Words are symbols, which means the same word can mean different things to different people. A perfect contemporary example are the labels “liberal” and “conservative.” I have never found anyone who was wholly one or the other.
GAO used to mean “Government Accounting Office,” now it means Government Accountability Office. There is a new GAO report on the farm bill. The summary states:
The Government Accountability Office (GAO) and the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Office of Inspector General (OIG) seek to enhance the efficiency, effectiveness, and accountability of the federal government. As Congress debates ways to address the federal government’s long-term fiscal imbalance, it becomes even more critical that we help with this challenge by identifying opportunities for cost-savings and for improving programs to ensure that every dollar counts.
In this spirit and in anticipation of upcoming deliberations over the 2012 Farm Bill, we are issuing companion reports today. They present the following set of principles significant to the integrity, efficiency, and effectiveness of programs in the farm bill:
- Relevance. Does the program concern an issue of national interest? Is the program consistent with current statutes and international agreements? Have the domestic and international food and agriculture sectors changed significantly, or are they expected to change, in ways that affect the program’s purpose?
- Distinctiveness. Is the program unique and free from overlap or duplication with other programs? Is it well-coordinated with similar programs?
- Targeting. Is the program’s distribution of benefits consistent with contemporary assessments of need?
- Affordability. Is the program affordable, given the nation’s severe budgetary constraints? Is it using the most efficient, cost-effective approaches?
- Effectiveness. Are program goals clear, with a direct connection to policies, resource allocations, and actions? Does the program demonstrate measurable progress toward its goals? Is it generally free of unintended consequences, including ecological, social, or economic effects? Does the program allow for adjustments to changes in markets?
- Oversight. Does the program have mechanisms, such as internal controls, to monitor compliance and help minimize fraud, waste, and abuse in areas where these are most likely to occur?
In the context of these principles, our reports summarize key GAO and OIG findings, respectively, related to farm bill programs. The principles could guide consideration of each program and potential program, and the summaries could help Congress make well-informed decisions about program design while continuing to maintain a strong agricultural sector and the safety and security of the nation’s food supply and to provide nutrition assistance, promote U.S. exports, support renewable energy and conservation, and enhance economic growth in rural communities.
(more at link including link to pdf.)
The sentence which has me thinking is, “Does the program concern an issue of national interest?” What exactly does that mean? Is it one thing to processors. Is it another thing to rural communities?
Could a survey of the entire country come up with an agreed upon definition? Or, is the national interest actually greater than people’s concepts . Are, for instance, teenagers capable of understanding their own best interest?
How many people would be willing to say, “As long as the milk in on the store shelves, everything is OK.” What about the quality of life in rural America? Should the production of food become more concentrated or is there a public interest in a dispersed food supply?
As the so-called Farm Bill of 2012 is being cooked up, it seems to me some preliminary discussion would be in order. No one should be surprised that the corporations are running the country. Corporations are all about exclusion and not a bit about inclusion.
