Thursday, July 10, 2008

NAIS and Veggies

From a Post editorial in reference to the salmonella problem:
"Ms. DeGette points out that the technology exists to trace food and produce from the farm to the dinner table. It's time that Congress put that technology to work to protect the food supply."
In that context, it's hard for those who oppose the NAIS to gain traction.

As a followup, Nextstep cautions Congress on trying to mandate technological fixes.

More on ACRE

The ACRE program really makes me shudder, and this from farmgate doesn't help. Why? Because FSA had, and I think still has, a general "misaction/misinformation" provision. The idea being if a bureaucrat tells you something wrong and you act on it, or if the bureaucrat does something wrong which harms you, FSA should make you whole.

From a philosophical standpoint, it's interesting. (There's a certain parallel to the FISA debate going on--the bill that just passed the Senate which Obama and Clinton differed on holds the telecoms harmless/gives them immunity from suits for past acts taken in accord with instructions from the executive. To my mind it's much the same philosophy as misaction/misinformation.) Looked at one way, shouldn't the government expect its citizens to be knowledgeable and to look after their own interests? If so, if a bureaucrat misinforms you, why shouldn't we expect you to know better? To be pejorative, should the government be encouraging its citizens to rely on it? (Conservatives/libertarians can do a great riff on this.)

The political reality is that we have the misaction/misinformation law--write your Congressperson with a grievance and one of the first questions the FSA person who handles the correspondence is going to ask is, was there misaction or misinformation? And, in my experience, the agency will often lean towards saying "yes". If the farmer goes out the door confused, it was the FSA person who confused him. (All farmers are smart, just as all children are above average.)

So, under a brand-new program like ACRE we're particularly likely to have confusion both within FSA and in the agricultural community. We're also particularly likely to see people regretting their choice after a year or two and that's when the claim of "you misinformed me" is likely to be made.

Who Says Bureaucrats Don't Listen

The Director of the Congressional Budget Office listens to David Brooks, and has poetry in his soul, or at least footnote 47 of his testimony.

I Was Wrong, Perhaps [Updated]

I've commented at both Marginal Revolution and John Phipps on posts reporting the existence of a World Bank report that blames biofuel initiatives in Europe and US for 75 percent of a 140 percent increase in food costs over the last 6 years. My comments boil down to: not credible as reported

But the devil's in the details. And people fall into traps of snap judgments. So I might well be wrong for the following reasons:
  • the definition of "food". It can mean the costs to the consumer of articles in the supermarket in the U.S. Or it could mean the prices of basic commodities: rice, wheat, corn, etc. averaged over 6.7 billion people. The impact using the first definition is much less than the second, and there could obviously be variations and permutations of the definition.
  • the definition of cause--which straw broke the camel's back? If you start with 2002 and look at all the changes in production and demand since, there are many things which impact price.
I need to remember the basic economics of agriculture, demand is inelastic and supply is inelastic--changes in supply can cause big changes in price. But so can changes in demand. So a change like biofuels which is new can cause big price hikes. And a new demand is going to seem more significant than a change in old parameters, like the levels of imports by India and China.

Having said all the above, and knowing we still haven't seen the actual study, I still expect the World Bank study to end up at one extreme of the argument, but I can't dismiss it as cavalierly as I did before.

[Update: See here for an update. Via Farm Policy.com]

True Sentence

"If members of Congress could get away with never voting on anything, they'd probably do it."

Kevin Drum, on a new War Powers Act

Wednesday, July 09, 2008

Coral, Algae, and Culture

The NY Times had an interesting article on coral and algae that hits the slow food and cultural markers as well. Carrageenan comes from algae and is used in industrial food (i.e., ice cream). But the algae that were brought into Pacific areas to be farmed are now endangering the coral reefs. And solving the problem is hard:
"Then there are cultural factors. Some Pacific countries, like Kiribati, are populated by what ethnologists call nonconsumers: people who need just a little cash to get by and once that need is met, prefer to spend time with their family, go fishing or sleep.[instead of gathering algae]

There is also “pubusi,” (pronounced poo-boo-SEE) the local tradition in which one person can ask another for pretty much anything, using the magic word, and the other person has to hand it over or face public opprobrium.

“What’s the point of making money if you have to pubusi it all away?” says Kevin Rouatu, a stocky, cheerful former banker who runs the Atoll Seaweed Company in Kiribati."

The conflict between market and non-market thinking/culture exists not only in Amish communities in the U.S. but in Kiribati.

Foolish Optimism from Michael Gerson

Who says in today's column in the Post that:
"Chevrolet and Toyota are only a couple of years away from offering plug-in hybrids that could average hundreds of miles to the gallon. [enphasis added]"

The column segues from fuel economy to hunger to insufficient food stamp funds.

I Never Rode a Bike, But Like the Tour de France

And this feature of Google Maps (offering a bike-level view of the Tour), via the Monkey Cage, is cool.

EU Fights Fat by Free Food

The EU is proposing to provide free fruits and vegetables to kids 6-10 to fight obesity.

Tuesday, July 08, 2008

A Different School System

Dirk Beauregard on the French system, now 200 years old:

"For better or worse, the Baccalauréat works, and is still a reasonable indicator of educational excellence, furthermore the Baccalauréat is national and nationalised. Candidates sit the same papers in the same subject at the same time all over France. There are no private exam boards. State education mobilises thousands of teachers to get everything marked within ten days, and all candidates get their results in the first week of July. There is no single Baccalauréat that is easier than another. There is no exam board reputed to be more difficult or better than another. It is true educational equality, and it works. Why reform it, other than the fact it is 200 years old and therefore has to be modernised in the name of fashionable progress.

So, all the candidates, for better or worse, have their results, and this week they are signing on at university. Come Friday, everything will be sorted for the start of the new university year, and France can go on holiday. Kids in Britain will get their results in late August and spend the rest of their summer trying to get a place at university. Seems a bit late to me."

For someone with no children, it's probably easy for me to overestimate the fragmentation (that may not be the right word) of the US education system. I know we have the SAT's and I assume the National Merit exams and the application process to college is being standardized and No Child Left Behind has forced some uniformity. But I'm still amazed at the difference between our system and the Europeans.

Best SEntence Today

"Sex and food — that's what NYT readers care about the most."

(From a discussion of the long article on Rush Limbaugh in the Sunday magazine and NYT's readers reaction.)

Sunday, July 06, 2008

Most Surprising Factoid of the Day--Africans

"African immigrants in the United States have a higher level of education than all other groups, including white and Asian Americans, staying in school an average of 14.5 years. They have a median household income that is higher than that of black Americans, West Indians and Hispanics."

That's from a piece on their support for Obama in today's Post.

[Update: I suppose there are a number of possible explanations for this: Opportunities in the African countries sending emigrants could be particularly limited for the most educated. The cost of emigrating might be such as to screen out the less educated. Relatively speaking, the US is more attractive to the most highly educated Africans than are other countries which attract immigrants--i.e., Canada for example might attract more than its share of Asians and less than its share of Africans.

We don't know whether they come here into more highly paid slots or, once here, rise more quickly so it's not clear what the data might say about the opportunities to prosper here.

We don't have a feel for the proportions of Africans migrating, do more or less migrate compared to Southeast Asians, for example.

Bottom line: facts are tricky.]

Saturday, July 05, 2008

Only Animal Farmers Are Real Farmers

That's a bold claim, sure to tick off all the grain and fiber producers, but read this post from the Life of a Farm blog and you may understand. As he says: " Thing is the chickens don’t take days off."

(He's under contract to raise layers and finding it more work and more tedious than he anticipated. He also complains about the lack of help, neighbors who cheat SSI, and the possible need for immigrant labor.)

As I say, a dairy or poultry farmer is the only real farmer, because animals will drive you to drink. You may work 18 hours a day planting or harvesting grain, but it's not every day. You can get away. Caring for dairy cows or poultry is a job 365 days in a year, with no breaks, no vacation, always chained to the schedule of feeding and watering, milking and collecting eggs. If any farmer writes about traveling or camping, be assured they're either not a real farmer by my lights or they have some gullible relatives.

Two Southern Products I Couldn't Stomach

Grits and Jesse Helms. I ran into both of them at the same. When my boss sent me to NC in 1969 to learn how the agency really worked, I ate breakfast (and probably supper) at a diner near the motel. Of course I got grits with my eggs, without asking, and the Raleigh TV station had Mr. Helms spouting off about dangers to the American way of life from the radicals in Washington and those who would change the southern way of life. Needless to say, I rejected both: tasteless pap for those with no brains. (Although, to be fair, grits and the "Cream of Wheat" I sometimes had as hot cereal growing up weren't that much different. )

Friday, July 04, 2008

Thoughts on the Fourth

I read somewhere the difference between conservatives and liberals is:
  • conservatives believe the U.S. was perfect when created, and the job is to preserve it. That, as Powerline posts today, in the words of Calvin Coolidge, the principles of the Declaration of Independence are perfect and final. Period, end discussion.
  • liberals believe the U.S. was imperfect and the job is to perfect it. "All men are created equal" may be a noble principle, but it meant "white men" in 1776.
I'm on the liberal side. So was Lincoln, whom Powerline also quotes, though he made his point through clever lawyering. "Government of the people, by the people, and for the people shall not perish..." did liberal work in conservative clothing. In the midst of a war redefining "men" as men of any color Lincoln made it seem as if war was preserving the meaning of the Declaration.

The Best Line I Read Today

"“It seems like age and experience do have a role,” Mr. Nagel said in an interview.

From Floyd Norris in the NYTimes reporting a study of whether experienced fund managers did better or worse during the tech bubble.

Thursday, July 03, 2008

Big Farming--The Way It Starts

Josh Ruxin writes an op-ed in the Post about Africa's Food Crisis Opportunity--the idea that the food crisis in Africa still presents opportunities for change:
"But subsistence-level farmers who are not reliant on expensive fertilizer or oil-fueled machinery can sell their excess produce at higher prices, which are still less than prices for food that might be trucked or flown in. The resulting boomlet benefits sub-Saharan Africa's small farmers, who cultivate, on average, less than 2 1/2 acres and who can, with appropriate assistance, expand their production to meet increasing demand....

A colleague from Nigeria wrote to me this spring saying that while the cost of fertilizer had increased by 50 percent, the selling price of corn was up by 100 percent. In other words, those productive small farmers who had had access to the increased capital required to obtain fertilizer had doubled their income in a year. "
And this is, in my opinion, how it starts. Someone doubles their income and invests wisely, maybe more land, more fertilizer, better seeds, better equipment. Doesn't go deeply into debt so when prices slump, as they always do, he or she can ride out the storm, pick up some land and be ready to profit by the next rise in prices. Slowly the operation gets bigger, until the farmer makes a mistake, has bad luck, or grows older and less ambitious. As it gets bigger, it tends to specialize. Gradually the farmers get on the "treadmill", as Professor Cochrane called it, the feedback loop of more productivity leading to lower commodity prices and higher land prices, leading to more specialization and more investment, meaning more productivity.

Wednesday, July 02, 2008

Compost and Manure

You can have one or the other, but not both, not in abundance. That seems to be the lesson I learned in the past, of which I've been reminded by a couple of the organic/gardening blogs I visit. We had a "slop" pail, into which went the vegetable scraps, beet tops, sour milk, etc. After lunch we'd top the pail up with some water and use it to wet down the chicken mash still left in the feeders. The hens would be attracted, both by the wet mash and by the slop, eat a bit more and presumably lay a few more eggs. And also excrete more manure, which dad and I would have to shovel from the house into the manure spreader to spread on the field. (Hen manure is much hotter than cow manure, so it had to be spread much thinner.)

My mother maintained a compost pile outside, under the lilac bush or in her garden, but with the competition from the hens it didn't really accumulate much. (Enough for her to brag about it though--compost in 1950 was just a tad rare in upstate NY.)

As I mentioned, a couple of the sites I visited mentioned the same sort of competition--you can feed vegetable scraps to the pigs, which are omnivores like us, or you can compost, but not both in full measure. (You also need a balance of materials for the compost, which is hard to achieve in ideal measure over the course of the year.) These are some of the little complications of organic gardening.

Transparency

Government Executive reports on a growing movement for transparency in government, particularly in the field of government expenditures. As I commented there, I like it, mostly. EWG has done it to farmers for 12 years and they've mostly survived the experience.

Have I mentioned David Brin's Transparent Society recently? I like it.

I'd extend the idea to many areas. For example, Down to Earth has a post about McNuggets--how McDonald's has some housewives looking at their processes. Why shouldn't McDonalds stick video cameras hooked to the Internet in the places they want us to see, and the places we want to see (as mentioned in the post). Granted, very few people would ever want to watch 50,000 birds eating and sleeping, but PETA might check now and again.

If people can use cameras to watch pregnant cows and babysitters and somewhat senile oldsters, we can use them elsewhere.

Tuesday, July 01, 2008

Bottled Water; or Michael Pollan Might Be Right

I typically respond negatively to those, like Michael Pollan, who say that food manufacturers have stuffed Americans with high sugar drinks. Don't they realize Americans are independent thinkers not to be led around by the nose?

But then I read a story on bottled water, like the one by Shenkar Vedantam in Monday's Post, "What's Colorless and Tasteless And Smells Like . . . Money?" and I think, maybe they have a point; maybe cola companies do have the power to stuff us with sugar water and make us pay for it.

Giving Hypocrisy a Bad Name

John Tierney at the Times has a post on hypocrisy, taking off from McCain and Obama's reversals of positions to discuss psychologists' studies of hypocrisy. He describes an interesting tidbit--given a situation in which people are hypocrites (although acknowledging option B is fair and A is unfair, they take option A), if you keep their brain busy with another task like remembering numbers, the same people suddenly take the fair option. It's fascinating, but...

I like to think well of people, at least until I run into some road-hogging whippersnapper in a Hummer, so I'd quibble with Tierney's premise. He dings McCain for switching positions on Bush's tax cuts over a period of 7 years or so, and Obama for switching on public financing. But note both politicians are being hypocrites, if they are, over time. And we're all hypocrites over time. Is there a parent with soul so dead, who never to his kid has said, don't ever do X, when buried in his memory is all the X ever done? Forgive the poor try at poetry, but my serious point is that time changes our viewpoint. And our politicians, unlike the subjects of the psychologists studies, are making decisions in time.

  • McCain can reasonably say: I opposed the tax cut in the situation in 2001 based on the information I had, in 2008 the situation is different, the future looks different, and my judgment differs.
  • And Obama can reasonably say (perhaps with a tad more difficulty but remember I'm a Dem): no one, not even me or my wife, thought I'd be in the situation I'm in today; no one thought I'd have this fundraising base. I made my pledge as a means to an end, reforming our politics. My campaign has been a model for how our politics can change (no lobbyists, no 527's) and this decision is the right one to ensure my success in achieving office.
I think it's fair to accuse politicians of being windbags, of over-certitude, of selling a penny's worth of ointment as a dollar's worth of cure. And they're hypocrites, just as the rest of us are, even Mr. Tierney.

Monday, June 30, 2008

Seeing the Future (of Oil, Wheat, etc.)

Tyler Cowen at Marginal Revolution has an interesting post on Julian Simon, an economist who famously bet Paul Ehrlich that prices of metals would drop. His logic was, the most important resource we have is the human brain--the more brains we have the better everyone (on average) will do and brains can remedy any shortfall in any seemingly scarce resource. His heyday was during the last run-up in prices of oil and grains and other commodities in the 1970's, when he was a contrarian voice who seemed for 25 years to have been more right than wrong. But with today's prices, Tyler asks whether people can believe his thesis, at least enough to short oil, etc.

As you might expect, it gets lots of comments. (Also as you might expect, Simon's outlook is not popular among the Bill McKibben's of the world.) Anyone who is interested in the argument might also look at the study from Humboldt U. (Berlin) which basically argues that Simon was right (at least for food over the 1870-2000 period) but we face a changed environment. (It's nice to get a perspective from outside of the usual parties in the U.S.--we often are blind to our own biases.) An excerpt:
European Union agriculture has long stopped producing homogenous commodities. Rather it has become “boutique agriculture”. Farmers produce a wide range of goods which are characterised by differing production cost and sold for differing prices in the market place. Domestic consumers and those from abroad choose those qualities that best meet their individual preferences and income. It is likely that sustained higher market prices for agricultural products will act to slow down the growth in the demand for organic food. Moreover, the price of organic food relative to that of other food has declined in recent years, making organic food less profitable to produce.
And from the conclusion:
In this study the driving forces of changes in agricultural world market prices and their implications for European Union agriculture have been analysed for the time period 2003/05 -2013/15. The mega-trend of declining world market prices, which is sometimes referred to as the Agricultural Treadmill, has ended. Since the turn of the millennium, world market prices for agricultural goods have been increasing. This trend can be expected to continue for at least the time period analysed here. Not only will prices have a tendency to increase, but also fluctuations of agricultural world market prices are likely to be higher in the future than they have been in the past.

The reason for the positive trend in agricultural world market prices is that global demand growth outstrips the growth in global supply, and this trend will continue in the foreseeable future. Global demand for food will continue to grow at a fairly rapid pace mainly for two reasons. One is the continued growth in world population; the other is the sustained growth in per capita incomes in developing and newly industrialising countries, with a corresponding increase of per capita food consumption.

Green Milk

No, it's not a belated St. Patrick's Day story, but a piece in the NYTimes on new milk containers, touted as more efficient and greener, because there are no milk crates to wash. The 1-gallon milk jugs must be shipped from bottler (jugger?) to grocery store in crates "because the shape of old-fashioned milk jugs prohibits stacking them atop one another. The crates take up a lot of room, they are unwieldy to move, and extra space must be left in delivery trucks to take empty ones back from stores to the dairy." And, in one bottling plant, it takes 100,000 gallons of water to wash the crates.

The article says Wal-mart and Costco are pushing it, but consumers have problems learning how to pour (if I understand, the new container is basically a box). But if I can adapt to coffee cans that are cubical plastic jobbies, consumers for the sake of the earth can learn how to pour milk from these. After all, I can remember lots of different milk containers, lots of improvements.

We used to sell (raw) milk to a couple of neighbors, who'd bring a stainless steel container, which we would fill. Other neighbors had milk delivered, in the glass quart bottles, which made interesting shapes when it was zero and the milk wasn't taken in promptly. That milk was pasteurized and homogenized and took a while for me to get used to the taste. (But my mother had TB, so you won't find me a strong defender of raw milk.) Of course, the glass bottles had a deposit and were returnable, just as the pop (soft drink) bottles were back then. When I went to college, the cafeteria I worked in dispensed milk from a machine, the milk arriving in a plastic bag within a cardboard box. The boxes were good for packing books in at the end of the term when it was time to head back to the farm. The Army may have had a similar system, but fortunately I didn't do enough KP to remember. (Youngsters ask: "KP? What's KP") Then in civilian life and married life we bought milk in the waxed cardboard cartons, then the plastic gallon jugs. (I don't remember when we switched--funny how we don't notice the small changes in our lives.)

But, as I say, there's always a tradeoff. At each step along the way the new system may be more efficient and maybe more safe, but it also requires dairy companies to invest in new equipment (rather like the old days when farmers had to get milk coolers to put their milk cans in--the next step was requiring bulk tanks). So it's also another straw on the camel's back for the dairy company that's just getting by, day-to-day, and which can't afford the new equipment to compete. People, at least those who drink milk, gain; those who work at the companies who can't compete, don't.

Bureaucracy and Farm Bill Implementation

Whenever there's a new program enacted, the question becomes which bureaucracy will implement it. The Sustainable Agriculture Coalition reports on the infighting in their weekly newsletter:

Farm Bill Implementation News: Two letters have been sent this week from Capitol Hill to USDA to clarify beginning farmer provisions in the new farm bill. On Thursday, House Chairman Peterson (D-MN) and Senate Chairman Harkin (D-IA) wrote to Secretary Schafer to provide a clear direction that the farm bill designates the Beginning Farmer and Rancher Development Program to be administered by the Cooperative State Research Education and Extension Service (soon to be renamed the National Institute for Food and Agriculture). The letter came in response to surprising news from the Department that the program might be assigned to either Rural Development or to the new Office of Outreach and Advocacy. The clear intent of Congress, supported by SAC, was for this program to go to CSREES.

On Friday, a letter from Senator Feingold (D-WI) and Chairman Harkin was sent to the Secretary to outline their intent, as the Senate champions for the new Office of Outreach and Advocacy and its Small Farms and Beginning Farmers and Ranchers sub-unit, regarding the placement and mission of the new office. SAC has been working closely with the Rural Coalition on the implementation of this new office, which also includes a sub-unit for Socially Disadvantaged Farmers and Ranchers. The newly-positioned and enhanced office will be at the executive level of the Department, reporting directly to the Secretary, not through any department mission area and Under Secretary.

The program sponsors want it placed as high in the bureaucracy as possible and in as sympathetic bureaucracy as possible. If the sponsors succeed, the bureaucrats naturally feel gratitude to the sponsors. It's a very different process than a public adminisration-type analysis of the logic and appropriateness of the bureaucratic setup.

Sunday, June 29, 2008

Pigford and Discrimination

The case of blacks who tried to maintain their family farms and failed, originally labeled as "Pigford", was revived in the new farm bill.

The NY Times has an update today--actually it's an AP story carried in the Times. It makes these points:

  • it summarizes the case--73,000 claimed to have missed the filing period under the original Pigford agreement.
  • the new provision in the farm bill passed only because the cost estimate was only $100,000. (The article cites possible costs of $1.5 to 2.4 billion.)
  • 800 have already filed suit under the new provision.
  • Rep. Davis seems to concede he deliberately low-balled the cost estimate.
In my own view, I think Rep. Davis is wrong--the costs will never get that high because the former black farmers who are applying have been sold a pig in a poke. It's another case of 50 acres and a mule. But if he admits the cost will be low, he becomes the bad guy who disillusions the potential claimants. If he pretends the cost will be high, the court system and USDA retain their roles as the bad guys.

Saturday, June 28, 2008

Life Is Fragile

Remember our first view of the earth from the moon? See NASA's site, visible earth. The "blue marble" image stimulated the environmental movement, emphasizing the fragility of life on earth.

To compare incomparables, I had a reminder yesterday that life is fragile--screwing up my back while getting out of the car. :-) Now I'm gimping around the house, my routine disrupted, fussing at the cats, dependent on my better half. (I hate being dependent.) The good news is, behind the scenes in my lower back the damage is being repaired. Thank you, body. The bad news is, my body gets older and slower at repairs every day.

Friday, June 27, 2008

How Legislation Is (Not) Implemented

From a press conference at USDA, this exchange:

REPORTER: Thank you. Just quickly, I wanted to ask about the Lacy Act Amendments. Is USDA implementing the expansion of the Lacy Act for illegally taken plants? Or is that strictly a CBP function?

SEC. SCHAFER: Can you translate that into real language?

REPORTER: Sure. The expansion of the Lacy Act that essentially requires documentation to avoid any illegally logged tropical lumber, among other plants.

SEC. SCHAFER: And what was the other? You used an acronym.

REPORTER: Oh, the Customs and Border Protection. I wasn't sure given that APHIS inspectors had gone over there whether it's USDA that has to implement that part of the farm bill.

SEC. SCHAFER: I don't even know. Can't tell you. And you're drawing blanks from our expert team here, so you've stumped the panel.


What this mean is USDA is not likely to implement the provision. Customs may, assuming the reporter is poorly informed and it clearly fits within Customs jurisdiction. But if there's a genuine question, neither bureaucracy has an incentive to pick up the ball. If the Congressional sponsor doesn't push it, it may fall through the cracks.

Good Bureaucracy in the DC Government

I don't know who might be responsible, but I like the effort, as described in today's Post, to have one ID card that works for all functions of DC government. Apparently the ACLU doesn't have big problems with it.

Thursday, June 26, 2008

Online ID and ID Cards

NYTimes has an article on an effort to simplify passwords online:

"The idea is to bring the concept of an identity card, like a driver’s license, to the online world. Rather than logging on to sites with user IDs and passwords, people will gain access to sites using a secure digital identity that is overseen by a third party. The user controls the information in a secure place and transmits only the data that is necessary to access a Web site."
Having recently scorned Medicare's refusal to take the SSN off their ID card, I think the government should join this effort.

Silos and the Lament of a Yellow-Dog Democrat

I'm a yellow-dog Democrat, at least since the Dems in Virginia got themselves half-way together, so I have no way of knowing the situation on the Republican side. But the situation on my side stinks.

What am I talking about? The decentralized, unbusinesslike way in which we Democrats work our campaign finances. I think Tom McAuliffe helped a little bit, but it's still bad.

Specifically, everyone and his sister solicits me because I have a long record of being a sucker, er--responding to solicitations. There's the DNC (the national committee), the DSCC (Senate campaign committee), the House committee, the individual campaigns (for some reason Clinton had my email address until she dropped her bid, but Obama didn't, but now he does), and then there's the Virginia Democrats and my various representatives and Senators.

I mentioned McAuliffe--once I used to get brochures and solicitations from the DNC every month or two. Then they made me an offer I couldn't resist--they'd drop the mail if I'd give them protection money, er--contribute on a regular basis. But, and here's my complaint, the DNC and the other Democratic units don't talk to each other. It'd be fine if they'd piggyback on the DNC's infrastructure, so they could ask me to boost my contribution and spread my money among the various units. But that's not the way the U.S. works--we believe in silos, everyone doing his or her own thing.

Delays in Program Implementation

Brownfield Network reports implementation problems for the ACRE program and permanent disaster:
"The data that is necessary to implement ACRE simply cannot be put upon the current computer system that is housed in the Farm Service Agency and there will need to be changes in that system before we can implement ACRE fully," Conner said.

Conner also emphasized the Bush administration is "working closely" with Congress to get "additional implementation resources" for the FSA. But Senate Ag Committee Chairman Tom Harkin disputed that statement Thursday. And Harkin told Brownfield he has little sympathy for USDA’s computer problems. According to Harkin, the Bush administration has known about the FSA computer problems for years, has never bothered to ask Congress for funding to fix the problem and still hasn’t done so.

"If they want money they should come up here and ask us for an emergency appropriation," Harkin said. "If they do that, we'll honor that. But where are they?"

ACRE isn't the only new farm bill program to face lengthy implementation delays. Schafer explained that permanent ag disaster aid program payments to producers devastated by flooding may not come for more than a year, mainly due to the fact Congress did not authorize USDA to speed-up the rulemaking process for the program.
I'm in no position to comment on either issue, though I did previously write about FSA/USDA computer problems. But I would note that the farm programs were operated without computers for decades, so what we're seeing is the symbiosis between bureaucratic technique and legislation--the more capable the bureaucrats become (using computers, etc.) the more complex the law.

Wednesday, June 25, 2008

The Adaptability of People

That seems to be today's theme. Here's a NYTimes article on a weird custom in parts of Albania--a woman can choose to live as a man, and apparently it works. I've been intrigued by studies of the importance of peers versus that of parents in forming people. But here's a reminder that, provided society creates a set of roles and norms, people can be very flexible. (In the article, a 20-year old woman all of whose brothers were killed, leaving the family without male leadership, chooses the male/leader role with full acceptance from the society.) I suppose it's similar to people moving from one society to another: some are able to adapt to the new range of roles available and become successful; others drop in status to the more limited roles (taxi drivers, cooks, cleaners).

Everyone who announces a position about people should remember examples like these.

Gardens in Lesotho

Anyone who's skimmed the history of agriculture in different parts of the world won't be surprised by the gardens of Lesotho, as described here. The history is testimony to the ability of people to adapt to different environments, meaning they learn ways to make use of what's available. (Updated: see the nice piece in Slate on gardening.)

The Faceless Bureaucrat

See the picture there.

Tuesday, June 24, 2008

Feminism Score--Four Stars

The Post and Times have pieces on Lt. Gen. Ann Dunwoody, now nominated to be a four-star general, probably the first one to have graduated from Cortland State (i.e., upstate NY). And apparently a Scotch-Irish background.

A Weak Government and Weak Newspapers Equal No Sports Fanatics

I'm trying to link one of my themes, that, in keeping with Madison and Federalist 10, we have a weak government (despite the fantasies of the conservatives and libertarians), with an observation

Ilya Somin at Volokh Conspiracy contrasts American sports fanaticism with that in Europe, and finds ours lacking (our fans almost never kill each other over games):

Many European and especially Latin American soccer teams are also closely associated with governments. This often allows repressive and corrupt regimes to obtain propaganda benefits from the teams' victories. For example, the repressive Brazilian and Argentinian military governments of the 1970s increased their public support as a result of their national teams' World Cup victories in 1970 and 1978. In Europe, Mussolini, Franco, and the communist government of the Soviet Union derived similar benefits from their teams' successes. On a lesser scale, incompetent or corrupt local governments in Europe sometimes benefit from the victories of local clubs.

In the United States, by contrast, pro sports rivalries are based on geographic divisions that have little or no connection to deeper social antagonisms over race, religion, or political ideology. As a result, even the most heated US sports rivalries, such as the Red Sox-Yankees rivalry, rarely result in violence between fans of opposing teams - and never in the form of the large-scale soccer riots that we sometimes see in Europe, Asia, and Latin America.
Where do newspapers come in? I read a report a few days ago, I think from a newspaper conference in Europe, that's relevant. As I remember it, European newspapers look at US papers and see lots of weak, local papers as compared to their setup where you have fewer, more national papers. For example, in France the Paris newspapers dominate the country; similarly in Britain the London papers are dominant. The closest we come is having USAToday, the Wall Street Journal and NY Times, but even those papers don't have the influence of the Times (of London). So the Euro papers see the problems US papers are having with the Internet and currently don't have the same problems, but anticipate they may down the road.

Monday, June 23, 2008

Potatoes, Co-ops, and Marketing Information

The potato industry has organized itself. Partially facilitated by modern technology, as in the Internet and conference telephone calls, the Idaho potato growers organized a cooperative in 2004. Under the existing law, farmers can organize without violating anti-trust law. The co-op was able to reduce production, in part by running a bid program, as well as coordinating marketing.
Abstract of a paper from SSRN:
High potato price volatility, decreasing demand for fresh potatoes and prices below the cost of production led to a decision of a number of Idaho potato growers to organize the United Fresh Potato Growers of Idaho, a marketing cooperative. The programs and strategies of the cooperative target both production and marketing of fresh potatoes. To evaluate the effectiveness of the programs implemented by the cooperative, we examine the level and volatility of fresh potato prices during two periods: before the cooperative was organized and when the cooperative is in the market. We find empirical evidence suggesting that fresh potato prices were higher and less volatile during the period when the cooperative was in the market.
The whole thing is interesting for those who remember farmers struggles to cooperate over the past 90 years or so.

Medicare and SSN

The NY Times reports that Medicare is resisting changing the Medicare card to remove the SSN.

Ms. Frizzera, the Medicare official, said that issuing new Medicare cards would be “a huge undertaking.” The agency would need three years to plan such a move and eight more years to carry it out, she said.

Medicare officials estimate that it would cost $500 million to change their computer systems if they issued new ID numbers to beneficiaries. Doctors, hospitals and other health care providers use those numbers in filing claims with Medicare, which pays a billion claims a year.

I regard this with the disdain it deserves. The state of Virginia has phased out SSN's as the drivers license number. I recognize that Medicare is not used to issuing new cards every 5 years or so, but I assume they have procedures for replacing lost or stolen cards. And they have procedures for handling erroneous numbers (i.e., if they give out a card with the wrong number they're able to reissue a new card with the right number). Those two capabilities can be the basis for the changeover because they supply the business logic for the change. The third and missing element is a process to generate a unique 9-digit number for Medicare recipients. All they need is a cross-reference file matching their number to the SSN. Match all bills against the file so the provider can bill using either the SSN, if already in the provider's database, or the Medicare number.

The bottom line is, they're going to have to do it someday, might as well do it now.

Sunday, June 22, 2008

Two Nations Forever

Sometimes I'm optimistic about the future, but then I read this Post story about a southern Maryland church chorus, trying to bridge religious and racial differences and I conclude there's no way.

With just two weeks until their first performance, Jefferson [chorus leader] jumped into practicing the two songs the choir planned to sing at the concert. For the slow "Lord We Worship You," he told them, imagine a quiet candlelight dinner with God. For the upbeat "Blessed Be the Lord," use "your country voice," he said.

And learn to move, he told them. Clapping was not an option at this point, as past attempts had ended with the black members clapping on the second and fourth beats and white members clapping on the first and third.

But some aren't so easily discouraged:

"It's not in everybody's culture to do the moving, so be sensitive," Jefferson said. "We're a little, how do I say it, challenged in that area. It's going to take awhile. We're going to bridge it together. Bridge the cultures."

Start with baby steps, he instructed. Tap your foot. Or rock back and forth.

"Just try not to laugh at each other."

How Americans Do Things

Haphazardly, because our government is not a strong state. For evidence, read this NYTimes story on the levees along the Mississippi. (Almost wrote "levee system", but it's not a system.) The latest issue of the American Historical Review has an article arguing, unsuccessfully in my view, that the U.S. has a strong state. If the comparison is to France or other European models, I disagree.

Bureaucrat Dies

Well, he may not have been exactly a bureaucrat, but he dealt with people as part of his role in a big bureaucracy--the Fairfax County police force, and he's now dead, prematurely, at the age of 6.

The Monkey Cage picks up the story from the Post.

Friday, June 20, 2008

Surprising Factoid of the Week--Chinese Govt Worries About Customer Service

Al Gore, before he was elected President, worried a lot about the government and customer service. Apparently the Chinese (mainland, not Taiwan) do too, because Alex Tabarrok at Marginal Revolution reports:
At the Beijing airport as the customs official questions you, you get to rate them - there is an electronic box, hidden from their view, that asks for your rating of service.
The idea of the Chinese government getting feedback from their customers boggles the mind.

Wetlands and Oil Drilling

Steven Pearlstein has a take on offshore drilling in the Post. To sum up:

The frustrating thing about this standoff is that both sides have it half-right. Republicans are right that we need more oil and gas drilling, more refineries and a revival of nuclear power. And Democrats are right in demanding that we finally get serious about conservation, crack down on speculation and market manipulation, and recycle windfall profits into alternative energy sources.

Unfortunately, they're both so thoroughly captured by their interest groups, and so determined to defeat the other's policies, that they haven't noticed we're now so deep in the hole that we have no choice but to do it all: Gas drilling off the coast of Florida and wind farms off the coast of New England. Curbs on speculation and curbs on CO2 emissions. Tax hikes for oil companies and tax breaks for solar.

I often like "a curse on both your houses" thinking (was that Shakespeare?). I don't like NIMBYism, which accounts for much of the opposition to offshore drilling. But I've also a knee-jerk reaction, a sort of romantic feeling that progress is steamrolling everything and wondering why we can't keep some things forever. I guess, contra Pearlstein, Dems are more right because drilling means tapping an expendable resource. If we don't drill now, nothing happens to the oil and gas. Our descendants can someday drill if they think it advisable. While the Democratic proposals are permanent--once we do solar, we can keep doing solar forever.

I would suggest, though, the possibility of "mitigation". The law permits farmers to drain one wetland by mitigating the damage by recreating another wetland. In other words, the law says we're going to always have X million acres of wetland, but it may not always be in the same place. I wonder whether it's possible to take the same approach to drilling. If an oil company exhausts one field, make it clean up its mess and then allow it to drill the same number of acres somewhere else. That approach might provide some flexibility for business and reassure people like me that drilling doesn't mean a permanent, forever, loss of the environment.

Farming and Bananas

I'm always interested in farming, I found this bit on bananas in the Philippines at Freakonomics in the comments (general post on bananas):

I’m from the Philippines and we do grow a lot of bananas. Most of the banana plantations are in Mindanao because of the stable climate conditions and fertile soil. The crops from from these plantations are only for export, and they only grow Cavendish there. The bananas they pick are still unripe when harvested to keep them firm durig transportation.

About the condition of the employees. Right now, employees of large companies like Dole and Del Monte experience fair labor practices. Most of the land of the plantations were under Agrarian reform, so the farmers own the land, which they rent to the companies to plant. The farmers are hired as employees, so aside from rent from land, they also get wages, and they have a stable job. These gives them incentives to be more productive, and hence higher manufacturing efficiency.

But this was not the case 30 years ago, before land reform. Farmers were tenants, and they were planting the land which were owned by really rich families. They had no security of tenure. They were overworked and underpaid, and yes, there were no healthcare benefits. there was also child labor: children of farmers would rather skip school and help in planting to increase family income. Also sometimes, there were unjust land owners. They have control over the farmers and their families because they feared being thrown away from from the farms, their only livelihood and their homes. [Is the land reform significant--wish I could find a study of the land tenure arrangements across the world. I'm speaking as a descendant of someone who was a renter in Ireland but owned a large estate (by Irish standards) in Illinois by the time he died.]

And in the Philippines, bananas are staple foods, specially in the really poor provinces where rice and corn are very expensive.

Thursday, June 19, 2008

Surprising Factoid of the Day--the French Export Food [Updated]

From the CAP Health Check (the blog on EU ag policy):
The UK runs a large trade deficit in food and agricultural products, at around 22 billion euros or 13 per cent of GDP (see table below). This makes global food price increases especially damaging for reasons that I’ll explain below. By contrast, France runs a trade surplus in food of almost 5 per cent of GDP.

I'm too lazy to check, but I doubt the U.S. surplus is that big.

[Updated: Turns out the French export more wine than we do soybeans or corn and the Brits export more beer/ale. (2004 figures). And our 2008 exports are only $91 billion (record high value) but that's tiny compared to GDP/GNP of $14 trillion. That differential explains why the French do more for their farmers than we do for ours--the agricultural sector is much more important.)

Wednesday, June 18, 2008

Veal

Via Down to Earth, this post on a project for organic, humane veal shows some of the problems of these efforts in mass society:
So, ironically, even though the chefs love the flavor and the Azuluna story and that the flavor and texture is excellent regardless of the size, many of them will stop buying it or complain to the distributor that it lacks consistency in size. This is a problem for the high end cuts only - as the chefs are fearful of serving chops of differing sizes and charging the same price. The solution to this problem is to get more producers raising the veal and to expand the market into NYC. This would balance out the size problem, as cuts could be grouped by the distributors according to size. However, in order to recruit more producers, I need to promise them a market.
So, we consumers want consistency--no surprises, please. But that implies production practices and a scale of operation that's difficult to develop. In a way, we want what we had years and years ago, but destroyed because our preferences valued consistency, uniformity, etc.

(This subject rings a small bell for me--we sold our bull calves at about a week or 10 days. The old quip goes that the dairy is the most feminist place around.)

Eating Your Own Dog Food, Or Something

There's phenomena among the chattering classes, I believe on all sides of the political spectrum, of eating their own dogfood. That is, when they have an argument to make, their citations tend to be to the secondary, or tertiary, literature, not to primary source material. What it means is there's a tendency to talk in an echo chamber, to repeat the same urban myths, and to ignore facts or alternatives.

There's an example here:
"The last time food prices shot up, in the 1970s, the U.S. response was to put more land into agricultural production. This was the infamous "fencerow-to-fencerow" policy of Secretary of Agriculture Earl Butz that Michael Pollan, author of The Omnivore's Dilemma, has linked to the glut of corn -- and corn syrup -- that has so profoundly affected global diets. "
The whole piece discusses how North Korea was and is a canary warning the world of imminent catastrophe.

FSA's Problems with the New Farm Bill

Are implied in the discussion at the University of Illinois extension farmgate site.

Different members of Congress had different takes on the Average Crop Revenue Election Program, so the odds are that FSA will come up with an interpretation that someone disagrees with, and that someone may have enough clout to change the law on them. (I think it's true that a flood-caused spike in corn prices in 2008 makes the program more problematic in the long run, since it raises the likelihood of a fall in prices in the out years, and the revenue guarantee is based on history. In the old days for yields we used the "Olympic average", dropping high and low years which recognized that farming can be very variable. Something to consider.)

Tuesday, June 17, 2008

On Why We Need Health Insurance

See this post of Erin's.

Obviously, healthy ranchers in Montana don't need health insurance, right?

Improving Flow in the Oldest Profession

There's a piece in the Times today on something I'd never heard of--prostitution reviews. Apparently this guy has a website where Johns can rate their satisfaction with their prostitutes. Apparently it's just part of the impact of the Internet on the oldest profession--prostitutes are using it to connect with a higher class of customer (maybe even the former governor of NY).

Economists have written on the imbalances of information, as between the seller and buyer of a used car; here's another case where technology comes to the rescue of mismatched customers and buyers, improving the net happiness of the world. (I guess.)