Replies to post #307630 on $Stock*Shop*Charts*News*Option$

[Tuff-Stuff]

A Politician's View of Policy Making

Posted by Debbie Cook on February 16, 2010 - 10:13am
Topic: Policy/Politics
Tags: cellulosic ethanol, corn ethanol, energy policy, local government, politics [list all tags]

(Editor's note: Below is an essay by new TheOilDrum contributor Debbie Cook. Debbie was formerly Mayor and Councilmember of Huntington Beach, CA from 2000-2008 and a US Congressional Candidate, 46th District in 2008. She is also President of the Board at the Post Carbon Institute. Long active in resource depletion related outreach with TOD, ASPO and PCI, she is also locally involved with energy/water and permaculture issues in southern CA.)

Jeffrey Sachs, economic advisor to the UN, in his recently published article, Fixing the Broken Government Policy Process , articulates four manifestations of the breakdown in Washington:

1. Inability to focus beyond the next election
2. Decisions are made through negotiations with those who will be funding the next election (i.e. industry lobbyists)
3. Technical expertise is ignored or bypassed
4. The public is largely excluded from the process

Sachs asks, “How can business and government work together without policies falling prey to special interests?”

He suggests that government initiate a more “open, transparent and systematic public-private policy process in each major area of sustainable development”—high-level roundtable proceedings that are open to the public, web-based, and include representatives from private business, nongovernmental organizations, government officials, scientists, and engineers.

While this all sounds good in theory, my eight years in public office tells me that one more group, no matter how it is constituted, issuing one more report, is not going to drive better public policy.

In my opinion the best way to influence policy is for the “scientists and engineers” to influence policy makers directly—and you don’t do that in a report, in a letter, on a petition, or a blog. It requires a commitment to face-to-face relationship building, nurturing, and maintenance—not the kind of activity typically selected by the pocket protector/lab coat types.

Rarely does a policy discussion center solely around facts. Emotions like trust, loyalty, anger, contempt, and sympathy are often just below the surface of every discussion. Facts become attached to emotions in large part because of the relationships that have developed between individuals, groups, and ideas. Words like “politician” and “government” evoke strong emotions that may have very little to do with facts and everything to do with how we synthesize information.

Here is a real life example of policy making on the fly.

On the same day that Scientific American published Professor Sachs’ article, the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) was taking up the issue of E85 ethanol fueling stations. See here and here for the agenda items. SCAG is the largest Metropolitan Planning Organization in the United States covering 6 counties and 19 million residents. It is guided by an unwieldy 83 member governing board whose members are elected representatives of cities and counties within the region. SCAG is mandated by the federal government to undertake planning and policy initiatives within the areas of transportation, growth management, hazardous waste management, and air quality.

This particular policy debate surrounding the E85 fueling stations serves as a good example of the fragmented decision-making process described by Sachs. It is also an example of the cast of characters whose relationships will have influenced the issue prior to it reaching the policy making body: a lobbyist who had applied for and won a grant in the agency’s name but without their knowledge; a businessman who was the sole source recipient of the grant; an Executive Director concerned over rejecting a DOE grant for fear it would affect future grant awards; an elected official or two whose communities are being targeted for an ethanol plant; air quality officials whose mandate is to reduce emissions; and a former colleague (myself) who spent her years on the board introducing concepts like peak oil and energy return on investment.

Every member’s vote represented a unique “truth” to that member based on facts filtered through their relationship matrix. It was the interactions between and among the characters that influenced the range of expressions preceding the vote. There were votes of loyalty for the Executive Director; votes of trust for a former colleague; votes of sympathy for the businessman who was losing out on an opportunity to build 55 fueling stations; and votes of anger against a lobbyist who may or may not have obfuscated information from the agency.

For me, the result was both unexpected and unsatisfying—unexpected because the inertia behind the industry seemed insurmountable, and unsatisfying because many board members are still holding onto the belief that cellulosic ethanol will displace transportation fuels and bring the U.S. closer to “energy independence.” Dissuading policy makers from these and other fantasies is going to require many more conversations.

The hope for cellulosic ethanol appeals to the same fantasy themes ascribed by Dr. Benjamin Sovacool, researcher on issues related to energy policy, to the hydrogen economy: independence, patriotism, progress, democratization, and inevitability. As Savacool says, “The desire to experience these sorts of fantasies will likely continue even if the hydrogen economy does not come to fruition.”

Indeed, the ethanol fantasy continues even as targets come up 90% short.

I have my own fantasy—to see CBS news journalist Dan Rather pay atonement to Robert Rapier for Rather’s 60 Minutes piece. Something akin to Mad Money’s host Jim Cramer’s repentance to Jon Stewart, host of the Daily Show:

Cramer: I always wish that people would come in and swear themselves in before they come on the show. I had a lot of CEOs lie to me on the show. It's very painful. I don't have subpoena power…. But Dick Fuld, who ran Lehman Brothers, called me in—he called me in when the stock was at 40—because I was saying: "Look, I thought the stock was wrong, thought it was in the wrong place"—he brings me in and lies to me, lies to me, lies to me.

Stewart [feigning shock]: The CEO of a company lied to you?

Cramer: Shocking.

So returning to Sachs’ idea that we can work together to fix government policy-making, here is my prescription for scientists, professors, and engineers:

1. Participate in the public discourse
2. Publicly challenge your peers who put forward junk science
3. Be mindful of fallacies in your own assumptions
4. Relationships are primary and every policy is derived primarily from relationships, not facts.

To each critic sitting in their ivory tower, I challenge you to create the conditions for these relationships to flourish.
60 comments on A Politician's View of Policy Making
You must log in to post a comment. If you don't have an account, create one.
ShareThis | Show without comments | PDF version
[-] Gail the Actuary on February 16, 2010 - 10:17am Permalink | Subthread | Comments top

Welcome Debbie to The Oil Drum staff! And thanks for this these insights on the political process!
Log in or register to leave a comment
[-] Jim MacInnes on February 16, 2010 - 10:46am Permalink | Subthread | Comments top

Debbie - Nice to hear from someone who has been there. A very good historical discussion of public policy making is contained in Gustav's Le Bon's book "The Crowd: A Study of the Popular Mind" http://etext.virginia.edu/toc/modeng/public/BonCrow.html

The means of persuasion of the leaders we are dealing with, apart from their prestige, consist in the factors we have already enumerated several times. To make a skilful use of these resources a leader must have arrived at a comprehension, at least in an unconscious manner, of the psychology of crowds, and must know how to address them. He should be aware, in particular, of the fascinating influence of words, phrases, and images. He should possess a special description of eloquence, composed of energetic affirmations -- unburdened with proofs -- and impressive images, accompanied by very summary arguments. This is a kind of eloquence that is met with in all assemblies, the English Parliament included, the most serious though it is of all.

This may be some good advice on framing an issue from republican strategist, Frank Luntz.

The First Rule of Fighting Climate Change: Don't Talk About Climate Change

http://motherjones.com/mojo/2010/01/gop-pollster-luntz-tells-enviros-sto...
Log in or register to leave a comment
[-] Debbie Cook on February 16, 2010 - 11:40am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | [Parent subthread ] Comments top

Thanks. And another excellent book on framing is The Political Mind by George Lakoff.
Log in or register to leave a comment
[-] hightrekker on February 16, 2010 - 12:18pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | [Parent subthread ] Comments top

i second the recommendation.
Log in or register to leave a comment
[-] Jim MacInnes on February 16, 2010 - 1:50pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | [Parent subthread ] Comments top

yes, I just finished reading Lakoff's "Don't Think of an Elephant." which was interesting.

Bruce Wexler's "Brain and Culture: Neurobiology, Idology and Social change" is excellent too. http://kolber.typepad.com/ethics_law_blog/2006/04/bruce_wexlers_b.html
Log in or register to leave a comment
[-] Matt on February 16, 2010 - 10:27am Permalink | Subthread | Comments top

I would like to add:

5. Government's advisers and consultants deliver the good news and the reports which guarantee their next jobs

Example from Australia:

Report Card 2009 (part 1) - Energy Policy - Has the Federal Government prepared for declining oil production?
http://www.crudeoilpeak.com/?p=948
Log in or register to leave a comment
[-] Paulo on February 16, 2010 - 10:43am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | [Parent subthread ] Comments top

4. Relationships are primary and every policy is derived primarily from relationships, not facts.

Too often this is called, or becomes "The Old Boys Club". I am thinking of Haliburton and contracts with Bush Govt. as a recent example. Certainly, real professionals act differently, but do they get very far in the decision making world?

"Follow the money". I think well-meaning participants are shorted by a corrupt process. Having said that, news and exposure by non-traditional means, blogs like TOD, are taking over the oversight role that used to found in investigative journalism. Thank God.
Log in or register to leave a comment
[-] mymomishot on February 16, 2010 - 1:48pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | [Parent subthread ] Comments top

Having said that, news and exposure by non-traditional means, blogs like TOD, are taking over the oversight role that used to found in investigative journalism. Thank God.

I second that.

I rarely visit news sites anymore, other then the financial sites to watch oil prices skyrocket (like today) and to read the comments by the clueless growth forever mindset zombies.
Log in or register to leave a comment
[-] steve from Virginia on February 16, 2010 - 10:58am Permalink | Subthread | Comments top

Unfortunately, this process is becoming increasingly irrelevant. 'Letting all the little people have their say (and letting a few big- shots determine the outcome)' is now a waste of time. The little people and the big shots are now on the same page which is an across- the- board desire to return consumption to 'normal' levels.

Our institutions themselves are at issue. Most of society's institutions are not useful for managing our industrial economy - this includes the US political process. Our country's political institutions evolved during the late Middle Ages in England and Scotland. There is no inherent mechanism to exclude special interests that co- opt the process itself because the interests are given special treatment as 'entrepreneurs'.

The entrepreneurs have innovated new forms of corruption unthinkable to the John Locke- reading Founding Fathers.

At the core of our current crisis is an institution gap. We need certain social bodies immediately but we cannot imagine what they will look like and what they will do. This gap is on display in Europe, where the Euro monetary and fiscal management mechanisms come up against their designed- in 'democratic' shortcomings. Everyone is panicking for good reason. The result of similar stresses not that long ago gave rise to such institutions as Adolf Hitler. The default position is always winds up being a variation- on- the theme of Gestapo.

Which is probably the outcome in the US and other 'civilized' places that have surrendered every resource to unrestrained commerce, consumption and luxury.

Right now the US destiny is in the hands of some Middle Eastern sheiks, this despite a large US military presence in the area. A demonstration of the hollowness of another cliché - that of the overwhelming political effectiveness of the American military.

Another social institution dives over the cliff, right?
Log in or register to leave a comment

[Stock Lobster]

FT: The US will continue to lose market share

By Byron R. Wien
Published: February 16 2010 13:03 | Last updated: February 16 2010 13:26

The debate about the current recovery centres on whether a secular change is taking place in the United States economy. If it is not, then we should all be optimistic because peak-to-trough declines in real GDP of 4 per cent are usually followed by gains of 6-8 per cent. But the consensus view is that growth will be sluggish (2-3 per cent) and few jobs will be created.

There will be revenue growth to be sure. The weak dollar has clearly helped exports and the 90 per cent of the working population with jobs are spending again, now that their house prices have stabilised and the stock market has come back from its lows of last March. The unemployment rate remains stubbornly near 10 per cent, however, and operating rates for American manufacturers are at 70 per cent, so there isn’t much of an incentive for capital spending beyond technology.

EDITOR’S CHOICE
The long road ahead - Feb-10.Long view: Baby boomers lead bear market - Feb-12.Tony Jackson: China – sweet spot or sour lesson? - Feb-14..Moreover, the working week is staying around 33 hours, so even those who are working aren’t getting their pre-recession paychecks. To get the goods out the door and provide the services demanded by customers, companies are hiring temporary workers in record numbers to maintain maximum flexibility. They are worried that a health care bill, if one passes, will add onerously to the cost of full-time employees and they don’t want to be hit with more termination pay if the economy suffers a double-dip.

The result of this is that productivity is soaring. The reading of better than 8 per cent growth is the highest in decades. Rather than applaud the efficiency of the American worker one should wonder if the numbers are too good. Are workers being driven to the point of exhaustion? There’s no sign that anyone’s complaining. Wage rates are barely increasing. Most of us with jobs are glad to have them and aren’t willing to make any waves.

How much longer can this go on? Not much longer in my opinion. The unemployment rate usually starts moving lower about nine months after the economy troughs and that happened in the second quarter of 2009, so we could see jobs created as soon as the February report, which will come out on March 5. I also believe real GDP will be stronger than the consensus expects, as inventories continue to be built and the remaining part of the government’s stimulus programme flows through the economy.

Longer term I doubt that the United States or Europe will grow faster than 3 per cent anytime in the next five years, while the developing world will grow in excess of 5 per cent. The result of this is that the mature industrial economies are losing about a percentage point a year in share of world GDP to the emerging markets and they are losing a similar amount in share of world stock market capitalisation.

The biggest problem the United States is facing is the productivity of capital. After the end of the second world war it took less than two dollars of investment by government, corporations and individuals to produce one dollar of GDP growth. The productivity of capital continued to be impressive until 1980, when Europe had recovered and Japan was producing automobiles and consumer electronics products that found wide acceptance in world markets. In the single decade of the 1980s, the productivity of capital declined from less than two dollars of investment to produce a dollar of growth to about three. If you assign a 30 per cent gross margin to that revenue growth, the return on investment declined from 15 per cent to 10 per cent.

That level of return proved to be satisfactory, but in the first decade of this century capital productivity declined seriously in the United States. Because of profligate spending on over-priced housing and other assets that declined seriously and deficit spending by the government, by the end of the decade it took six dollars of capital to produce a dollar of growth. The return on that would only be 5 per cent and few would put money at risk for that reward.

When you look abroad to assess our competitive position, the results are not encouraging. It is hard to put together comparable information, but, based on the data I could gather, Europe was still getting a dollar of growth for two dollars of investment and China was getting at least a dollar of growth for each dollar of investment.

If the US is to stop losing ground against other mature and developing economies, it is going to have to put money to work more effectively. We are still the leaders in technology and scientific research and we must continue to take advantage of the commercial possibilities of innovation. If we don’t reverse the current trends, growth in America beyond this year will be disappointing and our standard of living will decline.

Byron R. Wien is senior managing director at Blackstone Advisory Partners
.Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2010. You may share using our article tools

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/20ed5672-1aec-11df-88fa-00144feab49a.html