New Blog

Just what the world needs--another blog. This one is focused on the genealogy of my family, and that of relatives. My cousin pushed me into this (thanks, Marjorie)--see her blog.

Coming This Week

No, not the last Harry Potter, but the full House Ag committee meeting on farm bill. Interesting discussion here.

Interesting Site and Post

I don't think I've noted the Farm Policy blog before. Seems to be mostly summaries of news articles.

And Dan Morgan, who has posted on the blog, has an article in the Post on farm policy, pointing out divisions among Democrats. Do the newcomer Dems support reform, or continuation of the current programs?

Bureaucracies and Measurement

Kevin Drum makes a good point in the health system debate. Because single-payer systems are bureaucracies, they measure things about the health care system, including waiting times for various illnesses/treatments. Their statistics are better than ours (we don't measure waiting times at all). That's no argument to change the system, but it is a warning when we discuss different systems-- we don't have comparable statistics.

Twinkies, Deconstructed

Libertarian economists have an essay floating around the web called "The pencil". It describes all the things and processes that go into the making of a pencil. It's a way of celebrating the free market--Adam Smith's invisible hand coordinates the efforts of people on all the continents to bring forth an ordinary no. 2 pencil

Just read the book: "Twinkie, Deconstructed", which does the same sort of thing for the Twinkie. It's an interesting read, though I got lost at times amidst all the chemicals. The writer isn't a Michael Pollan for style, or for bias against the agri-business-industrial system that provides our processed foods.

What's amazing, and a little disturbing given the recent execution of the top regulator for taking bribes, is the number of chemicals that originate in Chinese plants. Apparently, they do a good job competing in this area--perhaps because the value per pound is so very high. I'm waiting for the conservatives who raised a fuss during the Clinton Administration about Hutchison-Whampoa taking operating facilities in the Panama Canal to realize the insidious invasion taking place on the shelves of grocery stores.

Conflicting Priorities

An old IT mantra--there's three characteristics of software and IT systems that are mutually exclusive--you can have speed to implementation, low cost, and software that works, only if you choose 2 of the 3. (I'd throw in the rule that the first version of software never works well.) Our politicians don't know this: From Government Executive

House lawmakers had two specific messages Thursday for Homeland Security Department officials when it comes to issuing new biometric identification cards for port security workers: Get it done, but do it right.

Members of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee said they are frustrated that the Transportation Security Administration has not yet started offering the transportation worker identification credentials to port workers.

Under the program, up to 1 million workers with access to sensitive port areas are to undergo background checks and be given special IDs with fingerprint biometric identifiers. TSA just missed another deadline for the TWIC program, this time to begin enrolling workers at 10 of the nation's busiest ports by July 1.

But lawmakers also are worried about widespread problems when TWIC is deployed. "If we don't get it right, it's going to be total chaos," said Transportation and Infrastructure Coast Guard Subcommittee Chairman Elijah Cummings, D-Md.

Rep. Frank LoBiondo, R-N.J., added: "When you do roll this out, I hope you realize that there is no reason for any excuse for why it doesn't work."

Maurine Fanguy, the department's TWIC manager, said the program is taking time to develop because of its scope. She said the program is on the forefront of biometric credentialing.

Bureaucrats--Go to Britain, Not China

China just executed their top bureaucrat in charge of enforcing drug safety. Meanwhile, over in Britain, they may fire someone for not executing on farm program payments, but:

The civil servant who oversaw the single farm payment fiasco has received more than £250,000 since being suspended over the failure to pay farmers on time. [From Farmers Weekly Interactive.]

Still Around, Earle Bedenbaugh

Earle was Deputy Administrator, State and County Operations while I was working. It's a political position, which sometimes gets good appointments and sometimes bad. (The first DASCO under Reagan was an absolute disaster.) But he's returned to FSA as a member of the State committee. (Another political appointment, but not a full-time position. The best I understand, having stayed far away from the politics of the agency, the committee members get to come to DC occasionally, get a title for their resume, make some decisions, and are a way for a political operation to co-opt community leaders and opinion shapers.

The Risks of Farming

The Life of a Farm blog is interesting. I found this bit particularly so:

The excavation [for foundation for possible poultry house] continues here on the farm. We are rapidly approaching a time when we will have to make a definite decision about the poultry houses. I’m still on the fence about this venture. My hunch is it would be profitable. It is a huge risk though. I finally got a copy of the contract we would be signing and I can tell you it’s certainly not a great contract. Cobb is paying for a lot of things that other companies aren’t, but it’s still a huge risk. The pay can be adjusted at any time and they can cancel your contract for a number of reasons. I guess the biggest reason I am having trouble making a definitive decision has to do with what is right for the land. I have such a bond with the land here. It’s beautiful land that could be used for so many other things it just seems a waste to put a commercial chicken house on it.

In the 1950's, poultry started becoming vertically integrated. Big companies would contract with growers to raise poultry. That had the effect of stabilizing prices for eggs and chicken, because the companies could implicitly coordinate to keep prices steady. (Same reason car prices don't vary by 50 to 100 percent from year to year.) The growers had the reassurance of operating in a more stable environment with much less risk day to day. The tradeoff was the loss of independence and control. (And, of course, the small growers, like my parents, went out of business.)

Contract farming is coming--it started with hybrid seed growing, then poultry, now hogs. It rationalizes and stablizes the market and spreads the risk.

The excerpt from Joel points out that the risk moves to the upfront decision--to sign the contract (and take out the loan to build the house and equip it). He also points to the "love of the land" which is real. You invest your time in anything, you're apt to come to love it.

NRCS vs FSA II--Moving the Money

Found the provision of the House farm bill, on page 101 of the conservation title.

101
H.L.C.
1 (c) ADMINISTRATION OF CONSERVATION PROGRAMS
2 BY FARM SERVICE AGENCY.—Section 1244 of the Food
3 Security Act of 1985 (16 U.S.C. 3844) is amended by in4
serting after subsection (f), as added by subsection (b),
5 the following new subsection:
6 ‘‘(g) ROLE OF FARM SERVICE AGENCY.—
7 ‘‘(1) ROLE.—The Secretary shall assign to the
8 Farm Service Agency the administrative duties asso9
ciated with delivering all programs under this title,
10 including administrative responsibility for making
11 such benefits available to participants in such pro12
grams.

I've left out the key bit--the next paragraph allows the Secretary to move the money to support this. That is the motivating bit--jobs and money.

I'm hardly an unbiased observer, but returning responsibility to FSA makes sense to me. In the ideal world, something like former Secretary Glickman's proposal to merge the administrative tails of the agencies serving farmers would be adopted. But that was killed late in the last century. As I understand, the question is basically who writes the checks. FSA and its predecessors have always prided themselves on being good check writers; NRCS and its predecessor have always prided themselves on their science and their education work. In 2002 the conservation lobby was strong enough to get NRCS assigned the checkwriting role for these programs. They seem to have had their problems (Harshaw's law--you never do things right the first time). In their defense, it's particularly difficult for them because their IT operations were even more decentralized than FSA's.

Anyhow FSA's lobby, notably its "union" (National Association of State and County Office Employees--NASCOE, but don't try its website using Firefox, use IE), has urged the return of these responsibilities to FSA and apparently has enough support on the Hill to make it into the draft. Here's its position paper.

I fully expect this fight to continue as long as I live, or the separate agencies do.

Infighting--NRCS and FSA

Once again, there's infighting within the agricultural community. Apparently a version of the 2007 farm bill contains provisions NRCS and its supporting lobby don't like. So they're opposing, as stated here.

I'll have to check the draft to see what's proposed. But there's been conflict between the two agencies and the associated lobbies ever since the 1930's. Each agency has its own advantages in the fight.

Real Farming

George Buddy sends an article on "Farming for the fun of it". It's an interesting idea: would anyone write an article on "Bureaucrating for the fun of it". "Plumbing for the fun of it". We make avocations out of some vocations, but not others.

If you visit Oatlands, an old plantation house outside Leesburg, VA, they have a carriage house--full of carriages. At one time, maybe still, rich men liked "coaching", driving carriages instead of their hired help. If you can afford it, I suppose it's different strokes for different folks. But the bottom line, the one that makes the difference as to whether it's vocation or avocation, is whether your livelihood depends on it.

People Self-Justify

Shankar Vedantam has a piece in today's Post talking about social psychology. The idea is that, if I injure you, that's incompatible with my self-image, so I'll justify it by saying you weren't really hurt, not that bad, and you really deserved and you're really a bad person or maybe you'll learn from it. And, having worked the injurious act into a web of meaning, I'll soon forget it. Whereas, if you injure me, I'm going to remember it for a long time as something totally unjustified, that I didn't deserve, that shows you're mean, etc.

The psychologists are pushing the theory in connection with Bush (as in, he had to commute Libby's sentence because Libby is a good guy doing good work so couldn't deserve it).

I think it's a reasonable theory. I certainly remember the kids who taunted me in first grade about not being able to pronounce my "ch's", so my "chicken" came out "sh*tken", to the great delight of everyone except me. Showed me forever that people are no damn good. :-)

Lead and People

S. Vedantam had a piece yesterday on research into lead poisoning, specifically relating the presence of lead in the environment to crime rates. The theory being lead is a neurotoxin that causes impulsivity and aggression, so infants exposed to lead, either in lead paint or in the atmosphere from gas additives, grew up more apt to be criminals.

It sounds good in the writeup, as such pieces often do. Over at Freakonomics today , they are open to the idea, but aren't convinced (particularly because the proponent of the theory questioned their theory that legalized abortion might have impacted US crime rates. They include references to other researchers.

It's a little personal to me, since lead contributed to my existence. My father graduated from U of Minnesota in chemical engineering, went to work in a paint factory in St. Louis, became sick and was told to get into the fresh air or die.

We've Advanced, We Really Have

Just finished Walter Isaacson's biography of Einstein. I'd recommend it. But what was interesting was the discussion of the understanding of science in 1920's America, as shown by polls testing the average person's knowledge. As a footnote, Isaacson provides this, on page 299:

Governor Channing Cox had been thrust a version of the test earlier that week, and his first three responses were: "Where does shellac come from?" "From a can". "What is a monsoon?" "A funny-sounding word." "Where do we get prunes?" "Breakfast."

I think our current crop of politicians, even our President, is more knowledgeable.

Religion and Farming

This book review outlines some of the problems for farmers, dairy farmers, whose way of life is closely tied to their religion. The Virginians are members of the the Old German Baptist Brethern. It's an example of the persistence of culture, but also the challenges posed by free market capitalist society. Similar challenges are faced by the Amish.

Somewhere this week, on one of the economist blogs I frequent, there was an argument for greater use of the hormone that enhances milk production as a measure to reduce milk prices, which have risen recently. It's this tension between modernity and older values that's interesting (particularly if you're on the sidelines and have no personal stake in the matter--entirely different if it's your livelihood and your values.)

Today in FSA County Office

This piece in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch offers a refreshing change from the usual run of stories on farming and farm programs. Barb Burns is the county executive director (CED) in St. Clair county, and has her concerns: Land values, land being taken out of ag use, farmers signing up by computer versus the office (they're not), and handling pigheaded farmers.

(I remember visiting a county office in NC with a district director (responsible for oversight of about 10 county offices) way back in 1969 (tell it grandpa). After a week or so he decided he could trust me, even though I was a Yankee, presumably liberal and a troublemaker, as witness my long hair. He admitted to me he didn't really think that women should be in such positions as CED, because some of the farmers got pretty profane in the office. He resisted the idea of southern womenfolk being forced to deal with vulgarity. (He did admit, however, that the one woman in his district had no problem handling her farmers.)

Deja Vu, Warthogs, and Unmanned Aircraft

Government executive has an AP story on how the services are fighting over control of unmanned aircraft, both in Iraq and in the future. Brings back memories of reading Charles Peters' Washington Monthly in the 1970's and 1980's, which reported similar fights among the services. In fact, the struggle goes back to the 1920's--should each service: Navy, Army, Marine, have its own aviation or should it be centralized? The politicians thought and thought for many years, and came up with the only rational answer: Both.

Then, as the Monthly reported, there was fighting over tactical air and strategic air--the Army thought the AF was slighting tactical air in favor of the glamor of air superiority and strategic bombing. One area of controversy was the A-10 Warthog; a hideous plane designed never to appear in a Hollywood movie on the AF (but appears in movies on the ground forces as a modern version of the cavalry). It's slow, multiengined, armored to protect the pilot and designed for survivability and close ground support. During its development the Air Force tried to kill it repeatedly, only to have the Army and its Congressional supporters save it. Since its deployment the AF has tried to kill it, again to save money in the budget for more glamorous stuff.

So the fight over unmanned aircraft isn't new. How many services will fly them? Five (CIA plus the four service branches).

Furthering International Understanding

Here's an interesting post from an ex-pat Brit in France about bureaucrats (er, civil servants) in France. The whole site's not bad either.

Our Neighbors to the North Get a New Farm Program

Google Alerts is a good way to track stuff (actually, it's a good way to overwhelm yourself when you're curious). But Canadian farm programs are interesting, not only the different methods they use to administer them, but the different process for developing them. In a parliamentary system, the executive seems to have more power. This piece announces the program for 2008+:

The business risk management programs that replace CAIS include:

- AgriInvest, a program where both producers and governments contribute to a producers' savings account that will allow producers to easily predict the government's contribution and have the flexibility to withdraw funds to help address declines in income or to make investments to improve farm profitability.

- AgriStability, a program that provides support when a producer experiences a decline in farm income of more than 15 percent.

- AgriRecovery, a disaster relief framework which provides a coordinated process for federal, provincial and territorial governments to respond rapidly when disasters strike, filling gaps not covered by existing programs.

- AgriInsurance, an existing program which includes insurance against production losses for specified perils (weather, pests, disease) is being expanded to include more commodities.

Closing Offices Reaches Indiana

Another piece on the effort to close FSA offices, this time in Indiana. These plans have dribbled out over the spring. Is that intentional, to diffuse the impact and lessen the likelihood of politicians getting together, or, more likely, accidental and an artifact of bureaucracy?

U.S. Won't Be Majority Minority II

I posted on this a few days ago. Today Freakonomics refers to an article, and an acronym, reinforcing my point. Mayor Bloomberg of NYC is called a "W.A.S.H."--white, anglo saxon, hebrew. The article referred to, in the Forward, describes how Bloomberg isn't really "Jewish" in the usual way in NYC. It's almost like some blacks describing Barack Obama as not really "black" (or the present and former mayors of D.C. who certainly aren't the usual "black" politician). Of course, this is all dealing in stereotypes, in pictures that we carry around in our heads).

Basically what happens is as we come to know people, we start understanding the differences, the individuality. That usually leads to more mingling, fewer minorities and more individuals.c

Electronic Money and Money [Updated]

Today's Times has an article on toll roads. In the old days, you had to stop every 5-10 miles to deposit quarters when driving the New Jersey Turnpike (which I did once or twice, going from Fort Belvoir home). Today, the EZ Pass system (for anyone not used to the Boston-DC megaplex, it's an electronic system of scanners tied to one's credit card--you can roll through at 35 mph legally, 65 for all the speed freaks). The idea of the article is that people hardly notice the fees; the result of which is, according to an economist, toll road authorities have jacked their tolls. This raises concerns--the taxes are unseen and perhaps hit poorer families harder than rich.

Now in the real old days, we didn't spend money on roads. Country folk had to work x number of days on the roads (we're talking early and middle nineteenth century here), using their own equipment and animals to improve them. In effect, it was a non-monetary economy, one that was almost gone by the time I was born 100 years later.

It also occurs to me that now our toll pays for two things: the roads we travel on and the time and aggravation we save by not having to pay money tolls. The richer we get, the more we value our time. Time is one thing that, by and large, the poor have as much of as the rich.

[Update] Piece in the Post this morning about credit cards--they make it so easy to spend money and go into debt. So liberals will complain about credit cards and conservatives will complain about EZ-Pass. Both innovations reduce the friction in the system, with good and bad consequences.

Farm Bill

Sounds from this Wiesemeyer excerpt as if the House Ag committee is operating strategically--extend the 2002 farm bill with some sweeteners to keep the ag folks happy, and force the green types (organic, fruit and vegetable, slow food, etc.) to come up with the extra money under pay as you go.

Letters to the Editor II

I blogged yesterday about letters to the editor and rules. I received a prompt (and polite) response from Prof. Boudreaux (the politeness surprised because I was just a little snarky). I'm not convinced by his reasoning, but he didn't give me permission to quote so I'll go on to the broader issue.

The Post sports pages now carry material from blogs. I've never looked at the sports blogs, but it appears they're rapidly blurring the line between print and electronic media. In this respect, sports is well ahead of the news desk. I suggest the Post look into a similar process on the news side--certainly there has to be material worthy of being raised to the prominence of the print pages.

Such an advance still doesn't answer the bottomline question--where do you write? The odds against getting a letter published are very high, but the reward in circulation is great. It's a trade off--a 100 percent chance of publishing where almost no one reads or a .0001 percent chance of publishing where 1000000 people read (made up figures).

Of course, if the Post would merely kick rejected letters to a web site, the problem might be alleviated.

GMU Economist Flouts Post Rules??

Just started to send a letter to the editor of the Washington Post on the Fairfax education article, but then I read their rules:

Letters must be fewer than 250 words long and exclusive to The Washington Post; they may not have been submitted or posted to, or published by any other media or web outlet. They must include the writer's home address, e-mail address, and home and business telephone numbers. Anonymous letters will not be considered, nor does The Post permit the use of pseudonyms.

Just after seeing that, I read this post at Cafe Hayek, written by the head of the George Mason University Department of Economics:

"Here's a letter that I sent yesterday to the Washington Post in response to this report on Congress's refusal to renew the President's fast-track authority to negotiate trade agreements.

Dear Editor:It is unfortunate that Congress refuses to renew the President's fast-track trade authority ("End Nears for Era of Presidential Trade Authority," June 30)..." (I've truncated the letter).

So we have these options:

• Professor Boudreaux doesn't read the Post rules.
• He reads them but doesn't follow them. Or rather, because the Post doesn't say: "don't send us anything you use on a web site" he figures it's up to the Post to enforce their rules.
• He has talked to the Post and found out that the rules don't really apply to him or they don't apply to blog posts, or they don't apply as long as you write the letter before you post to the blog.

Anyhow, since I've already posted on the education article, and because my Presbyterian minister forebears are looking over my shoulder, the Post editor is getting one less letter. :-( However, I may ask the omsbudman for clarification.

Bad News in Fairfax County

A Post article reports on high school graduation rates. Almost 20 percent of Fairfax county teenagers do not graduate from high school. Actually, that statement is wrong, if I read correctly. 20 percent of Fairfax county freshmen do not graduate from high school, so those youngsters who were outside of the system entirely do not count. (And I mean that in about three different ways: not considered in the calculate, may be mathematically illiterate, and are excluded from our concern as a society.)

According to published data, 91 percent of Fairfax residents over 25 have high school degrees (or GED's). So Fairfax is importing more educated people and exporting less educated people. Whether this is a reflection of the statistical principle of "regression to the mean" or of class differences, I don't like it.

Flash--Scientists Discover Original Sin

From the Telegraph:

Whether lying about raiding the biscuit tin or denying they broke a toy, all children try to mislead their parents at some time. Yet it now appears that babies learn to deceive from a far younger age than anyone previously suspected.

Behavioural experts have found that infants begin to lie from as young as six months. Simple fibs help to train them for more complex deceptions in later life.

Until now, psychologists had thought the developing brains were not capable of the difficult art of lying until four years old.

World Hunger--Good News/Bad News

I haven't seen any media mention of this Economic Research Study of what, in the old days, we used to call "world hunger", but is now called "food security assessment". Call me old-fashioned, but I prefer the old days and the old term.

Briefly, they project over the next 10 years, although world population will grow substantially, the number of hungry people won't grow (at least within the margin of error of the study). Sub-Saharan Africa accounts for the bulk of the problem.

Where the Bureaucracy Meets the Citizen

In my former agency, we had a long-running discussion over our responsibility to the people we served; a discussion that was never resolved in my time there.

One side said: "farmers" are mature, rational people, well able to calculate what's best for themselves. Our job is only to make information on alternatives available to them. Their job is to make the best decision. If they fail to meet deadlines or understand the rules, that's too bad. But we should not spend taxpayer money to spoon feed every farmer, to walk him or her through the ropes and make sure they sign up for the right program. If our bureaucrats make mistakes, fine, but we should only offer redress for mistakes of commission, not failure to nurse people along.

The other side said: Congress creates confusing programs and never worries about how program operations relate to farmer's schedules for planning their operations and planting their farms. We county-level bureaucrats are dealing with our friends and neighbors, people we go to church with and whose children attend school with ours. We need to do everything we can to help these people understand the programs and sign up for the best option available. And if we fail to do so, we should recognize it's not the farmer's fault if they don't ask the right questions, it's our fault.

While I'm exaggerating the clarity of the two sides for effect, the different perspectives were real. I remember one county director in Kansas who took it as a personal affront when a former ASCS employee set up a consulting firm to aid farmers in complying with (or evading, depending on one's perspective) payment limitation rules. The differences were sometimes based on political perspectives--some Republicans leaned more towards the first, some Democrats more towards the second. But sometimes it was just the individual case where someone was particularly inept.

I suspect this tension is common throughout bureaucracies. Consider the IRS. This story
examines their program for free electronic filing of tax returns. Should our tax laws and tax procedures be so simple that H&R Block goes out of business? How far should the IRS go in explaining and coaching taxpayers? Or should they contract out, in effect, to private purveyors of tax preparation software and CPA's?

Will the U.S. Become Majority Minority?

No.

Yes, I know that California and Texas have already become majority-minority, with Hispanics, African-Americans, Asian-Americans, and Native Americans outnumbering the rest, but I doubt it will happen to the U.S., ever. Why? Let me go back in history. [yes, oldtimer, and let us sleep]

In the 1950's the WASP (white anglo-saxon protestant) dominance of America was slipping. A Catholic would even become President in 1960). To some that was as big an issue then as majority-minority is now. But now? We are all WASP's now. The issue of which people running for President are Catholics, which have a non-anglo-saxon background, is a non-issue, raised only occasionally as a space filler. Yes, I may be overstating my point, but the tone of the society is WASP. For all the jeremiads from the peanut gallery about the degradation of American culture, the differences between 1950 and 2005 are dwarfed by the continuity. We've evolved, but are still culturally American. For a comparison, Casey Stengel's NY Yankees and Joe Torre's NY Yankees are different, but are still the Yankees.

I predict the same is going to happen by 2050. We'll have some new divisions, but they won't be on the current lines. And the dominant culture will remain the dominant culture.

Outstanding Protection of SSN Data

From an FSA notice,explaining that travel documents show the Social Security number, which needs to be hidden:

The recommended method, provided by the Office of the Chief Financial Officer (OCFO) to hide
SSN’s, is to manually mark-out SSN’s on travel documents.
Notes: OCFO currently has no plans to modify the NFC OnLine Travel System to hide SSN’s
when travel documents are printed. Marking-out SSN’s is the only solution currently
recommended by OCFO, at this time, to protect an individual’s SSN.
An ink pen is more effective in hiding SSN’s than a felt-tipped pen.

I'm glad to see the USDA taking the protection of privacy so seriously.

Fallows, Chinese Peasants, Lowell Girls, and FSA Clerks

Sometimes I go off the deep end. Did that the other night, listening to James Fallows (renowned draft dodger [tongue in cheek] from the Nam era and now writer for the Atlantic) talk about his travels in China. (Here's a link to the Atlantic, but subscription is required.) He was describing a common practice: peasant girls from the country come to the city in their late teens, go to work in factories working long hours, living in factory dormitories, eating factory food. They end up saving enough money to go back home and move to a higher social class. (In the old days, they'd be earning a dowry--I'm not sure that's a Chinese concept though.)

As he talked, I remembered the "Lowell girls". The early New England spinning and weaving industry was typified by Lowell, MA, a factory town where country girls came to live under the eye of the management, working long hours, etc., etc. As we would say in Vietnam, "same, same". (The Wikipedia article is a little more anti than one recent scholarly article might suggest.)

Of course, the choice is between marrying young, which assumes you have available young men with available land, or delaying marriage and childbearing. In 1815 Massachusetts the land was taken, single men were moving west and leaving women behind. (Men being more mobile than women in general.) Women could go into teaching (as the public school system was taking off), or into the newly developed factories.

The issue of what do to with women (sounds more chauvinistic than I mean to) is common in rural societies. Some kill them (either in the womb or in the cradle) or, as the Chinese, prohibit them from being born at all (1 child per couple). In America, we've hired them as teachers, nurses, telephone operators, secretaries, and servants. In a minor way, the New Deal helped in rural America by opening up offices to run the farm programs. The paperwork needed women to handle it, so I'd expect you'd find a majority of women in the clerical ranks of the AAA/PMA/CSS/ASCS/FSA over the years. Just one way to keep them, if not on the farm, at least in the rural towns.

The Enemy of the Good--Health care and NASA

The attempt to do things perfectly is often an enemy to the good. This Government Executive piece outlines a familiar story: do you use a military standard software system that's centrally designed and inflexible, or do you use a locally developed system that works better, at least for some. This is in the area of military healthcare. An easy response is that it's such a vital area that things need to be exactly right, hence the need for a centrally planned and managed system.

A counter to that is a piece in the PC Magazine, including this discussion on NASA and even DOD:

The space agency itself has released at least 20 open-source applications under the NASA Open Source Agreement, including Livingstone2, a reusable artificial-intelligence software system that lets a spacecraft operate with minimal human oversight even if its hardware fails.

As the first federal agency to commit an open-source policy to paper, the Department of Defense has continued to encourage open-source deployments.

"Open-source software . . . connects and enables our command and control system to work effectively," said Brigadier General Nickolas Justice at an open-source technology conference in Arlington, Virginia. "When we rolled into Baghdad, we did it using open source."

More recent uses include the Navy's DDG 1000 Zumwalt class destroyer, built primarily on Red Hat Linux, and the Large Data Joint Capabilities Technology Demonstration, which allows quick handling of huge volumes of geospatial data. Such initiatives could streamline federal agencies and offer a new transparency to government.

So it's good to use open source in destroyers, but not in health care. (I recognize the difference between "open source", where the source code is public and available for people to change and improve, and "locally developed", where the source code is probably not public and almost certainly was not managed in a way that invites public comment and change. But, the psychology is similar--do you, the manager, want total control or do you want to steadily improve the software your users employ?

Closing the Border Is Impossible?

Roger Simon at the Politico has some good observations on immigration, focusing on the problems in eliminating illegal immigration. Takes the position that you need a database of all legal residents in order to check new employees. I tend to agree, although I'd say there are more possibilities to improve the situation than most discussions allow for.

Farm Bill Progress

Jim Wiesemeyer has an interview with the chairman of House Ag on the current status. This quote:

Biggest problem is the farm program payment cap issue: Peterson said he does not intend to offer changes to the limits on direct payments during upcoming 2007 farm bill deliberations. He had originally sought to have farm subsidies distributed to single attribution -- only to individual farmers instead of co-operatives. That language was defeated in Tuesday's markup by the General Commodities and Risk Management Subcommittee. But it is widely expected there will be a debate over payment limits during House floor debate on the farm bill. "I'm not doing anything on payment limits in the full committee," Peterson said. “Cotton, rice and peanuts will have to beg me to put it back in,” Peterson said.

I still think a compromise is to switch from a cap to a graduated scale of limitations. Just intuitively, the graduated scale seems fairer, so there's a chance you can sell it to more people than a cap.

How Do You Know When You've Lost It?

When your wife gives you a list to take to the store, and you forget to check the list.

Cheney, II

The Post continues its series on Cheney, today focusing on the debates over torture and cruel treatment of prisoners.

A couple second thoughts from yesterday. You can bypass bureaucracies effectively. The new book out on Nixon and Kissinger in China describes this well. They brutally cut out the State Department, humiliating Secretary of State Rogers. But it worked. My vague memory of reading Clark Clifford's memoirs has Truman cutting out the bureaucracy at one point, perhaps on the Marshall Plan.

The two examples show a key--if you're going to bypass the bureaucracy, you need to change the world in which they operate. Once we recognized China, once Marshall had made his speech, the bureaucracy had lost its veto power. Yes, bureaucrats could sabotage from within (as the remnants of the China Lobby tried to do with Nixon and his successors. But they don't have the leverage.

In the context of treatment of prisoners, Cheney tried to shift the parameters permanently, but the bureaucracy (and the structure of the U.S. government) ensured he couldn't do so. He would have been better off to claim a strictly temporary emergency power for the President--waterboard a handful, then declare the emergency over until the next time. The American people like to think of ourselves as holding to higher standards--we need our illusions.

Cheney and the Bureaucratic Dark Side

Post today has the first of four articles on VP Cheney's work while in office. What's interesting is that Dick (he's only 2 weeks older than I, but I'm much better preserved) has gone over to the dark side. Both he and Rumsfeld offered bureaucratic precepts before beginning service in the Bush administration. Cheney says perfectly good things like: "no surprises". Every player in the bureaucracy needs to know what's happening so they'll go along.

But the reality since 9/11 has been different. Cheney makes a practice of doing end runs around the bureaucratic machinery, predictably making the bureaucrats mad. He's become a bureaucratic Darth Vader. Or a leopard who hunts in the dark, leaving only the rags of its victims behind. It is a way to get results but it only works in the long run if you are either: (a) successful or (b) terrifying. Bush and Cheney succeeded in being terrifying until the lack of success became obvious. (Obvious to all but the most loyal and most blind.)

The article does elaborate on a bureaucratic tactic I don't remember seeing as well used--lack of feedback. Apparently Cheney will never offer suggestions or feedback. That tends to drive people up the wall. I well remember a boss who would reject a draft memo without being very clear on what was wrong. I used to call it: the "I'll know it when I see it" school of management.

Are Americans Really Know-it-alls?

A comment on a post: "I don't understand, but then again you americans think you know everything!" from a Canadian. It was a little misplaced, because I was almost in a state of wonderment that possibly the Canadian government administered their farm program(s) entirely through the Internet. Obviously I wasn't clear, but the commenter makes a very serious charge.

Of course, I often claim to know it all, that's an occupational hazard for a blogger. But do Americans think we know it all? Really? Remember Rex Harrison in My Fair Lady: "men are ...." ("A Hymn to Him) Just replace "men" with "americans" and that's probably fair, "we are a marvellous sex..", we only want others to be like us.

I have to plead guilty to the charge on behalf on 300 million + residents of the U.S. At this point, it's appropriate to refer to the post just below this one.

Incompetence and All Children Above Average

Garrison Keillor says in Lake Woebegone all children are above average. Two professors publish an article suggesting that incompetent people overestimate their abilities. To quote the abstract:

People tend to hold overly favorable views of their abilities in many social and intellectual domains. The authors suggest that this overestimation occurs, in part, because people who are unskilled in these domains suffer a dual burden: Not only do these people reach erroneous conclusions and make unfortunate choices, but their incompetence robs them of the metacognitive ability to realize it. Across 4 studies, the authors found that participants scoring in the bottom quartile on tests of humor, grammar, and logic grossly overestimated their test performance and ability. Although their test scores put them in the 12th percentile, they estimated themselves to be in the 62nd. Several analyses linked this miscalibration to deficits in metacognitive skill, or the capacity to distinguish accuracy from error. Paradoxically, improving the skills of participants, and thus increasing their metacognitive competence, helped them recognize the limitations of their abilities.

There's problems with this. Teenagers are incompetent drivers, but think they're invincible. Most drivers of all ages think they're above average drivers, which is mathematically impossible. (I'd suggest the most realistic drivers are those between 50 and 65--after 65 you start to lose it but are in a state of denial :-( )

Praise for Bureaucrats?

Christopher Hayes in the Nation
praises bureaucrats (Hat tip I think to Kevin drum.) for standing up to the Bush administration on various fronts. While I'm all for bureaucrats, and all for standing up to the Bush administration, I suspect liberals should be moderate in their praise and expectations.

Comes the great day when the Democrats control the Presidency again (plus about 2-6 years) and the papers, or whatever media we have in that grand and glorious time, will be full of stories on bureaucrats standing up to the hare-brained dictats of know-nothing Dems. You can count on it.

IT Progress at the FBI (Rah)

The sound of one hand clapping as the FBI rolls out phase I of its modernization program. It doesn't indicate that it will help in the problem recently reported--the length of time it takes to do FBI checks on immigrants. Apparently it's now a semi-manual process, the FBI office in DC has to poll all its field offices to see if they have anything in their files on a specific applicant. It's not clear from the story where that process is in the program. Perhaps after they upgrade their PC's to Windows XP in 2010?

3 to 5 Hours on the Phone, Daily?

Michelle Slatalla in the NYTimes today reports:

"How many calls does the average college student get or receive, anyway?

Peggy Meszaros, a professor of human development at Virginia Tech who asked more than 600 students that question in 2005, said, “An average of 11 calls a day.”

Professor Meszaros said that women, who talked longer than men, reported speaking most frequently to immediate family members, during calls that lasted 16 to 30 minutes.

“They were on the phone for an average of between three hours and five and a half hours a day?” I asked.

“Yes,” she said. “I’m guessing that it has ramped up more, too, because this study was done before texting was the fad.”"

I'm stunned, amazed, confused. I don't think I've ever had a day where I spent 5 hours talking with one other person (in series). So much for the idea that modern culture isolates individuals into social atoms.

Happy Birthday, Powerpoint

Via xx, here's an article in the Wall Street Journal on the 20th birthday of Powerpoint, the indispensable tool of bureaucrats these days. While interesting, it fails to give proper credit to the IBMers, led by Thomas J. Watson, who spread the gospel of graphics, along with their motto: "Think" around the world.

As I understand, Watson liked visual aids, so IBM got into it. It spread to DOD, where in the mid '60's I attended "charm school" (training for instructors), which included time on how to make your overhead projections. (Wikipedia has a different chronology, giving credit to the Army in WWII.)

As a bureaucrat, I first steered clear of overheads, until my boss (the one I called the "junior idiot", but not to his face) encouraged them. Part of the problem was the specialization of that era--to get overheads done you went to the graphics/forms shop. I didn't like the dependency. So when WordPerfect came out with a presentations package I got into it, because now I could control the process. ("If you want it done right, do it yourself".)

There was an advantage, especially important for a national bureaucracy faced with training people in 50 states and 2700+ county offices. You could create a graphics presentation and duplicate it for others to present. That's particularly important when the emphasis is on speed--if Congress passes a bill today and wants payments out in X weeks. In the old days, you'd present a spiel and state specialists would desperately (if they were conscientious) try simultaneously to take notes and plan their own presentations to county personnel beginning almost as soon as they got back to the state. It was a formula for misunderstanding, mistakes, and mispaid checks.

Gradually we moved to a pattern where (with the help of very capable county personnel (take a bow MK)) we'd be able to provide copies of the national materials ready for the state specialists. Ironically, we managed to centralize the training materials based on a decentralization of the process of developing them. Powerpoint (and, more importantly, word processing) spread skills and capability to more people, making them more productive. Apparently even school children use it these days. Which is just another instance of formerly advanced skills becoming the common property of the young.

TSP and Social Security Privatization

Back in the day when reform of Social security was under discussion, Republicans were pushing the alternative of having people invest in securities. They preferred the idea of individually managed accounts, as opposed to having the government manage investments. Some Democrats (like me) were open to something like the Thrift Savings Plan--the Federal version of a 401 K for its employees as at least one element of a revised system. Republicans attacked the idea, arguing that a government managed plan would be pressured to reflect social objectives in its investments.

A test of that position is underway--some Dems have asked the TSP to divest of stocks of companies in the Sudan, of tobacco, etc. etc. So far the board has resisted the idea.
If we get a Democratic government in 2008, it will be interesting to see if they can continue to do so.

Pet Peeves--"Traditional Farmers"

Don't have a URL for this, but it's aggravated me and, if this blog serves any purpose at all, it should help relieve my aggravations. Last week I ran across an article criticizing US farm programs (which is fine, there's nothing wrong with that). But one of the criticisms was that they had the effect of undermining the traditional farmers in other countries, because they couldn't compete with the flood of food imported from the U.S. at low subsidized prices.

What aggravates me is not the cause and effect relationship, but the idea that undermining traditional farming is somehow wrong and bad. After all, China is surging its way to developed nation status by policies that undermined traditional farming, creating an urban labor force for its new industries. Ireland is the Tiger of the EU because its traditional farming has been undermined and abandoned. The U.S. is an industrial power because our traditional farming patterns have been destroyed.

Granted, destroy any traditional way of life and you cause suffering and pain, loss of the past and loss of life. And granted, the power of the market is blind. But I believe in the general proposition that life in the U.S. today, taken by and large, is better than it was 180 years ago when one of my ancestors immigrated. And that's true despite, and even because, the traditional agriculture found in 1830 America has been destroyed, even on Amish farms.

Impact of Farm Bill

The Farmgate site of the University of Illinois says extrapolations show minimal impact on agriculture from the administration's farm bill proposals. Oddly, though they credit FAPRI (Food and Agricultural Policy Research Institute) for the data, I don't see it highlighted on FAPRI's website.

How the Brits Do Health and IT

This is interesting:

Britain's best-paid civil servant is to quit as the head of NHS information technology, claiming the new, accident-prone computer system is on track.

Richard Granger, the chief executive of Connecting for Health, said he would leave the post, and its £290,000-a-year salary, in October. "There is no doubt about the programme's achievability," said Mr Granger, who took up the role in October 2002. "Most of the building blocks are now in place."

Karen Jennings, the head of health at Unison, the NHS's biggest trade union, said Mr Granger's optimism was at odds with the views of the "majority of NHS staff".

She said: "Technically... things are finally coming together. But lessons must be learned from the way these over-ambitious, big-bang IT projects have been brought in late and so over-budget."

Parts of the project are two years behind schedule and it may now cost a total of £20 billion, which would put it £7 billion over budget.

Mr Granger can point to some successes. An electronic patient-booking service now arranges 20,000 appointments a day and 250 million X-ray images are now stored electronically.

Several things--the guy was the highest paid civil servant. By automating the National Health Service, Britain brings all the advantages and weaknesses of centralized IT to health care, including the problems of doing a big big project. On the other hand, while $40 billion is a bigger project than anything the US government has done, at least outside the military, they appear to have had better success than the FBI has.

Putting Up Fences and Winning the War

The NY times has an op-ed today by Owen and Bing West, Bing was in DOD (under Bush I, I think), Owen was a marine in Iraq. They contrast the ability of NYC cops to identify people and lookup history in databases, with the lack thereof in Iraq. (NYC probably has a large population of illegal immigrants.)

Meanwhile, the people opposing the immigration bill in the senate are calling for tough enforcement. Charles Krauthammer in the Post has an column pushing fences.

I read somewhere that 40 percent of those illegally present in the US arrived on visas, so fences won't be the magic bullet. It seems obvious to me that, if we say that we don't want illegal immigrants, we also are saying we agree to digital ID's, biometric databases, and tight checking of credentials. We can't have one without the other (if indeed we can have the one). As Mr. Heinlein used to say, there's no such thing as a free lunch.