in law, justice, and policing, but not much more.
The theme here is, I think, the power of old habits and the past.  I hope to live long enough to see how wrong I am.

Tuesday, June 16, 2020

Pigford's Legacy

Government processes grind slowly away.  And, just because we're old, it doesn't mean you can trust the aged.  Years after the first and second Pigford claim settlements, DOJ brought suit against four sisters in their 70's for defrauding the government and tax evasion.  They arranged for the filing of 192 claims under the Pigford and the Hispanic settlements, getting money under the table from the claimants and conspiring with an attorney and a tax preparer to submit false claims for tax refunds.

I feel sorry for the 192 claimants, who lied on their applications, but who trusted people when they shouldn't have.

Monday, June 15, 2020

R.I.P. Freedom to Farm

Sen. Pat Roberts is retiring.  He was the ranking Republican/Chair of House Agriculture Committee last century.  His big thing was what he called "Freedom to Farm", ending government regulations and programs.  That became the informal title of the 1996 farm bill.

I don't think many farmers believe the reforms worked, either in the early 2000's or now.  Today's Farm Policy has an article on the current state of government help for agriculture.

"A Switch Before Time" Coming?

The Supreme Court famously defanged FDR's court-packing plan by delivering some pro-New Deal decisions--the "switch in time saved nine"

There has been some discussion of possibly expanding the Supreme Court if the Democrats won the election.  I think it's a non-starter, but some serious people have talked about it. Today's decision on the LGBTQ issue makes me wonder if SCOTUS will tread carefully between now and the election, just in case the polls are right and Dems win big. 

Not a serious thought, but we'll see.

Sunday, June 14, 2020

Pandemic From 30,000 Feet Again

This is based on the NYTimes summary as of June 13.

It seems to me you can categorize states by the shapes of their case graphs:

  • States with one defined peak, and a fairly consistent decline from that peak.  This would include the NY/NJ/CT/MA states, with early peaks, and a number of other states which were slower to peak.
  • States with two fairly clear peaks, which might include FL, TN, KY
  • States which have never reached a peak--i.e., their case load is still climbing. Includes CA, TX,  AL, UT, NC, SC, AR, KY,
  • Small states with too few cases to evaluate.
  • Mixed cases
Trying to create a story from this data, I go back to my previous pandemic post:  
  • the East Coast states were hit early because they are both well networked with Europe and dense.  That meant they weren't prepared and got overwhelmed early, but they learned to take covid-19 seriously and adopted measures which reduced spread.
  • other states didn't take the virus that seriously (i.e., even if they were officially locked down, public compliance was less than in the hard hit states), meaning if they were networked like FL, they could have an early peak and then a later one.
  • possibly two peaks reflects a matter of luck, the virus hitting nursing homes, etc. once, then a slower spread to the more general population.

Saturday, June 13, 2020

A Sad Photo of Joyous Wedding

The Post had a picture of a wedding today, which I can't find online.  It was illustrating a Lisa Bonos story on a convergence of BLM and the wedding in Philadelphia.  All very joyous and feel-good, except when you look closely at the one photo of the wedding celebrants.

If I counted correctly there were 18 women and 7 men in the party.  I can make assumptions about the cause of the apparent gender imbalance, but whatever the reasons IMHO it casts a shadow on the event.

Friday, June 12, 2020

Watching the Messy Process of Implementation in the Field

I'm enjoying watching the FSA field people administering the CFAP by logging into the FSA Facebook Group. 

I have to remember I'm lurking, and no longer have the knowledge nor authority to comment on anything.  Much of the discussions seem familiar from times gone by but what's more visible (probably not new but it wasn't visible before) is the networking among the program technicians as they're officially called today.  I wonder how many of the State and DC specialists are auditing this group?

NASCOE has had a system of "program" recommendations where they pass problems and suggestions from the field on to the DC specialists for possible resolution. It seems to take a while to make the circuit.  Some of the problems raised in the Facebook group are resolvable there--just a lateral flow of knowledge and tips.  Some of the problems may be tackled by people with special knowledge, particularly of the software. Since the group has maybe 1,000 members, and the field offices probably have 7K+ employees plus temps I wonder whether the lateral flow of info is reaching everyone it should. 


Thursday, June 11, 2020

Children Born Racist?

CNN says they aren't.  I disagree.

Children are born human.  As such they have both the capacity to fear and flee from the unknown, and to know and love the known.   The family and social structures they're born into will guide them to things to know, and how to fear the things they don't.  Racism evolves from the interplay of the human abilities and the environment.  It's inevitable.

Wednesday, June 10, 2020

The Effect of Graphics

Both the NYTimes and the Washington Post have graphs showing the deaths due to the covid-19 virus over the days since Mar. 1.  The Post's graph is on the front page, spanning one column, which represents 1/6 of the width of the paper.  The Times' graph is on page 4, in their coronavirus update column, which is double width--two columns. 

I've not measured the height scale, but the general effect is that the Post's graph shows a steep decline after a vertical rise in cases while the Times shows a much more gradual decline.  Same data, different impressions.

Monday, June 08, 2020

Reboot the Police

That's my position.  I don't particularly want to reduce funding for police.  History says, I think, that the public overreacts to swings in crime, cutting police excessively in low-crime periods, ignore a period of increase in crime, then over-fund police in an attempt to catch up.  In other words, we overshoot both on increases and decreases.

What I do want is more research into policing-- we have so many different strategies proposed:

  • tough on crime, lots of policy,
  • community policing--cops on the beat knowing the community
  • broken-windows
  • social services--replacing cops on the beat with social workers
  • etc., etc.
Why can't we take precincts which are matched in demographics, etc. and use one strategy in one and a different one in the other.  Keep the experiment going for years and learn. 

Instead of taking money from police for the sake of taking money, raise taxes on me and you to fund needed and useful government services.

Sunday, June 07, 2020

Satisfaction With 911 Calls

What's surprising in this survey is the uniformity in responses across ethnic and gender lines.  Though  that's good, what isn't the percent saying the police improved the situation.  (Might be because the situation had dissolved by the time the police got there, at least in part.)

Friday, June 05, 2020

World Pandemic from 30,000 Feet

Looking at the world wide incidence of covid-19, I see the influence of networks--it's as if the virus is a tracking molecule, like taking barium before a CT scan. 

You start with Wuhan, which is networked both to Europe and the US. (I'm guessing it might have particular ties to Italy?) The US is more closely networked with Europe than China, so a majority of our virus imports seem to have come from there. Meanwhile nations such as Russia, India, and Brazil are less closely connected to China and, perhaps more significantly, are less networked internally than countries such as UK and US.

Within the US the  NYTimes map shows a correlation, in my mind at least, between the timing and volume of cases and the networking of the state and county.  Currently the Northeast states are on the down slope, while the Southeast states are on the upswing. 

Thursday, June 04, 2020

The Police: Now and 1968

Lots of comparisons between the protests/riots of today and those of 1968. Lots of concerns about police.

IIRC in 1968 white liberals thought that integrating the police and establishing civilian review boards would solve the problems with the police.  With hindsight, civilian review boards, where established, have not done well.  The problem is likely the entrenched political power of police unions. Not only do police generally have a positive aura,but, like the NRA, they've the power of fierce unity.

And the police have been integrated, perhaps not as thoroughly and at all ranks in some places as they should be, but we know  now that police who are minorities themselves can be authoritarian and abusive.

There have been gains in 52 years.  The number of people killed now as opposed to 1968 is witness to that.  I suspect, but don't know, that the property damage has been of an order of magnitude less.  Part of that is learning from experience (though it seems we've forgotten a lot of the lessons of 1968) but much of it IMHO results from social trends.

Again, in IMHO, I think the problems we see with police today reflect continuing forces in society and economy.  It's inevitable when you ask people to risk their lives, whether military, firefighters, police, or Doctors without Borders they're likely to develop esprit de  corps, and an us versus them mentality.  It's inevitable in crisis situations police get lots of attention, much unfavorable, which further aggravates the us versus them.  When you add minorities to the mix, they'll often feel forced to do better, to go one step further in order to "prove" themselves.   It's inevitable that public attention will fade as memories fade, meaning that police unions, based on the esprit de corps, will gain leverage over the political process.  If you're willing to increase pay, you can chip away at union-enforced procedural rights.  If you aren't willing, as most publics won't be most of the time, you'll allow polices to gain job security in lieu of more money.

Wednesday, June 03, 2020

Tom Friedman in NYTimes

Last week Friedman had a doom and gloom op-ed in the Times, rather surprising given his past optimism.  He argues three trends have made the world more fragile:
Over the past 20 years, we’ve been steadily removing man-made and natural buffers, redundancies, regulations and norms that provide resilience and protection when big systems — be they ecological, geopolitical or financial — get stressed. We’ve been recklessly removing these buffers out of an obsession with short-term efficiency and growth, or without thinking at all.

At the same time, we’ve been behaving in extreme ways — pushing against, and breaching, common-sense political, financial and planetary boundaries.

And, all the while, we’ve taken the world technologically from connected to interconnected to interdependent — by removing more friction and installing more grease in global markets, telecommunications systems, the internet and travel. In doing so, we’ve made globalization faster, deeper, cheaper and tighter than ever before. Who knew that there were regular direct flights from Wuhan, China, to America?
Today he returns with an even more gloomy one, at least by title:
"I am not at all certain we will be able to conduct a free and fair election in November or have a peaceful transition of presidential power in January. We are edging toward a cultural civil war, only this time we are not lucky: Abraham Lincoln is not the president.
He goes on to segue into praise of local leaders, since he's given up on national leadership/Republicans.

The "doom and gloom" phrase dates back to the 1950's, when Ike attacked Democrats for spreading doom and gloom.  It's a hint that I think Friedman is unreasonable in his fears.   For example, the current pandemic will, I think, kill many fewer people than the 1918-20 one.  Why? Mostly because of our advanced science and communications.  The world is fighting it together, not as together as it could be, but much more so than in 1918.

Another example: the current riots are much less serious than in 1964-68--they don't reflect a racial division nearly as serious as then, mostly because conditions have improved greatly since then. 

Tuesday, June 02, 2020

The Effects of the Recession and Other Stats

Three interesting stats in the news on May 29: one was how much fewer school employees the education system has today, as opposed to 2008; one was how much fewer employees the health system today as opposed to 2008; the third was how little time cars spend on roads.

The Decline of Pension Plans

The Post had an article on the decline of pension plans provided by companies, pointing to Minnesota and Iowa as exceptions to a general decline of such plans.

What stood out to me was that MN and IA weren't exceptional, didn't stand out in any of the maps shown from 1980 to 2014.  In the 1980-94 period they weren't in the top rank of states. It's only in the 2014-19 period that they become exceptions.  So whatever is the cause of their slower rate of decline, it seems to me it's unlikely to be deep-rooted trends, such as labor unions. 

Monday, June 01, 2020

Doubled Payments in CFAP?

I shouldn't do this, because I'm approaching senility and know little about the subject, but I won't let that stop me asking this question: is it possible that some producers and commodities will receive compensation for the same loss under both CFAP and the existing insurance and FSA programs?

1968 and Now--a Subtle Difference

I remember 1968 well, so well I've tried to avoid most coverage of the riots over the past few days.

There is one subtle difference I notice between then and now: the rioters are integrated.  In 1968 the rioters were all black.  Now they seem to be the majority but there's some whites (and perhaps Latinos and Asians, but I don't know that) shown as well.

I think that's a significant detail showing the distance between then and now.

Sunday, May 31, 2020

US Pandemic from 30,000 Feet

It seems to me the general pattern of the pandemic spread was:

  • the first to become ill and those who spread the disease were the well-off.  By definition if you were traveling between China and Europe, or between Europe and the US, or China and the US, you had money and an upper-middle class or upper class lifestyle.  And those you gave the virus to likely shared those characteristics.
  • but second to become ill were the parents and grandparents of the travellers, those in nursing homes and assisted living homes.  My assumption is that most people in such homes are from backgrounds with above-average incomes, even though Medicaid may cover care.
  • the final tier of victims were the vulnerable, those in meat packing plants, those in congested areas living in crowded homes, immigrants and the poor.
This is just speculation; I hope I live to see some good social research on the subject. 

Saturday, May 30, 2020

I Remember: Space's Early Days

Watched the successful launch today.  Brought back memories of the pathetic early days of our space program, plagued by disasters and pitifully behind the Soviets in throw weight.  America certainly wasn't great in space in those days--1957 to mid 60's.

After Musk had his Starship blow up in the unmanned testing phase, I and I'm sure others of my age thought back to those early days, which increased my concern over today's launch.  But I've long since tried to learn not to obsess over what I can't control.  Today means the Starship event was just another instance of Harshaw rule, and we can all applaud Musk and NASA.

Friday, May 29, 2020

Our Pictures in the Head Are Wrong

Until today I had an image in my mind: people come down with some symptoms, they start to get worse, they go to the hospital to the ICU.  Sometimes they go on ventilators and likely die; sometimes they are able to recover and leave the hospital.  That to me was the normal course of events for people with covid-19.  It's wrong.

I started looking at data today.  One set of data was the rate of death, which turns out to be about .6 of  1 percent.  Then I tracked down CDC data on the rate of ICU admissions.  That turns out to be much smaller.

I should have realized: sometimes people die in the hospital as I was thinking, but sometimes they die in their nursing or assisted living home.  And sometimes they die in their home home. So dying in the hospital is not the majority experience. 

As is often the case,things are more complicated than the images you have in your head.

Thursday, May 28, 2020

How Far Do Aerosols Carry?

Josh Marshall at TPM links to an article which seems to take aim at the science behind the 6 foot distance, arguing it's old science and modern instruments can offer more accurate measurements.

I'm no expert--Marshall repeats the suggestion if you're close enough to smoker to smell the tobacco, you're likely too close for covid-19.  That's the sort of layman's measurement which appeals.  Might not be right but appeals.  I'd offer another layman's measurement: in season 3 of the Last King some episodes are set in winter.  It appears they shot in winter, because the exhaled breaths of people and horses are very visible.  Hard to guess the distance traveled, but often likely over 6 feet.

Wednesday, May 27, 2020

Election Predictions

I was wrong in 2016.  Maybe I'll do better in 2020.

As of Memorial Day, I'd put the odds this way:

  • 10 percent chance Trump wins a majority of the 2-person popular vote and wins back the House.
  • 30 percent chance Trump wins a majority of the electoral vote and keeps the Senate
  • 10 percent chance neither candidate wins with 48 hours of election day, including possibility it goes to the House
  • 30 percent chance Biden wins a majority of votes, both popular and electoral but fails to win the Senate.
  • 10 percent chance Biden wins a comfortable majority, and squeaks a Senate majority
  • 10 percent chance Biden wins a landslide, taking House and firm Senate majority
Bottom line, I think the Dems have more upside than the Reps but it's currently a tossup.

Tuesday, May 26, 2020

Furman and I: Great Minds

Politico reports that some Democrats, led by former Obama economist Furman, are worried that the fall will see lots and lots of positive economic news, as the economy starts to recover from the pandemic shutdown.  That's similar to my post here.

On the other hand, a FiveThirtyEight survey of economists has a prediction of a relatively slow recovery, a slight majority predicting a Swoosh (i.e., Nike logo) recovery.

Monday, May 25, 2020

Revising the US Food System

In the wake of the pandemic I'm seeing calls for the US to change the way we produce and distribute food.  Some of the proposals are intended to make it more resilient to disasters, some just hope for environmental friendlier ag.  See this piece and this 

I've doubts.  The way our food system currently works was never planned, but evolved. The forces at work were economic,governmental, social--the market system meant rewards for greater productivity and lower costs; the government ensures uniform food regulations for the country, government programs have eased the dislocations caused by the growth of more productive agriculture, the society as a whole values education, science and technology and the new, people place less of a priority on the taste and provenance of food and more of a priority on fast, cheap food which they don't have to prepare themselves.

Can these forces be changed, even if you have a popular cause that supports government action? Tastes can change, norms can change, but I'm not sure how well any social movement can manage such change.

Saturday, May 23, 2020

Trump Is Dyslexic?

Bob Somerby at Daily Howler is often repetitive and long-winded, but he offers a perspective I don't often find elsewhere (although he and Kevin Drum respect each other and Kevin's my favorite blogger).

Here's Somerby discussing Andrew Sullivan's attack on the president.

Buried in there somewhere is the suggestion Donald Trump might be dyslexic.  I've not heard that before, but it's an intriguing suggestion.

As Somerby notes, liberals would normally shy from attacking someone with some disabilities or mental disorders, but not DJT.  The possibility won't change my attitude towards him either.

[Updated: If you assume that Trump is starting from a position of no knowledge, it would explain why he's easy prey for the last person to talk to him, and why he's suspicious of people.  For similar thoughts,here's Friedersdorf.


Friday, May 22, 2020

Speculation on What the FBI Was Doing

I approach the Michael Kelly case with some preconceptions:
  1. the FBI has never been particularly fond of liberals.  The head of the agency has never been an agency.  For a long time it was headed by J.Edgar Hoover, a great bureaucrat and no friend to liberals.  It was a struggle to get some diversity into the agency, both minorities and women.
  2. as an entrenched bureaucracy with its own esprit de corps it's liable not to follow direction from the outside.
  3. Kelly I knew from his association with Gen. McChrystal and the Rolling Stone article, which got McChrystal fired.  I may have seen appraisals like that of Sarah Chayes in Business Insider, essentially a loose cannon, as I was once called, innovative but needing close management.
  4. Not being a lawyer I've no good way of judging between claims that the interview with Flynn where he lied had no "predicate" (the Barr position) and therefore the case was tainted, and claims that the charges were appropriate and well-based.
  5. Being a Democrat I'd enjoy any embarrassment to the Trump administration.
So, what do I make of Kelly, his indictment, and the subsequent dropping of the case by Attorney General Barr?
  1. He was totally miscast as National Security Advisor, particularly for a president such as Trump. His selection, despite the warning from Obama, was an early instance of Trump's incompetence.
  2. I doubt the narrative that the FBI looking at Flynn was part of an Obama administration's plot to undermine the Trump administration.  I don't believe the FBI would risk good relations with the incoming administration just because Obama or Yates told them to. That wouldn't fit my picture of the FBI as sophisticated bureaucratic players.
  3. Not being a lawyer, I've not carefully followed the arguments about FBI having a predicate for its investigations, particularly because the rules seem to differ some between a criminal investigation and a national security (counter-intelligence) investigation.
  4. My vague suspicion is as follows: in counter-intelligence people are paid to be suspicions, overly so.  Witness James Jesus Angleton, about whom I've written a time or two. It doesn't seem totally unreasonable to me that FBI agents would look at Flynn, fired by Obama from his DIA job, and say to themselves: if I were a Russian agent I might try to exploit his hard feelings, at least feel him out.  Certainly the KGB would see that as a potential gold mine and certain to reap big bureaucratic rewards.  
  5. If I'm an FBI bureaucrat, I think I'd believe that the Russian/Flynn investigation could offer big rewards--it'd be good for my reputation and promotion prospects.  (I'm assuming that the FBI culture is rather insular, and  agents would believe that their director still, as J. Edgar was, could insulate them from flak from DOJ and the presidency.  )
  6. I like a summary of the Mueller report from Dana Milbank: the Trump campaign wanted to collude with the Russians but was too incompetent to.  The whole episode is murky, and I don't believe it could have been much clearer to FBI agents.
  7. One known unknown: we don't know what covert sources of information were and are available to the administration.   Presumably there are some, the existence of which has been hidden from the public record.
So my bottom line is disbelief in any sinister plot against Trump and his people. I think a combination of bureaucratic motives, culture, and incompetence came together with Trump incompetence to produce one good result: Flynn's resignation as national security adviser and likely a bad precedent for the way the FBI should operate in the future.

Firing Inspectors General

As a good government ("goo-goo") type, I'm perturbed by the president's removal of several IG's and acting IG"s.  But this piece  suggests there's not much Congress can do to stop such actions by a president.  IG's are executive branch employees and as such are subject to the president's authority.

I wonder: could we look to sports, the NFL, for a solution:  There the tension is between getting the call right and keeping the game flowing.  Could we give the president a couple get-out-of-jail cards per term--allow her to fire two IG's but no more?  Arguably this would permit the president flexibility but not too much.

I'm afraid what will happen when the administration changes: the new president will use the Trump precedent to fire the Trump-IG's and goo-goo norms will suffer further erosion.

CFAP--A Tip of the Hat

I remember the pains of trying to implement new legislation on a rush basis.  I could tell, and have told, stories about the experience. 

One thing I never experienced was trying to implement new legislation while working from home during a pandemic.  A tip of my hat to those working in DC and the field who are trying to navigate that morass.  (Post inspired by Brent Orr's picture of the training room in the South Building from which they did online training of the field on CFAP.)

Thursday, May 21, 2020

What Will the Recovery Look Like?

I've no insight, but since when does that stop a true blogger?

Personally I think it will be slow-fast-slow. 

  • the first slow will because the majority of people won't be risk-takers, they'll let others be the trailblazers.
  • the fast will be as people realize that it is relatively safe--isolated incidents but nothing drastic enough to cause major political subdivisions to revert back to a lock-down.
  • the second slow will be because of the drag on economic activity from the measures taken to minimize risk plus dealing with the economic damages of the pandemic--the closed restaurants, the half-empty nursing homes, etc.
We'll see.

A Test of Leadership

Back in the day I got bawled out by my deputy division director for cursing at an employee.  I deserved it.  I think it was that conversation where he discussed a fellow branch chief.  Lou was a WWII vet, whose ship IIRC had been sunk on D-Day.  He was a voluble guy, loud and boisterous with a temper.  But Bob pointed to him as a good leader, simply because he was consistently Lou.  His employees and those who dealt with him knew, at least after the initial getting-to-know-you, that what you saw was what you got, no surprises.  I needed that, to be consistent.  (Not sure I ever achieved that.)

I think of that lesson from time to time, never more these days when considering our President.  His approval rating on dealing with the pandemic has not been good.  Meanwhile some of our governors have very good ratings, particularly Gov. Cuomo. I don't follow him closely, but it seems to me his record of decision-making hasn't been all that great.  I account for the difference in ratings between him and Trump by consistency by the one and inconsistency by the other.

Wednesday, May 20, 2020

The Usefulness and Reuse of Masks

Early on in the pandemic, I think I was informed that masks would insulate the wearer from the world, particularly the viral particles floating around in the air from those already infected.  So it made sense that masks were one-time use--you go out wearing a mask, you meet someone infected and his virus particles get hung up in your mask. You then go home, and the mask represents a threat to anyone who contacts it.  Fine.

But now I'm getting the impression the main function of the mask is to protect the world from you, the wearer.  It captures your germs, your viral particles.  Is that true?  If it is, then the mask can be used more than once.  If you're infected, and the mask captures your virus, there's no new contamination in the home and no real downside to reusing it.

Anti-Trump Derangement Syndrome

Conservatives use TDS to paint liberals as so biased against the president that they're incapable of treating his positions fairly.

I'd suggest the Anti-TDS as applying when conservatives or independents (like Ann Althouse) lean over backwards to whitewash his tweets and news conferences using excuses like he's joking or he's being sarcastic. 

I think it's sometimes true that DJT says things he doesn't expect to be taken seriously, but I refuse to believe it's a joke or sarcasm, at least not as a normal thing.

Tuesday, May 19, 2020

A Man Who Cares: Joe Fore

Joe Fore on Twitter does something I love:  assess typoographical choices of the legal profession.

He dings the First Circuit for their use of monospaced type, one of my pet peeves.

Monday, May 18, 2020

Suppose We Didn't Have Work From Home

There have been a lot of comparisons between the current pandemic and those in the past, particularly in terms of case numbers and deaths.

One thing which isn't accounted for in such comparisons is the existence of the Internet and the enabling of work from home. My point is that in 2020 we had the option of closing offices and working from home, of closing schools and going to remote learning, of moving to tele-medicine.

I don't know how much difference it makes; I don't know the extent to which shelter-in-place was implemented in past pandemics.  But I'm sure it makes a significant difference, which social scientists will be trying to figure out over the next years.

Sunday, May 17, 2020

Suppose Trump Is Mostly Right?

Let's say the reopening of the US goes okay, some glitches, but on the whole the level of deaths keeps declining down to a low level, so Covid-19 is just the fourth or fifth most common cause of death.

And suppose that's low enough that businesses and schools reopen during the summer without major setbacks.

So now it's October 1 and things have been going pretty well.  And most important they have been going pretty well since May 15.

And the stories in the media are no longer the gloom of uncertainty but the resilience of the country.

And despite the impact on the economy, our "animal spirits" have revived and the majority of the country thinks things are improving, and we're on the right track.

What then will be the outlook for Trump's reelection?

Saturday, May 16, 2020

A Note From the Store: Toilet Paper

I was intrigued yesterday by the toilet paper  shelf at Safeway.  Usually they have multi-roll packs of their own toilet paper, plus those of name brands.  There were a few such packs of their own brand yesterday, but the bulk of the shelves were filled with individual rolls of a couple of brands I'd never seen before. They were foreign, I think, but didn't linger to investigate further.