Jim Wooten notes that projects funded in tough times should be “marginally useful”:
Times are tough. People are out of work. Don’t take their money and buy them toys, and don’t take it to spend on programs that are marginally useful.
So, do marginally useful policies succeed? If not, why do we support iterative policy adjustments when they do not succeed? Do marginally useful policies represent a border area between public success and public failure?
Filed under Policy, public failure
From DHS today:
Cyber Security. Given the increasingly sophisticated number of threats to all areas of national cyberspace and considering the authorities provided by the Homeland Security Act, the Post-Katrina Emergency Management Reform Act, and Homeland Security Presidential Directive 23/National Security Presidential Directive 54, what are the authorities and responsibilities of DHS for the protection of the government and private sector domains, what are the relationships with other government agencies, especially the departments of Defense, Treasury, and Energy, and the National Security Agency, and what are the programs and timeframes to achieve the department’s responsibilities and objectives? An oral report is due by Feb. 3, with a final report due Feb. 17.
Filed under cybersecurity
CQ reports two alternatives under consideration by the Obama Administration to revise current federal stem cell policy:
Obama could issue an executive order lifting the restriction — which permits federal funding for research only on those stem cell colonies extracted before Aug. 9, 2001 — and authorize research on all embryonic stem cell lines, as long as the cells are “ethically derived.”
This would not award more money for the field per se, but dramatically expand the kind of stem cell research that’s eligible for federal grants, as long as donors give informed consent and are not paid to donate eggs or embryos.
The approach is outlined in a new policy paper from the Center for American Progress (CAP), a left-leaning think tank founded by John Podesta, who also headed Obama’s transition team.
But some patient advocates and research institutions favor a more minimalistic approach they say would keep politics and science apart.
The Coalition for the Advancement of Medical Research (CAMR) has been urging Obama to simply rescind the Bush policy — a move that would, by implication, leave it to the National Institutes of Health to issue guidelines for the field.
Coalition President Amy Comstock Rick said that policy making should be put in the hands of scientists and bioethicists, instead of elected officials. If Obama’s is too prescriptive in the way he undoes Bush’s policy, future president might feel compelled to tweak or revise Obama’s policy.
Whichever path he chooses, Obama can rest assured that the Democratic Congress will weigh in and try to codify the stem cell position into law later this year.
The executive summary from CAP has a rebuttal to the argument that all the benefits of stem cell research can be gained without use of embryonic stem cells:
Opponents also point to so-called induced pluripotent stem cells, which are created when adult cells—say, skin cells—are reprogrammed to become all-purpose “pluripotent” cells. These arguments are valid, but only up to a point. The reason: embryonic stem cells are both the original “master cells” capable of turning into any cell in the body as well as the “gold standard” against which all other stem cells must be compared
A full report and links to other information are provided in the CAP link above. CAMR argues for relaxed federal restrictions along these lines:
Stem cell research is one of the most exciting fields of study for young researchers, yet many are hesitant to enter a field with an uncertain future and funding restrictions. In addition, the restrictions fly in the face of the diversity requirements established by the Federal government for clinical research. The federally approved lines do not represent the diversity in our society, which is a critical part of ensuring that new medicines work for everyone.
This release from DHS Secretary Napolitano indicates an opportunity to evaluate current policies and policy directions:
“One of my top priorities is to unify this department and to create a common culture. These action directives are designed to begin a review, evaluation and dialogue between the various functions of this department and me,” said Secretary Napolitano.
- DHS intends to revitalize its relationship with state, local, and tribal governments effective immediately with the intent of creating a working partnership.
- Critical infrastructure protection. — This entails extensive dealings with other federal agencies, states, and the private sector, involving collaboration, data collection, risk analysis, and sharing of best practices.
- Risk analysis. — What is the status of risk analysis metrics and what is the plan and time frame for setting up a full-blown system to govern the establishment of critical infrastructure programs, the priorities among national planning scenarios, and the distribution of grants to state, local, and tribal entities? More broadly, how can DHS enhance risk management as the basis of decision making?
- State and local intelligence sharing. Provide an evaluation of which activities hold the most promise for achieving the smooth flow of information on a real time basis.
- The inventory and evaluation should take into account the voices of all stakeholders, especially state, local and tribal entities.
- The evaluation should also consider the private sector’s perspective and its relationship to these stakeholders.
From her confirmation hearing statement:
Cyber security and the protection of the technology critical infrastructure have been a top priority in Arizona. As Attorney General, I created the Computer Crimes Unit to train law enforcement in the identification and investigation of cybercrimes; the Unit successfully prosecuted some of the first cybercrime cases in Arizona. As Governor, I created the Statewide Information Security and Privacy Office to ensure adequate controls and safeguards are in place for all State of Arizona government technology systems and business practices.
And from WhiteHouse.gov, an outline of Obama Cyber Security Policy:
Barack Obama and Joe Biden — working with private industry, the research community and our citizens — will lead an effort to build a trustworthy and accountable cyber infrastructure that is resilient, protects America’s competitive advantage, and advances our national and homeland security. They will:
- Strengthen Federal Leadership on Cyber Security: Declare the cyber infrastructure a strategic asset and establish the position of national cyber advisor who will report directly to the president and will be responsible for coordinating federal agency efforts and development of national cyber policy.
- Initiate a Safe Computing R&D Effort and Harden our Nation’s Cyber Infrastructure: Support an initiative to develop next-generation secure computers and networking for national security applications. Work with industry and academia to develop and deploy a new generation of secure hardware and software for our critical cyber infrastructure.
- Protect the IT Infrastructure That Keeps America’s Economy Safe: Work with the private sector to establish tough new standards for cyber security and physical resilience.
- Prevent Corporate Cyber-Espionage: Work with industry to develop the systems necessary to protect our nation’s trade secrets and our research and development. Innovations in software, engineering, pharmaceuticals and other fields are being stolen online from U.S. businesses at an alarming rate.
- Develop a Cyber Crime Strategy to Minimize the Opportunities for Criminal Profit: Shut down the mechanisms used to transmit criminal profits by shutting down untraceable Internet payment schemes. Initiate a grant and training program to provide federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies the tools they need to detect and prosecute cyber crime.
- Mandate Standards for Securing Personal Data and Require Companies to Disclose Personal Information Data Breaches: Partner with industry and our citizens to secure personal data stored on government and private systems. Institute a common standard for securing such data across industries and protect the rights of individuals in the information age.
SecurityFix is a great place to watch developments in this regard.
Filed under cybersecurity
An update to the Heartland breach:
The Heartland breach also showed that in spite of the adoption of more stringent standards and tougher oversight by banks and credit card companies, consumers are still vulnerable. All this is happening after credit card companies and merchants spent over $2 billion on establishing the Payment Card Industry standards, Ms. Litan said. “And yet the breaches continue and they get more serious.”
Standards are promoted by both industry and DHS as the means to manage the issue. So, what do you do when standards are not enough?
More from the Post on how long it took to discover how the breach was made:
Robert H.B. Baldwin Jr., president and chief financial officer of Heartland Payment Systems, said the company, which processes payments for more than 250,000 businesses, began receiving fraudulent activity reports from MasterCard and Visa in October.
Heartland called the U.S. Secret Service, which investigates financial crimes, and hired two breach forensics teams to investigate. But Baldwin said it wasn’t until last week that investigators uncovered the source of the breach: A piece of malicious software on the company’s processing network was recording payment card data as it was being sent to Heartland by thousands of the company’s retail clients.
Baldwin said Heartland does not know how the software got there, how long it was in place, or how many accounts may have been compromised. The stolen data includes names, credit and debit card numbers and expiration dates.
According to the WSJ:
More than 40 states have laws that require businesses to disclose when sensitive information may have been accessed by an unauthorized party. In 2008, 656 such incidents were reported, according to the nonprofit Identity Theft Resource Center, up from 446 in 2007.
Filed under cybersecurity
Why should employees or students dare to point out deficiencies in security on college campuses when the reaction from the administration may be to terminate the discoverers instead of those responsible for the original violation of policy (i.e. leaving files with id out in the open).
A student journalist at Western Oregon University was reprimanded, and the newspaper adviser was fired, after publishing an article showing the institution had not secured sensitive, private information about some applicants.
Filed under cybersecurity
An excerpt of a letter signed by Cardinal Francis George, President of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, sums the arguments:
The embryonic stem cell policy initiated by President Bush has at times been criticized from both ends of the pro-life debate, but some criticisms are based on false premises. The policy did not ban embryonic stem cell research, or funding of such research. By restricting federally funded research to cell lines in existence at the time he issued his policy, he was trying to ensure that Americans are not forced to use their tax dollars to encourage expanded destruction of embryonic human beings for their stem cells. Such destruction is especially pointless at the present time, for several reasons.
- First, basic research in the capabilities of embryonic stem cells can be and is being pursued using the currently eligible cell lines as well as the hundreds of lines produced with nonfederal funds since 2001.
- Second, recent startling advances in reprogramming adult cells into embryonic-like stem cells – hailed by the journal Science as the scientific breakthrough of the year – are said by many scientists to be making embryonic stem cells irrelevant to medical progress.
- Third, adult and cord blood stem cells are now known to have great versatility, and are increasingly being used to reverse serious illnesses and even help rebuild damaged organs. To divert scarce funds away from these promising avenues for research and treatment toward the avenue that is most morally controversial as well as most medically speculative would be a sad victory of politics over science.
Filed under stem cell
This post by the Post needs unpacking…
A data breach last year at Princeton, N.J., payment processor Heartland Payment Systems may have led to the theft of more than 100 million credit and debit card accounts, the company said today.
…
The Heartland disclosure follows a year of similar breach disclosures at several major U.S. cards processors. On December 23, RBS Worldpay, a subsidiary of Citizens Financial Group Inc., said a breach of its payment systems may have affected more than 1.5 million people.
In March 2008, Hannaford Brothers Co. disclosed that a breach of its payment systems — also aided by malicious software — compromised at least 4.2 million credit and debit card accounts.
In early 2007, TJX Companies Inc., the parent of retailers Marshalls and TJ Maxx said a number of breaches over a three-year period exposed more than 45 million credit and debit card numbers.
In 2005, a breach at payment card processor CardSystems Solutions jeopardized roughly 40 million credit and debit card accounts.
Filed under cybersecurity
California’s Imperial Valley sees the potential new rule from the Obama administration as an economic plus to support California’s $3 billion, voter approved, investment in stem cell research.
However, any new rule would not result in creation of additional stem lines for research. That activity is banned by law :
The Dickey-Wicker amendment, first passed in 1995, prohibits the use of federal funds for the creation of human embryos for research purposes or the destruction or injury of human embryos.
But, the new rules could provide the ethical guidelines missing from current policy:
“The current Bush policy harms U.S. interests not just because it severely restricts the use of federal funds for a potentially life-saving new branch of medical science,” he wrote. “It also hurts the nation because, to the extent it allows such research to go forward, it demands almost nothing in the way of ethical constraints.” In other words, Bush’s attempt to claim the moral high ground on a contentious issue stranded the very research he was trying to regulate in murky ethical waters.
Filed under stem cell
Stanley Fish’s column finds a rather terse description of the public expectations of higher education:
In this latter model , the mode of delivery – a disc, a computer screen, a video hook-up – doesn’t matter so long as delivery occurs. Insofar as there are real-life faculty in the picture, their credentials and publications (if they have any) are beside the point, for they are just “delivery people.”
So, if college faculty are to be reduced to the identical functional role that k12 teachers now find themselves, who will determine the curricula that they will teach? And, who will lead the discoveries of knowledge and technologies yet to come? The first question will undoubtedly be answered by corporations who define the skillsets their workforce requires. As to the second, corporations have largely abandoned the costs of basic research as a long term expense that makes no sense in a world that values assets on a short term basis.
The power of the written and spoken word has been reflected in education since the time of the Greek empire. Curiously, another article in todays NYT discusses the differences in approach to literature in language found in comparison of President Bush and President-elect Obama. To the point, the author states the impact of Obama’s literature upon the development of Obama’s political skills:
But his appreciation of the magic of language and his ardent love of reading have not only endowed him with a rare ability to communicate his ideas to millions of Americans while contextualizing complex ideas about race and religion, they have also shaped his sense of who he is and his apprehension of the world.
So, should education devolve into a means of training workers for tasks that require little appreciation for communication skills? If not, how should these skills be taught to be appreciated? Rhetoric and composition in a for-profit school are taught with different intended outcomes than similar courses in public and private non-profit colleges.
From the essay on Obama’s love of books:
The incandescent power of Lincoln’s language, its resonance and rhythmic cadences, as well as his ability to shift gears between the magisterial and the down-to-earth, has been a model for Mr. Obama — who has said he frequently rereads Lincoln for inspiration — and so, too, have been the uses to which Lincoln put his superior language skills: to goad Americans to complete the unfinished work of the founders, and to galvanize a nation reeling from hard times with a new vision of reconciliation and hope.
What do we lose if we adopt the for-profit approach to short term goals?
We may lose those who find inspiration in history, literature and art whom we, today, find attractive as leaders. Think about this — do you want to decide whom to elect based upon rhetoric and vision or based upon a stack of 30 powerpoint slides?
Filed under Education
Jim's Blog 